This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Did your eyes not see it was a stripped down offense?Can I assume you have not watched the games this season? There is no way anyone can say that the Eagles offense looked better under McNabb than it did Kolb. Your eyes dont lie and what they are showing you is rather simple. Kolb is more accurate than McNabb and he gets rid of the ball quicker. Its that simple.Everbody loves the back up QB.
Did your eyes not see it was a stripped down offense?Can I assume you have not watched the games this season? There is no way anyone can say that the Eagles offense looked better under McNabb than it did Kolb. Your eyes dont lie and what they are showing you is rather simple. Kolb is more accurate than McNabb and he gets rid of the ball quicker. Its that simple.Everbody loves the back up QB.
I expected an Eagles blowout, but it seemed the Birds went very conservative as soon as they had a big lead. Conservative playcalling against a good defense = not many yards or points. Washington's real problems are almost exclusively on offense.It made for a boring, at times frustrating, game, but it was still a double digit win on the road against a divisional opponent. The gameplan (conservative with a lead) was the CORRECT gameplan against a team that's repeatedly shown they can't score.Relax all...we'll get a much better look at the Eagle's offensive capabilities next week.
As of now, the saints look like runaway favorites in the NFC. They alreadyblew out the Eagles and Giants. The only team that looks even close to them is the Vikings. If Eagle fans want to call for McNabb's job, I hope they have a plan to bring in Brees. Or get Peterson for the backfield.
Why are those the only choices? Is it so unimaginable to think that Kolb could take over this team next year, get in sync with the young speedster WRs they have and have a strong season as the Eagles starting QB?
Well said. I look at that dominating defense, the McCoy/Westbrook combo (finally not totally limited by Westbrook's health), Celek at TE and Maclin. You HAVE to have a steady QB that can throw ACCURATE passes. incomplete passes > Interceptions is the WRONG response to McNabb throws inaccurate passes. There are QBs in this league that will throw accurate passes 3/4 times. As an outside fan, the Eagles are "close but no cigar" as long as McNabb is there. I do hate to say it but I think it's true.
What does a stripped down offense have to do with a QB's accuracy? If you have watched the Eagles games this season then you have seen Kolb make throws that McNabb drills into the ground on a consistent basis. Kolb puts the ball in a spot that allows the receiver to make a play after the catch. So either McNabb needs a stripped down offense or Kolb is a more accurate passer.Did your eyes not see it was a stripped down offense?Can I assume you have not watched the games this season? There is no way anyone can say that the Eagles offense looked better under McNabb than it did Kolb. Your eyes dont lie and what they are showing you is rather simple. Kolb is more accurate than McNabb and he gets rid of the ball quicker. Its that simple.Everbody loves the back up QB.
Yeah, I've watched every play of every Eagles games this year. And every year going back a decade. McNabb is clearly better than Kolb.
He's not as accurate it seems. I have no doubt that he's a better team leader. Is he better at decisions? Just curious. Kolb - "paired down" offense or not - looked better, seemed to get the ball out quickly and accurately consistenly.
Then how has McNabb been better than Kolb this season so far?
better win %, better TD/Int ratio and higher QB ratingI don't think he has looked great the last two weeks however
This is where we clearly disagree.The Eagles have been a perennial Superbowl contender because of Andy Reid and the SYSTEM they run, and the way the front office manages personnel and effectively works the salary cap. It's NOT because of Donovan McNabb. That was obvious in 2002 when McNabb got injured and AJ Feeley lead the team to a 5-1 record down the stretch. He earned a starting job with Miami the following year and looked like garbage. It was evident again in 2006, when McNabb got injured and Jeff Garcia went 5-2 and carried the team into the playoffs. And what's Garcia done since? Now it's obvious again watching Kevin Kolb run the offense efficiently enough to stir up a QB controversy. Looking at the Eagles past history without a healthy McNabb, why would anyone assume the team would take a huge step backwards if Kolb was the QB? Let's not forget this kid was very highly regarded around the league when the Eagles traded up and drafted him.JuniorNB said:
Link?
They did not trade up do get Kolb. They traded out of the first round and took Kolb in the second.
Exactly. They would have given him away for a bag of chips this offseason. He had a decent game and wasn't even close in one game and put up numbers in mop up duty. That doesn't make him even close to the real thing. Everyone falls in love with the backup QB, especially some of our whiny fans. If you want to win in the next 2 years, you want McNabb starting. It's not even close.
That would be a great move. Let's fire one of the three or four most successful coaches of the last decade.
You're right. They traded out of the 1st. My bad. But it doesn't change my point about the SYSTEM. Can someone please explain to me how the likes of AJ Feeley, Jeff Garcia, and at moments even Koy Detmer, looked like superstars running this Eagles offense? The win / loss totals don't lie. Are you telling me that Kolb isn't in the same league as those guys?
Reid actually calls running plays when those guys are at QB. He relies on McNabb too much when McNabb is in. There was a limit to the system -- Mike McMahon.
Your being too kind to the Giants, their LB's are not exactly a strength, truth be told they only have a strong front four. Beyond that its very shaky. With that being said I think that shoddy LB play along with secondary has negated the talent of the front four as receievers are able to get open quickly before the QB can be pressured. Now onto the Eagles: How did the offensive line fare? I thought McNabb would be running for his life but by all accounts sounded like he had alot of time in the pocket. I heard that the Eagles only ran about 40 something plays which sounds to me that maybe all the offensive woes are not fixed. I saw alot of quick strike plays D-Jax, Weaver, and McCoy. Did the Eagles mount any sustainable drives or was it alot of 3 and outs?
Peters had a couple breakdowns. But also there were plays like the DeSean td where he had all day.There was one long drive for a FG, but otherwise it was big play or nothing.The best news for an Eagles fan is Weaver got 8 carries. I would love it if he got that every game, along with like 12-14 from Westbrook/McCoy. I think Andy is scared to use Westbrook, but doesn't want to bench him like AZ did with Edge either. Which is why we ran more when he was out (this game and the KC game). If Weaver can be a heftier version of Buck then
They only punted 3 times. The offense was extremely effective. You're next.
If Austin gets shut down the Cowboys have other playmakers. By the second quarter yesterday Romo had already completed passes to 8 different players. It really doesnt matter if McNabb is accurate it all boils down to whether or not he will have time in the pocket. In the last couple of weeks the Dallas pass rush has become more consistent. The Falcons had only allowed 2 sacks ALL SEASON before Dallas sacked Ryan 4 times. I would be very worried with your ability to pass protect. Truth be told this will be a great measuring stick for your offense. Prior to the Giants game the Eagles offense looked anemic to put it nicely (vs Raiders and Redskins) then came out and then broke the scoreboard against the Giants. Cant wait for this game.
I would agree with you that 5-3 is okay except that the first half of the schedule was the easy part. We have to play at SD, at Chi, at Atl, at NYG, at Dal, and home for Denver. Our only games that appear to be easy wins are Wasington and SF at home. I could easily see us go 8-8 or 9-7. I am very concerned about our inconsistent play, and Andy Reid's bad playcalling. Both have been very evident in our 3 losses this year.
Regarding the bolded part, I just don't understand this sentiment from AR supporters. If he's an "average at best" gameday coach, how can he be considered a "terrific" coach? I would think that one of the most important criteria to evaluate a coach would be their ability to actually coach the game.
Playing 4 of the next 5 on the road is worrying. The 4 road opponents have a combined 18-14 record. The divisional games against the Giants and Cowboys are on the road too. There are only 2 games left in the season (WAS and SF) which should be pencilled in as Ws by a playoff team.The earlier comment that the early half of the schedule was easier than the last half was right I think, the Cowboys also have a much softer second half of the year, gets much tougher to win the division from here.
Because gameday coaching is only one part of overall quality of coaching. It may not even be the most important part. He's worked well with GM's to get a decent product on the field virtually every year. He's overcome devastating injuries to QB's and O-linemen in the past to continue to field a competitive product year in and year out. He makes most of the drafting calls and has done an above average job with that. Coaching is far more then in game management of timeouts and challenges.The Eagles generally come to play...so yes, despite his deficiencies on gameday, he's still a terrific coach.
I thought we were going to blow the doors off the Cowboys. I didnt think their CBs were going to be able to hang. As it turned out, their pass rush was better than the NYG. Wow moment there.I thought the playcalling was horrible. Again, too many passing downs when we should be running. That said, we had WAAAAAAY too many dropped passes.
There's no question, on paper, the 2nd half schedule appears more difficult. But I also expect the team to execute better and don't view any of the road games are particularly problematic if the Eagles play their best football. I would assume a loss @SD b/c we don't travel to the West Coast well, but I full expect wins at Chicago and Atlanta; or to put more flesh on it, I expect we'll win those games IF we're as good a team as we thought we were entering the season.
I agree that there is more to coaching than in game management but I think that it is the most defining criteria to evaluate a coach. AR is great at preparing the team for a matchup but when the Eagles lose to an inferior opponent (which I think has happened twice this year), I believe it's usually because AR was outcoached. I think he's good at evaluating talent and usually does a good job with the draft but in my opinion that speaks more to his ability as a GM than a coach. I'm not disputing that he's a terrific GM. I think in order to be a "terrific" coach, he needs to improve in several areas of game management (e.g. clock management, use of challenged, run/pass distribution). I think he's a very good coach (he has to be with that kind of record) but not "terrific".
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree here. It took him years to figure out that he needs half-way competent receivers. Honestly, find me one other head coach EVER that would have tried to make James Thrash a WR1? Or Pinkston? It took an embarrassment at home against the Panthers on the biggest of stages to convince him of that? Why does our head coach have a learning curve? I can go back to the inept 7 plays from the goal line at San Francisco, which ended with an INT, and state that Andy's learned nothing about how to convert the short yardage consistently. Is it personnel? Those are all Andy's guys, is he not bringing in the right talent to convert 3rd and short? Is it play calling in that situation? Could it be that we're in so many 3rd and 8+ yards that the players aren't prepared to convert short yardage? Again, it's Andy's responsibility to put his players in a better position to make plays. I am just wondering when he'll ever get around to that? He's only been saying that since the Clinton Administration.
I dont disagree with anything you said except that AR does a lot of things right. If we bring in a different coach, will he be able to do all of the other things that AR does well? Its not like AR is a losing coach. Unfortunately, we have to deal with some of his idiocy in these instances.
Forgot the "its my job to put the guys in the right positions"Jeff Pasquino said:Been far too long since I was in this thread. Just caught up on the regular season thru the last several pages.
There's a popular misconception that Reid didn't think he needed competent wide receivers for years. But that wasn't the case - it was just that Reid's attempts to stock the WR corps fell flat. Reid used a 2nd round pick on Pinkston in 2000, a 1st round pick on Freddie Mitchell in 2001, and signed James Thrash, not so much as a '#1' receiver as a starting receiver. (Thrash actually had two half-decent seaons at WR - people forget this.) During that stretch, only once did a real #1 receiver change teams - Lavearneus Coles to the Redskins, which was a RFA deal that cost the Skins a first round pick. Big names at wide receiver just weren't out there at the time. As soon as one became available - Terrell Owens - Reid pounced. Now if you want to criticize Reid's ability to identify and develop WR talent, feel free. But it certainly wasn't for lack of trying. Unfortunately a couple of draft busts can really set a team back at a position.
Agreed. Look at the players on the board when Reid picked Freddie Mitchell: Reggie Wayne, Steve Smith, Chad Johnson, Chris Chambers, TJ Houshmandzadeh. (And yes, a lot of others who didn't succeed)I'd like to get past this, really. I just can't.
I only caught the first quarter today. Should I bother to ask for a recap, or is it the usual lather, rinse repeat from the last ten years?
This would be a huge problem. No nickleback. I think D. Patterson is still hurt and I guess that leaves Macho and Jack I (on the practice squad) as the only other corners?Looks like Patterson is back 