#ChipKellyOffense (1 Viewer)

[Bigboy10182000]

You knew this was destined for failure, when it's all that was talked about all offseason.

To be fair, a few of the "wiser" heads spoke about how this #ChipKellyOffense would not work in the NFL...

3 games in, and it looks figured out. get Vick to turn it over 2x a game, score almost every possession against an already bad, and now dead tired PHI DEF.. win game

The guys that come along and try to re-invent the troll....do they think they're clever?

trolling or facting?

you're an eagles fan, we get it. the Chip Kelly scheme stinks

In order to be a better troll follow this guy. He has been doing it way longer and he's much better then you.

I'm waiting for someone to show evidence of an offensive failure.

Record: 1-2

 

[JuniorNB]

I'm waiting for someone to show evidence of an offensive failure.

Record: 1-2

Ah, so you haven't watched. 30 pts and 500 yds of offense does not equate to 'offensive failure'.

Scientist is a troll. He may be the least informed member of this entire messageboard. You forgot more than that tool knows. He doesn't know the difference between 'offense' and record.

 

[CentralPA]

The Scientist dude...stashed nicely on my ignore list.

 

[Ghost Rider]

The offense has not failed yet. The defense has. The rebuilding will take a couple of years, not 3 games.

I would say the offense failed big time last night. Over 400 yards of total offense, yet they only managed 9 net points (16 scored minus the 7 on the pick six) thanks for four turnovers on offense (the 5th was on special teams). Meanwhile, the defense played more than good enough to win, only letting the KC offense score 19 points.

I would agree that the offense failed in terms of sloppy mistakes/turnovers. But when you still put up 431 yards of offense that usually is a good recipe to score points.

Usually, yes, but an offense in football that can pile up yards, but not finish drives, is like a baseball team that can get runners all day, but can never get hits with RISP. Plus, when you have a QB like Vick, who is turnover-prone, those yards often come with a price: lots of turnovers. Maybe saying the offense failed was an overstatement on my part, but only putting up 16 points on offense, while giving the other team 7 with a pick six, is not exactly a success, regardless of how many yards they racked up.

 

[JuniorNB]

You knew this was destined for failure, when it's all that was talked about all offseason.

To be fair, a few of the "wiser" heads spoke about how this #ChipKellyOffense would not work in the NFL...

3 games in, and it looks figured out. get Vick to turn it over 2x a game, score almost every possession against an already bad, and now dead tired PHI DEF.. win game

The guys that come along and try to re-invent the troll....do they think they're clever?

trolling or facting?

you're an eagles fan, we get it. the Chip Kelly scheme stinks

In order to be a better troll follow this guy. He has been doing it way longer and he's much better then you.

I'm waiting for someone to show evidence of an offensive failure.

Record: 1-2

It's funny watching all the idiots come out of the woodwork now. When the Eagles were curbstomping the Redskins, they didn't say a word. This is a 4-12 team with horrible defensive personnel (thanks to Reid's drafting) and learning a new offensive scheme. If they can win 6 or 7 games, it is a step in the right direction. No one that I saw was predicting a Super Bowl this year.

In week two, their defense failed them. This week, way too many turnovers to win an NFL game. The offense looks good when they're not turning it over.

 

[JuniorNB]

The offense has not failed yet. The defense has. The rebuilding will take a couple of years, not 3 games.

I would say the offense failed big time last night. Over 400 yards of total offense, yet they only managed 9 net points (16 scored minus the 7 on the pick six) thanks for four turnovers on offense (the 5th was on special teams). Meanwhile, the defense played more than good enough to win, only letting the KC offense score 19 points.

I would agree that the offense failed in terms of sloppy mistakes/turnovers. But when you still put up 431 yards of offense that usually is a good recipe to score points.

Usually, yes, but an offense in football that can pile up yards, but not finish drives, is like a baseball team that can get runners all day, but can never get hits with RISP. Plus, when you have a QB like Vick, who is turnover-prone, those yards often come with a price: lots of turnovers. Maybe saying the offense failed was an overstatement on my part, but only putting up 16 points on offense, while giving the other team 7 with a pick six, is not exactly a success, regardless of how many yards they racked up.

I don't think anyone is arguing that

 

[Amused to Death]

You knew this was destined for failure, when it's all that was talked about all offseason.

To be fair, a few of the "wiser" heads spoke about how this #ChipKellyOffense would not work in the NFL...

3 games in, and it looks figured out. get Vick to turn it over 2x a game, score almost every possession against an already bad, and now dead tired PHI DEF.. win game

The guys that come along and try to re-invent the troll....do they think they're clever?

trolling or facting?

you're an eagles fan, we get it. the Chip Kelly scheme stinks

In order to be a better troll follow this guy. He has been doing it way longer and he's much better then you.

I'm waiting for someone to show evidence of an offensive failure.

Record: 1-2

It's funny watching all the idiots come out of the woodwork now. When the Eagles were curbstomping the Redskins, they didn't say a word. This is a 4-12 team with horrible defensive personnel (thanks to Reid's drafting) and learning a new offensive scheme. If they can win 6 or 7 games, it is a step in the right direction. No one that I saw was predicting a Super Bowl this year.

In week two, their defense failed them. This week, way too many turnovers to win an NFL game. The offense looks good when they're not turning it over.

Not to mention special teams killed them in game 3 unlike the first 2.

 

[nxmehta]

Tim Tebow updates, anyone?

Hes the hero philly deserves.

If you're referring to the sandwich, then yes.

 

[CentralPA]

The offense has not failed yet. The defense has. The rebuilding will take a couple of years, not 3 games.

I would say the offense failed big time last night. Over 400 yards of total offense, yet they only managed 9 net points (16 scored minus the 7 on the pick six) thanks for four turnovers on offense (the 5th was on special teams). Meanwhile, the defense played more than good enough to win, only letting the KC offense score 19 points.

I would agree that the offense failed in terms of sloppy mistakes/turnovers. But when you still put up 431 yards of offense that usually is a good recipe to score points.

Usually, yes, but an offense in football that can pile up yards, but not finish drives, is like a baseball team that can get runners all day, but can never get hits with RISP. Plus, when you have a QB like Vick, who is turnover-prone, those yards often come with a price: lots of turnovers. Maybe saying the offense failed was an overstatement on my part, but only putting up 16 points on offense, while giving the other team 7 with a pick six, is not exactly a success, regardless of how many yards they racked up.

I absolutely agree 100%. All I am saying is that I think with the right QB, which for better or worse right now is Vick, this offense thrives. But there are flaws most certainly.

 

[Amused to Death]

The offense has not failed yet. The defense has. The rebuilding will take a couple of years, not 3 games.

I would say the offense failed big time last night. Over 400 yards of total offense, yet they only managed 9 net points (16 scored minus the 7 on the pick six) thanks for four turnovers on offense (the 5th was on special teams). Meanwhile, the defense played more than good enough to win, only letting the KC offense score 19 points.

I would agree that the offense failed in terms of sloppy mistakes/turnovers. But when you still put up 431 yards of offense that usually is a good recipe to score points.

Usually, yes, but an offense in football that can pile up yards, but not finish drives, is like a baseball team that can get runners all day, but can never get hits with RISP. Plus, when you have a QB like Vick, who is turnover-prone, those yards often come with a price: lots of turnovers. Maybe saying the offense failed was an overstatement on my part, but only putting up 16 points on offense, while giving the other team 7 with a pick six, is not exactly a success, regardless of how many yards they racked up.

They put up 33 in week 1, 30 in week 2. Week 3 was their 3rd game in 11 days (unprecedented to start the NFL season). So 1 game in an unusual week classifies the offense as failing? What was KCs offense then, since Philly out-produced them in half the ToP? Which offense last night really failed?

 

[FDC]

On this thread scientist is ignoring yardage totals and only citing win/loss records

On the McCoy thread his argument is solely yardage totals (meanwhile McCoy has the 11th most rush + rec yards thru 3 games in NFL history)

 

[Ghost Rider]

It's funny watching all the idiots come out of the woodwork now. When the Eagles were curbstomping the Redskins, they didn't say a word. This is a 4-12 team with horrible defensive personnel (thanks to Reid's drafting) and learning a new offensive scheme. If they can win 6 or 7 games, it is a step in the right direction. No one that I saw was predicting a Super Bowl this year.

In week two, their defense failed them. This week, way too many turnovers to win an NFL game. The offense looks good when they're not turning it over.

That first half against Washington was the perfect storm for the Eagles: they caught a bad defense off guard with their fast-moving offense, and the Redskins offense was awful thanks to an RG3 who hadn't see any real game action in eight months. And the Eagles put up 33 points in that first half. But they have put up only 47 points in the five halves of football since (which is about 19 PPG), so you'll have to excuse some of us if we don't think Chip Kelly's offense, with the current personnel, is gonna revolutionize the NFL. Had Maclin not gotten hurt, and if they had a playmaking, less-turnover prone QB, maybe, but for now, nope. Their running game will continue to pile up a lot of yards, but their passing game is not gonna be consistent enough for the offense as a whole to be dominant. For now.

 

[Amused to Death]

It's funny watching all the idiots come out of the woodwork now. When the Eagles were curbstomping the Redskins, they didn't say a word. This is a 4-12 team with horrible defensive personnel (thanks to Reid's drafting) and learning a new offensive scheme. If they can win 6 or 7 games, it is a step in the right direction. No one that I saw was predicting a Super Bowl this year.

In week two, their defense failed them. This week, way too many turnovers to win an NFL game. The offense looks good when they're not turning it over.

That first half against Washington was the perfect storm for the Eagles: they caught a bad defense off guard with their fast-moving offense, and the Redskins offense was awful thanks to an RG3 who hadn't see any real game action in eight months. And the Eagles put up 33 points in that first half. But they have put up only 47 points in the five halves of football since (which is about 19 PPG), so you'll have to excuse some of us if we don't think Chip Kelly's offense, with the current personnel, is gonna revolutionize the NFL. Had Maclin not gotten hurt, and if they had a playmaking, less-turnover prone QB, maybe, but for now, nope. Their running game will continue to pile up a lot of yards, but their passing game is not gonna be consistent enough for the offense as a whole to be dominant. For now.

So....game 2 was an offensive failure? 30 and 500? Last night was by far the worst they've looked, and still out-produced KCs offense.

 

[ImTheScientist]

It's funny watching all the idiots come out of the woodwork now. When the Eagles were curbstomping the Redskins, they didn't say a word. This is a 4-12 team with horrible defensive personnel (thanks to Reid's drafting) and learning a new offensive scheme. If they can win 6 or 7 games, it is a step in the right direction. No one that I saw was predicting a Super Bowl this year.

In week two, their defense failed them. This week, way too many turnovers to win an NFL game. The offense looks good when they're not turning it over.

You need a reality check bro.

Beating the Redskins 33 - 27 is not a "curbstomping".

Beating the 49ers 29-3 is a "curbstomping".

 

[JuniorNB]

On this thread scientist is ignoring yardage totals and only citing win/loss records

On the McCoy thread his argument is solely yardage totals (meanwhile McCoy has the 11th most rush + rec yards thru 3 games in NFL history)

Good point. I think Im a Scientist might be a pimply-faced 14 year-old. Every time he posts, he comes across more unintelligent.

 

[JuniorNB]

It's funny watching all the idiots come out of the woodwork now. When the Eagles were curbstomping the Redskins, they didn't say a word. This is a 4-12 team with horrible defensive personnel (thanks to Reid's drafting) and learning a new offensive scheme. If they can win 6 or 7 games, it is a step in the right direction. No one that I saw was predicting a Super Bowl this year.

In week two, their defense failed them. This week, way too many turnovers to win an NFL game. The offense looks good when they're not turning it over.

You need a reality check bro.

Beating the Redskins 33 - 27 is not a "curbstomping".

Beating the 49ers 29-3 is a "curbstomping".

Once I teach you about running backs and feel you've absorbed enough, I'll move on to garbage time points. Stick around, Son. I'll smarten you up.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

3rd team ever to start with 6 straight games of 400+ yards.

 

[Amused to Death]

3rd team ever to start with 6 straight games of 400+ yards.

And that's with a pretty tough first 6 games, 3 in 11 days followed by 3 straight on the road. Schedule gets easier from here.

 

[bweiser]

3rd team ever to start with 6 straight games of 400+ yards.

And that's with a pretty tough first 6 games, 3 in 11 days followed by 3 straight on the road. Schedule gets easier from here.

funny, i was thinking the opposite.

next five weeks are cowboys, giants, a west coast trip to oakland, green bay and washington.

the giants might suck, but they're still the giants and it's a big rivalry.

 

[Amused to Death]

3rd team ever to start with 6 straight games of 400+ yards.

And that's with a pretty tough first 6 games, 3 in 11 days followed by 3 straight on the road. Schedule gets easier from here.

funny, i was thinking the opposite.

next five weeks are cowboys, giants, a west coast trip to oakland, green bay and washington.

the giants might suck, but they're still the giants and it's a big rivalry.

The trip to GB is probably the only one they're underdogs.