THE PHILADELPHIA EAGLES...

1…146147149151152…345

Comments

  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,594
    pjhawks wrote:
    The Juggler wrote:
    there's no use in arguing with someone who won't accept the facts. just present them and move on i guess...

    what facts are you referring to? i didn't realize that at a certain number of rushes you'd automatically win the game.

    the facts that you asked about:
    [/quote]

    for the 'you have to run the ball' people i'd have to look it up but i'd be willing to bet that in those Aaron Rodgers playoff games they ran the ball more and threw the ball a lot less in the Eagles game than the other 3, thus leading to the less points. As i stated after the game the only reason the Packers didn't put up 40 or more on us because they ran the ball so many times. If they had thrown the ball 50 times they would have torched us. Reuban Frank is probably part of the moronic run the ball group too. can't have it both ways.[/quote]

    you are misinformed.

    frank is a typically pro-reid guy but he knows his football. just ask fixer as he's posted a few of his articles supporting his boy this year. that is actually part of the reason why i opted for a frank article today.

    2 playoff games the packers won this year:
    against us they ran the ball 29 times total (minus rogers' carries).
    saturday they ran the ball 29 times total (minus rogers' carries.

    the game they lost to the cardinals last year (score was 51-45, mind you. a shootout for the ages)
    17 carries (still more than us last week :lol: )

    like i said, everyone is a pass first team. but you have to have some semblance of balance....even when your qb, rogers, is playing like the best there ever was. the birds qb was struggle down the stretch and we still put the game on his shoulders for some reason.[/quote]
    www.myspace.com
  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 12,911
    The Juggler wrote:
    7 of our offense's 16 points came off a turnover forced by the defense on the packers 24 yard line. just sayin'...

    you know what you guys are right, the defense was fucking great and if we ran the ball up the middle 5 more fucking times for 8 yards we would have won the game.
  • Jearlpam0925
    Jearlpam0925 Deep South Philly Posts: 17,528
    Dude, Jeags, for all those stats, anything is a step-up on defense from this year.
  • Phantom Pain
    Phantom Pain Posts: 9,876
    pjhawks wrote:
    The Juggler wrote:
    7 of our offense's 16 points came off a turnover forced by the defense on the packers 24 yard line. just sayin'...

    you know what you guys are right, the defense was fucking great and if we ran the ball up the middle 5 more fucking times for 8 yards we would have won the game.

    Dude...we're just saying when the offense is not balanced it's a lot easier to defend and the way the offense has been run is not working

    I heard in the GB game they were in a nickle defense inside the 5yd line against us...are you kidding me ?

    To ignore that part of the offense is just plain stupid as a coach

    They averaged 16 pts a game their last 3 games...the Dreaded Vikings D ? You have a corner blitzer for half the game getting free runs at your QB and they can't adjust ? WTF?
    My drinking team has a hockey problem

    The ONLY thing better than a glass of beer is tea with Miss McGill



    A protuberance of flesh above the waistband of a tight pair of trousers
  • Phantom Pain
    Phantom Pain Posts: 9,876
    Jearlpam0925 wrote:
    Dude, Jeags, for all those stats, anything is a step-up on defense from this year.

    The D was bad nobody is saying they weren't

    But in the 2 games they needed to win this year they didn't play that bad

    The offense was no better...but the Reid lover refuses to acknowledge Reid's offense is not working in the playoffs or in big reg season games
    My drinking team has a hockey problem

    The ONLY thing better than a glass of beer is tea with Miss McGill



    A protuberance of flesh above the waistband of a tight pair of trousers
  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 12,911
    Phantom Pain wrote:
    Jearlpam0925 wrote:
    Dude, Jeags, for all those stats, anything is a step-up on defense from this year.

    The D was bad nobody is saying they weren't

    But in the 2 games they needed to win this year they didn't play that bad

    The offense was no better...but the Reid lover refuses to acknowledge Reid's offense is not working in the playoffs or in big reg season games

    bring back ray rhodes and ty detmer. i so want to be 4-12 again,. but hey ray ran the ball so all was good
  • Jearlpam0925
    Jearlpam0925 Deep South Philly Posts: 17,528
    Phantom Pain wrote:
    Jearlpam0925 wrote:
    Dude, Jeags, for all those stats, anything is a step-up on defense from this year.

    The D was bad nobody is saying they weren't

    But in the 2 games they needed to win this year they didn't play that bad

    The offense was no better...but the Reid lover refuses to acknowledge Reid's offense is not working in the playoffs or in big reg season games

    What are you talking about? The D should've gotten torched against GB if it wasn't for GB being self-defeating for most of that game. It's this simple - you need a good O-line to be a stellar offense. It wasn't there this year because - and I can't believe I'm saying this - they tried to address every other position with draft picks.

    I'm not a Reid apologist, but people are miffed because this team played so high for most of the season then got bounced in the first round. If this was the equivalent of 2000 all over again(comparing to a year when rebuilding was hitting a time of a full fledge contender), I am fine with that. If the team was to make a change at head coach, fine, but I'm not going to say having Reid around is a bad thing. The dude keeps this team competitive every year. If you could guarantee me a Super Bowl with another coach, I'll take it. But ya can't, so that's all masturbation talk, and I'll take Reid over any coach in the league not named Belichick or Payton...and possibly Tomlin, though I still think he's overrated.
  • Phantom Pain
    Phantom Pain Posts: 9,876
    Jearlpam0925 wrote:
    Phantom Pain wrote:
    Jearlpam0925 wrote:
    Dude, Jeags, for all those stats, anything is a step-up on defense from this year.

    The D was bad nobody is saying they weren't

    But in the 2 games they needed to win this year they didn't play that bad

    The offense was no better...but the Reid lover refuses to acknowledge Reid's offense is not working in the playoffs or in big reg season games

    What are you talking about? The D should've gotten torched against GB if it wasn't for GB being self-defeating for most of that game. It's this simple - you need a good O-line to be a stellar offense. It wasn't there this year because - and I can't believe I'm saying this - they tried to address every other position with draft picks.

    I'm not a Reid apologist, but people are miffed because this team played so high for most of the season then got bounced in the first round. If this was the equivalent of 2000 all over again(comparing to a year when rebuilding was hitting a time of a full fledge contender), I am fine with that. If the team was to make a change at head coach, fine, but I'm not going to say having Reid around is a bad thing. The dude keeps this team competitive every year. If you could guarantee me a Super Bowl with another coach, I'll take it. But ya can't, so that's all masturbation talk, and I'll take Reid over any coach in the league not named Belichick or Payton...and possibly Tomlin, though I still think he's overrated.

    The argument goes both ways my friend...guarantee me a SB win with Reid...you cant

    I'm sick of being close and not winning..but you guys like making the playoffs every year and not winning

    I think 12 years of the same mistakes and the same ending is enough of a sample size for me

    His philosphy has to change on both sides of the ball...if not we're gonna be having this same discussion next year
    My drinking team has a hockey problem

    The ONLY thing better than a glass of beer is tea with Miss McGill



    A protuberance of flesh above the waistband of a tight pair of trousers
  • Phantom Pain
    Phantom Pain Posts: 9,876
    pjhawks wrote:
    Phantom Pain wrote:
    Jearlpam0925 wrote:
    Dude, Jeags, for all those stats, anything is a step-up on defense from this year.

    The D was bad nobody is saying they weren't

    But in the 2 games they needed to win this year they didn't play that bad

    The offense was no better...but the Reid lover refuses to acknowledge Reid's offense is not working in the playoffs or in big reg season games

    bring back ray rhodes and ty detmer. i so want to be 4-12 again,. but hey ray ran the ball so all was good

    4-12...we didnt have a SB win....13-3 we didn't win the SB either

    But hey...we make the playoffs every year and continue to lose the same way

    Why change anything ? .500 Coach in the playoffs...has lost numerous playoff games as a favorite..but hey..we make the playoffs every year
    My drinking team has a hockey problem

    The ONLY thing better than a glass of beer is tea with Miss McGill



    A protuberance of flesh above the waistband of a tight pair of trousers
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,594
    edited January 2011
    pjhawks wrote:
    The Juggler wrote:
    7 of our offense's 16 points came off a turnover forced by the defense on the packers 24 yard line. just sayin'...

    you know what you guys are right, the defense was fucking great and if we ran the ball up the middle 5 more fucking times for 8 yards we would have won the game.

    wow. totally not my point and not the point of the article you claim to have read.

    your reading comprehension skills are lacking.
    Post edited by The Juggler on
    www.myspace.com
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,594
    Jearlpam0925 wrote:
    Dude, Jeags, for all those stats, anything is a step-up on defense from this year.

    being healthy and filling a few holes will be a step up no matter who the coordinator is.
    www.myspace.com
  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 12,911
    The Juggler wrote:
    Jearlpam0925 wrote:
    Dude, Jeags, for all those stats, anything is a step-up on defense from this year.

    being healthy and filling a few holes will be a step up no matter who the coordinator is.

    as long as we run the ball everything will be ok. defense won't matter if we run the ball 5 or 10 more times a game. :roll:
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,594
    edited January 2011
    Jearlpam0925 wrote:
    Phantom Pain wrote:
    Jearlpam0925 wrote:
    Dude, Jeags, for all those stats, anything is a step-up on defense from this year.

    The D was bad nobody is saying they weren't

    But in the 2 games they needed to win this year they didn't play that bad

    The offense was no better...but the Reid lover refuses to acknowledge Reid's offense is not working in the playoffs or in big reg season games

    What are you talking about? The D should've gotten torched against GB if it wasn't for GB being self-defeating for most of that game. It's this simple - you need a good O-line to be a stellar offense. It wasn't there this year because - and I can't believe I'm saying this - they tried to address every other position with draft picks.

    I'm not a Reid apologist, but people are miffed because this team played so high for most of the season then got bounced in the first round. If this was the equivalent of 2000 all over again(comparing to a year when rebuilding was hitting a time of a full fledge contender), I am fine with that. If the team was to make a change at head coach, fine, but I'm not going to say having Reid around is a bad thing. The dude keeps this team competitive every year. If you could guarantee me a Super Bowl with another coach, I'll take it. But ya can't, so that's all masturbation talk, and I'll take Reid over any coach in the league not named Belichick or Payton...and possibly Tomlin, though I still think he's overrated.

    i disagree with your assesment of the packers game (as they ran the ball the same amount against atlanta and more than doubled their score) but i agree that having reid back isn't a bad thing. i love winning 10 games every year and having a chance. where we differ is i think there are certain coaching and personnel philosophies utilized by reid that is preventing them from getting over the hump (ie: smaller/finesse defense that wears down through the season...an offense too reliant on the big play--plus the late adjustments/clock management issues which are crucial in big games). hopefully he improves in those areas, but after 12 years, i have my doubts.

    expectations will be much bigger going into next season though. you gotta see what he can do with his new qb, and his new d coordinator.
    Post edited by The Juggler on
    www.myspace.com
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,594
    pjhawks wrote:
    The Juggler wrote:
    Jearlpam0925 wrote:
    Dude, Jeags, for all those stats, anything is a step-up on defense from this year.

    being healthy and filling a few holes will be a step up no matter who the coordinator is.

    as long as we run the ball everything will be ok. defense won't matter if we run the ball 5 or 10 more times a game. :roll:

    you should attend that football 101 class the eagles run for chicks.
    :lol:

    edit--no offense to pearljgirl2010 as she knows her shit :mrgreen:
    www.myspace.com
  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 12,911
    The Juggler wrote:
    you should attend that football 101 class the eagles run for chicks.
    :lol:

    don't need to, the guys on here and the comcast and wip-itis jersey wearing mofos have convinced me that all we have to do is run the ball a few more times. 5 or 10 more times a game we are 100% guaranteed to win super bowls. it won't even matter when we play better teams (you know like the packers were against us. and the cowboys last year) , 5 or 10 more times run the ball up the middle is all that it will take. :roll: :roll: :roll:
  • Phantom Pain
    Phantom Pain Posts: 9,876
    I'm lost on why some of you guys don't see Reid's short comings and why he is responsible

    He has done a good job on turning this mess around but at the same time he needs to get the job done

    Like Jeags said..we're seeing his same mistakes since '99

    He is stubborn to a fault IMO
    My drinking team has a hockey problem

    The ONLY thing better than a glass of beer is tea with Miss McGill



    A protuberance of flesh above the waistband of a tight pair of trousers
  • Phantom Pain
    Phantom Pain Posts: 9,876
    pjhawks wrote:
    The Juggler wrote:
    you should attend that football 101 class the eagles run for chicks.
    :lol:

    don't need to, the guys on here and the comcast and wip-itis jersey wearing mofos have convinced me that all we have to do is run the ball a few more times. 5 or 10 more times a game we are 100% guaranteed to win super bowls. it won't even matter when we play better teams (you know like the packers were against us. and the cowboys last year) , 5 or 10 more times run the ball up the middle is all that it will take. :roll: :roll: :roll:

    Doesn't Reid make all the personnel decisions ?

    Why are we not the most talented team ?

    We'll never know if we would win running the ball 10 more times because Reid wont do it

    :lol::lol:

    As soon as it's not a love fest for Reid we're wip listeners :roll: :roll: :roll:
    My drinking team has a hockey problem

    The ONLY thing better than a glass of beer is tea with Miss McGill



    A protuberance of flesh above the waistband of a tight pair of trousers
  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 12,911
    Phantom Pain wrote:
    I'm lost on why some of you guys don't see Reid's short comings and why he is responsible

    He has done a good job on turning this mess around but at the same time he needs to get the job done

    Like Jeags said..we're seeing his same mistakes since '99

    He is stubborn to a fault IMO

    well i'm pretty damn stubborn myself so it could be that.

    and i didn't call you a wip-lover. i said the people on here AND comcast and wip idiots.

    you clearly have a singular definition of getting the job done so clearly only 1 coach per year 'gets the job done'
  • The Juggler
    The Juggler Posts: 49,594
    pjhawks wrote:
    The Juggler wrote:
    you should attend that football 101 class the eagles run for chicks.
    :lol:

    don't need to, the guys on here and the comcast and wip-itis jersey wearing mofos have convinced me that all we have to do is run the ball a few more times. 5 or 10 more times a game we are 100% guaranteed to win super bowls. it won't even matter when we play better teams (you know like the packers were against us. and the cowboys last year) , 5 or 10 more times run the ball up the middle is all that it will take. :roll: :roll: :roll:

    well at least enroll in a reading comprehension course? it will make these conversations much easier for people to digest.
    www.myspace.com
  • pjhawks
    pjhawks Posts: 12,911
    The Juggler wrote:
    pjhawks wrote:
    The Juggler wrote:
    you should attend that football 101 class the eagles run for chicks.
    :lol:

    don't need to, the guys on here and the comcast and wip-itis jersey wearing mofos have convinced me that all we have to do is run the ball a few more times. 5 or 10 more times a game we are 100% guaranteed to win super bowls. it won't even matter when we play better teams (you know like the packers were against us. and the cowboys last year) , 5 or 10 more times run the ball up the middle is all that it will take. :roll: :roll: :roll:

    well at least enroll in a reading comprehension course? it will make these conversations much easier for people to digest.

    nah better to continue to tweak you guys and to shake my head everytime i hear the tired cliche about not running the ball enough.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories