1 hour ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Our O should take a nice leap forward this season….you know…unless those O mind coaches been here the whole time hold them back still. Pretty challenging to figure out reasoning to praise specifically just those two that have interacted with our O these years concerning anything revolving around X and O football areas. Full credit earned for Siri towards perfecting The Brotherly Shove as the lone exception.

Roob agrees with you

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

Everybody should understand a game isn’t just a game. Priorities should clearly begin with the SB game and work down from there. Playoff games….season ending games where it’s clearly defined stakes.

I mean what fan doesn’t understand divisional rivalry? Eagles fans that are kids even clearly know divisional games much more important than just any old regular season game. You lose to the Browns? Just A loss. You lose twice to a division rival so much more than just two losses. It’s also two steps ahead for your divisional opponent against you. Really put you in a hole if a divisional challenger sweeps you. That’s two losses for you while they gain two wins….handing over the tiebreaker advantage to them for the divisional title. You can have how ever many number of wins….more than all the other Conference teams but one that resides in your own division…and what is your seeding ceiling for the playoffs? You could have the second most wins in the entire NFL…yet have to play on the road the entire playoffs.

Spin and personal bias.

2 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Ok reprhase-who will be the team we contend for the tie breaker over, better????

Definitely

With that said, no one for the NFCE title. For the Playoffs seeding, the NFC West has a very cupcake schedule, especially the 49ers, but also the Rams. So I would say those two teams.

If we get 16 wins and only one loss in the regular season. But anybody in our division goes undefeated in the regular season. We are the fifth playoff seed. We are lesser than a 9 win team that was best in their crap division. 16 wins…can be below 9 wins.

23 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

See now you went way past the line. Labeling my statements disapproving your overly simplistic statement. Worse yet…no version what I’m saying is even wrong. It all is exactly spot on detailed explaining exactly how wrong your thoughts are. So labeling the guy’s opinion as stupidity…is just lashing out from a position of embarrassment. I was kind and patient for the most part …just listing out in the so many ways that idea was so very flawed. "A win is just a win” that’s the statement of stupidity. Something I was too kind to just call it like it is to that degree.

UH, if you don't win regular games the tiebreaker becomes moot????

But sure beat the Jets week 3 totally is equal to beating the Chiefs in the SB. But I’m the persistent fan of stupidity. Embarrassingly ludicrous!

1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said:

If we get 16 wins and only one loss in the regular season. But anybody in our division goes undefeated in the regular season. We are the fifth playoff seed. We are lesser than a 9 win team that was best in their crap division. 16 wins…can be below 9 wins.

Impossible for that to happen. Your example is stupid math. Keep on digging. You will get to China eventually.

2 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Definitely

I assumed you knew what I meant LOL.

16 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

So answer the question and stop the deflection. If Daniels won't last, why are you high on him?

Still waiting

2 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

But sure beat the Jets week 3 totally is equal to beating the Chiefs in the SB. But I’m the persistent fan of stupidity. Embarrassingly ludicrous!

The discussion started comparing regular season games. Your example is apples and oranges. Classic obfuscation on your part. Figures don’t lie, but liars figure.

1 minute ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

I assumed you knew what I meant LOL.

I did. But in fairness I need to be an equal opportunity noodge.

At least be correct when going to such great lengths beyond any lines. Doesn’t make it acceptable even then. Actually was believing you had some quality contributions I was welcoming. Advising you to just stick to those lanes which I already would compliment and commend you for possessing. You got it here if that is the true read of who you are and about. Going to be a harsh place though if you contributions equate to levels of all games are equal and mean the same…then lash out after detailed annihilation of oversimplification thoughts you failed to expect resulting.

9 minutes ago, mattwill said:

Roob agrees with you

I disagree, the offense was better when we [pulled Hurts back. The errors stopped after the bye. Hurts led the league in picks(or was tied) the first 4 weeks, so I would use a little caution in trying to force throws again. Now we can have differing views as to how many were Hurts fault, but the real point is turnovers kill drives and points. I believe when we went back to the KISS offense the offense flourished. I would be fine repeating what we did last year ALL year

4 minutes ago, mattwill said:

I did. But in fairness I need to be an equal opportunity noodge.

LOL point taken

11 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

If we get 16 wins and only one loss in the regular season. But anybody in our division goes undefeated in the regular season. We are the fifth playoff seed. We are lesser than a 9 win team that was best in their crap division. 16 wins…can be below 9 wins.

Who exactly is going undefeated in our division? 1972 was the last undefeated team and they weren't in our division. Who gives a F if you are seed 5 if you have the best team?

13 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

If we get 16 wins and only one loss in the regular season. But anybody in our division goes undefeated in the regular season. We are the fifth playoff seed. We are lesser than a 9 win team that was best in their crap division. 16 wins…can be below 9 wins.

You're freakin WORRIED already that someone will go undefeated? Are you serious????? If you are I will laugh until my sides hurt

14 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

But sure beat the Jets week 3 totally is equal to beating the Chiefs in the SB. But I’m the persistent fan of stupidity. Embarrassingly ludicrous!

The goal is to win 1 game per week, but we all know per last year you don't believe in this approach, even though it works for EVERY sports team in every sport(aka 1 game at a time). Ham knows better than all of them(not)

46 minutes ago, mattwill said:

You only get to Tiebreakers after counting the wins and losses. In those counts each individual game result counts one in the standings, never more and never less. A Division loss counts one. A Conference loss counts one. A non-Conference loss counts one. It is a zero sum game. A loss in any individual week puts the losing team one game behind each of the winning teams that week (half a game behind a Bye Week team). Who the opponent is makes no difference in that universal truth.

With that said, this conversation started by you asserting that the Eagles were harmed by the decision to not maximize the production of the Offense, and I responded that with an over 14 point margin of victory in the last 17 games of the season, more points wouldn’t have resulted in any appreciable increase in where the Eagles were in the NFL standings. As you often do, you morphed the discussion to Tiebreakers when you knew you were on the wrong side of the facts.

Feel I addressed the a win is a win part. Volunteer that doesn’t mean anything significant necessarily surrounding how the win is achieved. So without even disagreeing with that opinion…I do stress a priority of being at your best at the end. So especially specifically last season I don’t see how average margins of victory along with many low importance stats are hardly relevant. Key wasn’t just making sure not to lose. Key was installing, growing and developing everything as to maximize whole teams potential. Any loss could have consequences. But no one loss was going to be more significant to our season success as failing to improve. Much more willing to have suffered bumps in the road from making mistakes ….that helped speed up the learning curve.

5 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

I disagree, the offense was better when we [pulled Hurts back. The errors stopped after the bye. Hurts led the league in picks(or was tied) the first 4 weeks, so I would use a little caution in trying to force throws again. Now we can have differing views as to how many were Hurts fault, but the real point is turnovers kill drives and points. I believe when we went back to the KISS offense the offense flourished. I would be fine repeating what we did last year ALL year

I believe (but could be wrong in that belief) are defining "better” subjectively, while Ham is defining it by the count of points on the scoreboard. People who play Fantasy Football don’t like your subjective definition.

10 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

At least be correct when going to such great lengths beyond any lines. Doesn’t make it acceptable even then. Actually was believing you had some quality contributions I was welcoming. Advising you to just stick to those lanes which I already would compliment and commend you for possessing. You got it here if that is the true read of who you are and about. Going to be a harsh place though if you contributions equate to levels of all games are equal and mean the same…then lash out after detailed annihilation of oversimplification thoughts you failed to expect resulting.

More spin. The discussion included nothing about the detail specifics within a game until you post above. Those details do not appear in the weekly NFL standings table. Your spin is obvious and pathetic.

16 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Still waiting

16 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

Still waiting

17 minutes ago, GreenbleedinNC said:

So answer the question and stop the deflection. If Daniels won't last, why are you high on him?

Still waiting

(Tapping pencils on table waiting for my next birthday to arrive)

Just a thought here….realize it’s counter to what was done on a proven championship season. But I still don’t see how any harm would have resulted from taking the opposite approach on O. Pushing the limits towards highest greatness. Really believe we win just as routinely by letting the O go for it. Could have just been scoring so much more locking in wins week to week. Sure as so much was being added to the O for the first time assumed mistakes would occur. But payoff would have been pushing capabilities to the max. I just wasn’t believing a mis-que between receiver and QB resulting in a turnover here and there were going to really kill us. Believe we would have proven so difficult to beat by the incredible production proving far too much to contend with.

7 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Feel I addressed the a win is a win part. Volunteer that doesn’t mean anything significant necessarily surrounding how the win is achieved. So without even disagreeing with that opinion…I do stress a priority of being at your best at the end. So especially specifically last season I don’t see how average margins of victory along with many low importance stats are hardly relevant. Key wasn’t just making sure not to lose. Key was installing, growing and developing everything as to maximize whole teams potential. Any loss could have consequences. But no one loss was going to be more significant to our season success as failing to improve. Much more willing to have suffered bumps in the road from making mistakes ….that helped speed up the learning curve.

(Lost in Space)

6 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Feel I addressed the a win is a win part. Volunteer that doesn’t mean anything significant necessarily surrounding how the win is achieved. So without even disagreeing with that opinion…I do stress a priority of being at your best at the end. So especially specifically last season I don’t see how average margins of victory along with many low importance stats are hardly relevant. Key wasn’t just making sure not to lose. Key was installing, growing and developing everything as to maximize whole teams potential. Any loss could have consequences. But no one loss was going to be more significant to our season success as failing to improve. Much more willing to have suffered bumps in the road from making mistakes ….that helped speed up the learning curve.

Maximizing the potential is something that matters to Fantasy Football aficionados. Margin of Victory doesn’t actually matter in the Standings. All each individual margin needs to be is one. Where Margin of Victory matters is in determining the vulnerability of the team to actually incurring a loss. Incurring an actual loss is to be avoided wherever possible.

Football is a team sport.

2 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Just a thought here….realize it’s counter to what was done on a proven championship season. But I still don’t see how any harm would have resulted from taking the opposite approach on O. Pushing the limits towards highest greatness. Really believe we win just as routinely by letting the O go for it. Could have just been scoring so much more locking in wins week to week. Sure as so much was being added to the O for the first time assumed mistakes would occur. But payoff would have been pushing capabilities to the max. I just wasn’t believing a mis-que between receiver and QB resulting in a turnover here and there were going to really kill us. Believe we would have proven so difficult to beat by the incredible production proving far too much to contend with.

WTH are you talking about? 14 wins is a DAMN GOOD SEASON. Pie in the sky BS. Explain to us all the procedure for "pushing the limits" and "pushing capabilities to the max". What do you need to see to accomplish those?