Hypothetical: let’s say special teams keep changing with kickoffs and later punts and whatnot. One of the new changes is that the entire special teams group is seen as a unit, and they’ve decided it’s not really appropriate to award statistical TD’s to individual players on a special teams play when all 11 were extremely important to make that play. Instead, they’ll refer to the play as "STAPS”, Special Teams Advancement Points Scored. They advanced the ball far enough to score points so that the offense did not need to return to the field. It’s still identical to when it was called a touchdown, it’s still worth 6 points, and you still get a PAT or 2-pt option afterward. It’s just no longer officially a TD.

A game with 4 offensive TDs and 2 STAPS is now a 42 point, 4 TD game. Thats the rule. And That rule would be nonsensical. If it acts identically to a TD, it is a TD; ball crossed the plane while in possession, cut and dry TD regardless of what type of play it is. How ridiculous would that change be?

 

 

 

Rant: Broncos at Bills. Josh Allen has the ball at the 48 yard line. 4th and 1, incomplete pass because he overthrew the receiver. Josh Allen just committed a turnover. But it will never be logged as a turnover, because it is a "turnover on downs,” something completely unrelated to committing official turnovers. Had he fumbled the ball right there instead of throwing it and the defense recovered, an IDENTICAL result would entail. But it’s not a turnover. Had he thrown an interception where the defender brought it to the 48 that’s a turnover, but giving the ball to the defense in a different manner is not? Exact same result: had possession, made an error, defense claims possession on the very next snap against the offense’s wishes. 

It is not a field position deferment like a punt; Buffalo fully expected to continue possessing the ball. That is a turnover. And like an interception where the receiver falls over, or a handoff where the running back wasn’t expecting the ball… it goes entirely on the QB. He took the play in from the sideline. He huddled the team together to explain it. He approached the LoS with an understanding of the defensive formation. Even on a run play to the RB, he chose not to audible out of it. All of those more sensible reasons that claiming a fallen-over receiver makes an INT the QB’s fault. 

Imagine if a team failed 5 4th down attempts in a game (I’m sure somewhere it’s happened before). But they didn’t otherwise turn the ball over, and got blown out by a team that threw a pick. The announcers would proclaim, "They won the turnover battle, what an anomaly of a game!” Except it wasn’t an anomaly because they lost the turnover battle by a huge margin!

Fans don’t bring this up because it’s always been that way; if the special teams hypothetical was always that way we wouldn’t find it as weird as just hearing about it now.You could say it’s only semantics, and nothing really changes if you do that. But that’s no different than the special teams play; and people who flip their crap if they did that.

Turnover on downs is a QB turnover play. At the VERY least it is a team turnover. And it’s nonsensical that it isn’t. 

 

24 minutes ago, eagle45 said:

Where should he be drafted?

Raw, athletic, needs 1 year, and from UGA are pretty much a match made in heaven for what this team needs at RT.

I am profoundly ignorant about draft order but I’d guess in the 20s. Very well could be there for us.

Mims probably goes Top 20.

Morgan will be there with the Eagles RD1 pick 

Big fan of his.

The Eagles aren't losing because of lack of focus. They're losing because their coaches have bad game plans, don't put players into positions to succeed, and they lack back 7 defensive talent. They can be as "locked in" as they want, that's not going to help when they have Reddick dropping into coverage or are running QB sweeps on 2nd and 17.

8 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

wait what...Mailata really said that?

 

9 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Turnover on downs is a QB turnover play. At the VERY least it is a team turnover. And it’s nonsensical that it isn’t. 

This has been keeping you up nights, hasn't it?  

 

Why is it Allen's turnover?  What if its a drop?  What if a guy is just tackled short of the line to gain?  Is that akin fumble?   

Let's play the game though... they can just call a stop on 4th down a 'turnover'.  Make it a new category, INT, Fumbles and Downs.  Simple.  It doesn't need to be applied to a player, but to the team. 

2 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

This has been keeping you up nights, hasn't it?  

 

Why is it Allen's turnover?  What if its a drop?  What if a guy is just tackled short of the line to gain?  Is that akin fumble?   

Let's play the game though... they can just call a stop on 4th down a 'turnover'.  Make it a new category, INT, Fumbles and Downs.  Simple.  It doesn't need to be applied to a player, but to the team. 

At the very least applied to the team. A team that fails multiple first downs is repeatedly turning the ball over by NFL vernacular, whether officially or not.

 

33 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

There is your answer if changing DC's helped or hurt. Cost the division and #2 seed most likely. 

Definitely was a panic move smh. I don't think the players appreciated that more than likely 

15 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

The Eagles aren't losing because of lack of focus. They're losing because their coaches have bad game plans, don't put players into positions to succeed, and they lack back 7 defensive talent. They can be as "locked in" as they want, that's not going to help when they have Reddick dropping into coverage or are running QB sweeps on 2nd and 17.

I would say there is certainly some lack of focus and attention to detail. The missed assignments, penalties, and turnovers are totally on the players. They do have some accountability there contrary to popular belief. They need to execute after all.

Gotta think he's played himself out of the Eagles price range for RB at this point

 

8 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

 

If they come out onto the field to Sirius by The Alan Parsons Project, I'll be a believer ....

Oh, wait ... they don't have any f'n home games left because they lost to the 3-win Cardinals!

 

9 minutes ago, bpac55 said:

Gotta think he's played himself out of the Eagles price range for RB at this point

 

He'll be 25 with less than 3k yards on him. He'll find someone to pay. Doubt it's us

Your backfield will be Gainwell, Rookie, Who Cares.

Your backfield should be Swift, Rookie, Who Cares.

2 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

this back 7...  just completely devoid of playmaking ability. 

Sydney Brown, last game,  99 yard Int return for a TD.  21.52 mph.

6 minutes ago, Random Reglar said:

Sydney Brown, last game,  99 yard Int return for a TD.  21.52 mph.

I like SB. Find ways to keep him on the field.   Quick, always around the ball and surely made the most of that INT.  Just a bit of tackling and we are good there. 

   

14 minutes ago, Iggles25 said:

Your backfield will be Gainwell, Rookie, Who Cares.

Your backfield should be Swift, Rookie, Who Cares.

I’d prefer Swift, rookie, I kind of care.

17 minutes ago, Iggles25 said:

Your backfield will be Gainwell, Rookie, Who Cares.

Your backfield should be Swift, Rookie, Who Cares.

I'd be fine if they didn't sign Swift but sign someone like him. Don't get someone like Shady though. Hated the dancing

As I've stated before I'd love someone like Blount again

2 hours ago, jamiller said:

Yeah but but he hasnt touched the football. He needs live game reps?!?!  Can't just give him the ball in the playoff game and hope he has magic?

 

but you can do that.  they might not want to do that, but they certainly can.  And Penny isn't a rookie, he's already done good stuff,  so,  in theory at least they can put him out there and hope he is back to what he was last year. 

It's not hope he has magic, it's hope he has the same magic as last year.

2 hours ago, just relax said:

Oh please. 450 yards of offense, Time of possession almost 40 minutes. 220 yards rushing. We got crushed.

No,  the Eagles took a lead early,  and with less than 40 seconds left,  the Cards took the lead. Then,  a Hail Mary which could have won the game for the Eagles.  



 

8 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

I'd be fine if they didn't sign Swift but sign someone like him. Don't get someone like Shady though. Hated the dancing

As I've stated before I'd love someone like Blount again

I want Swift back. I'd even look to sign a secondary back like we did this year with Penny but actually use the guy. If Penny actually is used down the stretch here and looks good and wants to come back, I'd be fine with another short cheaper contract. If not, I've always been a fan of Foreman. He'd be a nice complimentary back to Swift who never costs much. 

1 hour ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

At the very least applied to the team. A team that fails multiple first downs is repeatedly turning the ball over by NFL vernacular, whether officially or not.

 

Is a missed FG a turnover?  

20 minutes ago, Know Life said:

I’d prefer Swift, rookie, I kind of care.

You’ll get Jeremy McNichols and like it 

2 hours ago, Frankfurteagle89 said:

Idk, but I think we need to stop with this Penny BS. They are not saving him for the playoffs or some secret plan. 
They’re stubborn and want to play it their way with the RPO. Maybe Jalen can’t play it any other way?! 
I just don’t get why he cannot get under center and allow the offense to run some conventional running plays. 
 

 

I see no reason why Penny couldn't be one of the secret weapons in the playoffs.

1 hour ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

 

Hypothetical: let’s say special teams keep changing with kickoffs and later punts and whatnot. One of the new changes is that the entire special teams group is seen as a unit, and they’ve decided it’s not really appropriate to award statistical TD’s to individual players on a special teams play when all 11 were extremely important to make that play. Instead, they’ll refer to the play as "STAPS”, Special Teams Advancement Points Scored. They advanced the ball far enough to score points so that the offense did not need to return to the field. It’s still identical to when it was called a touchdown, it’s still worth 6 points, and you still get a PAT or 2-pt option afterward. It’s just no longer officially a TD.

A game with 4 offensive TDs and 2 STAPS is now a 42 point, 4 TD game. Thats the rule. And That rule would be nonsensical. If it acts identically to a TD, it is a TD; ball crossed the plane while in possession, cut and dry TD regardless of what type of play it is. How ridiculous would that change be?

 

 

 

Rant: Broncos at Bills. Josh Allen has the ball at the 48 yard line. 4th and 1, incomplete pass because he overthrew the receiver. Josh Allen just committed a turnover. But it will never be logged as a turnover, because it is a "turnover on downs,” something completely unrelated to committing official turnovers. Had he fumbled the ball right there instead of throwing it and the defense recovered, an IDENTICAL result would entail. But it’s not a turnover. Had he thrown an interception where the defender brought it to the 48 that’s a turnover, but giving the ball to the defense in a different manner is not? Exact same result: had possession, made an error, defense claims possession on the very next snap against the offense’s wishes. 

It is not a field position deferment like a punt; Buffalo fully expected to continue possessing the ball. That is a turnover. And like an interception where the receiver falls over, or a handoff where the running back wasn’t expecting the ball… it goes entirely on the QB. He took the play in from the sideline. He huddled the team together to explain it. He approached the LoS with an understanding of the defensive formation. Even on a run play to the RB, he chose not to audible out of it. All of those more sensible reasons that claiming a fallen-over receiver makes an INT the QB’s fault. 

Imagine if a team failed 5 4th down attempts in a game (I’m sure somewhere it’s happened before). But they didn’t otherwise turn the ball over, and got blown out by a team that threw a pick. The announcers would proclaim, "They won the turnover battle, what an anomaly of a game!” Except it wasn’t an anomaly because they lost the turnover battle by a huge margin!

Fans don’t bring this up because it’s always been that way; if the special teams hypothetical was always that way we wouldn’t find it as weird as just hearing about it now.You could say it’s only semantics, and nothing really changes if you do that. But that’s no different than the special teams play; and people who flip their crap if they did that.

Turnover on downs is a QB turnover play. At the VERY least it is a team turnover. And it’s nonsensical that it isn’t. 

 

If you think about it along those lines then a punt is a turnover as well, but instead of a fumble near the line of scrimmage, it's like a deep pass that is intercepted. 

1 hour ago, just relax said:

Love him. He’s raw but very athletic. He needs a year of coaching but he’s a perfect fit. There are several guys who’ll be drafted ahead of him but he’ll end up being as good or better than any of them.

Cool thx

he was on my list of guys i felt could be well suited as Lanes heir