Do I need to even add in how the league offices are so very against us? Worse…so favoring Brady..then Mahomes. Anything short of blowing out the Chiefs was a mine field waiting for us.

1 hour ago, mattwill said:

You are off your medications again. Call the nursing station. They can bring you your meds.

Or just justify your usage of define our 2024 O concerning that fourth Bucs game…at all…much less as a quarter defining piece of your confusion.

Manage risk. Referred to as playing not to lose mostly. I get it after the bye against the Browns. Siri whole career …much less job was on the line with a loss against the Browns. He couldn’t lose to the Browns. That was just fact. The guy benefitting with his downfall the most being his OC Moore. Clearly complicated things. Actually it didn’t…it made things real obvious….nobody is putting their career trusting in a one game scenario into the hands of the exact guy most benefits against you. Just obvious. I get Siri stepping in there. He had to…anybody would.

Siri resume he wasn’t getting another HC job if fired after week 6 last season. Only a couple of OC jobs possible for him to fall back into even. Older HCs that ran their own O schemes needing a blue collar hard worker. So Siri would have really tumbled. Wasn’t qualified for much at all. Just create a title for hard worker every day coach. If my heads at stake…I’d rather go down swinging myself at least. Definitely not just naively putting my whole life in the hands of my biggest benefactor if I don’t succeed.

Whole new o scheme being tweaked during the bye after 3 games actually being first tested. Just basic. Always should have even been preplanned to happen. But…at what point should things have swung the other direction? Week 6 Browns game Siri just can’t afford lose. Collapse to end 2023 tying together with 2-3 start to 2025 with so much talent…loss to the Browns couldn’t happen. Not right then. Bad losses happen. But you can’t go on a string of unacceptable very fire-ble coaching…then lose to the Browns. Whole stadium calling for your head in during a victory over them.

Back to the four games you define our 2025 O based on. Bucs game…already clearly has no relevance…or least relevance more accurate. Then first game was against a top challenging Pack team …in Brazil. How defining was that game of our 2024 Eagles O even?

Week one I’ve always just called a crap shoot. Every year..every team. We had a new O…no PS…first game in South America. Not a football field. Fans awkward not understanding cheering.

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

Week one I’ve always just called a crap shoot. Every year..every team. We had a new O…no PS…first game in South America. Not a football field. Fans awkward not understanding cheering.

Week one low value define a season to begin with. Then add on every single extreme other details out of any ordinary to chose that game to define our O with. The list is crazy extensive on just so so many reasons it shouldn’t be very defining.

If you were going to define our O for the entire season based so much on performance week one? I’d demand PS action big time. Not what I otherwise actually believe…because I don’t define much at all week one ever. But if you are and do…you can’t just skip PS tuning up for week one then. Can’t have it both ways is all. Skip PS action…conclusion can only be expected lumps and bumps week one and two.

1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said:

AR …debatably the best coach ever? Known for his brilliant O mind and scheme so reachable to players? The HC just always gets a D mind for that side if the ball even. So what’s your attempted point here by sighting AR as any example?

The point is simple if you look at the Super Bowl play by play. AR’s willingness to accept the increased risk associated with his choice of a one dimensional Offense played into the hands of Sirianni, Moore, and Fangio. It was bad clock management that meant the Chiefs’ defenders got very short rest before having to again take the field.

Further, that high risk scheme on Offense meant that the Chiefs’ O-Line was absorbing punishment rather than dishing out punishment. The Offense you are advocating for has the individual O-Linemen taking their first step after the Snap backwards and waiting for the D-Linemen to hit them hard. The Offense that Stoutland and the O-line convinced Moore to adopt has those same O-Linemen taking their fist step forward … firing out and hitting the D-Linemen hard. The difference between blows given and blows received takes its toll on the denizens of the trenches. As a result the Eagles O-Line was much fresher in the second half of the game than the Chiefs O-Line even though the Eagles 1st half snaps were 40 and the Chiefs 1st half snaps were 20.

32 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Except again you make a terrible comparison. Because a win is a win. Yes. But we were a team installing and needing to grow and develop in our new schemes. So by most scenarios…we needed to push our learning curve to fastest possible version. Everything was based on a one season attempt for it to all get accomplished. So it was more about growth and development maxing out towards our teams ceiling …than managing not losing. 24-14 actually was riskier in many ways. Kept opponents within striking distance instead of unleashing an O that should have proved unstoppable!

The problem with your argument is that in the first 4 games the Eagles did exactly what you are arguing for … unleashing Moore’s O that should have proved unstoppable … except because of the high risk it inherently had, it stopped itself.

1 minute ago, mattwill said:

The point is simple if you look at the Super Bowl play by play. AR’s willingness to accept the increased risk associated with his choice of a one dimensional Offense played into the hands of Sirianni, Moore, and Fangio. It was bad clock management that meant the Chiefs’ defenders got very short rest before having to again take the field.

Further, that high risk scheme on Offense meant that the Chiefs’ O-Line was absorbing punishment rather than dishing out punishment. The Offense you are advocating for has the individual O-Linemen taking their first step after the Snap backwards and waiting for the D-Linemen to hit them hard. The Offense that Stoutland and the O-line convinced Moore to adopt has those same O-Linemen taking their fist step forward … firing out and hitting the D-Linemen hard. The difference between blows given and blows received takes its toll on the denizens of the trenches. As a result the Eagles O-Line was much fresher in the second half of the game than the Chiefs O-Line even though the Eagles 1st half snaps were 40 and the Chiefs 1st half snaps were 20.

I’m not advocating against utilizing our advantage attacking with our massive Oline run blocking. Totally should begin heavy with plenty of that. We have it…prioritized building our team that way. Use it! But …are you actually making the point about how flawed AR O has been? The coach was looking to Three Peat as champs? The coach laid out so perfect way for Mahomes to complete like every single pass in the second half of that SB just a couple of seasons prior against our top ranked D?

33 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

See you are making bad assumptions lashing out me attempts here. Nothing like that is true. I wanted to accelerate our hearing curve to maximize our season ceiling in that one season one shot scenario that was the 2024 season.

Not lashing out at you at all. Just having a conversation. Your insecurities are seeing lashing where there is none.

Yeah…think you choosing a terrible path if you are relying on just how terrible AR and his O are in the NFL. Within the conversation of greatest ever instead.

Just now, mattwill said:

Not lashing out at you at all. Just having a conversation. Your insecurities are seeing lashing where there is none.

Not my insecurities. You leaped to a bad false conclusion. Your statement…nothing to do with my own personal insecurities arriving from your bad assumption. Is what it is whatever. I understand your assumption could apply to many others….but not me…and not my insecurity resulting from your failure.

32 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Not about running up the score in regular season games to shame opponents at all. Terrible conclusion…if accurate I’d agree with your assessment. About become the best version of ourselves by seasons end. Simple…fundamental…NFL philosophy understood by most others than you.(no shot at you here. But you stated your belief every game is equal)

The all time NFL scoring record is 606 points. You are advocating for more than 800 points. How is that not running up the score every game?

3 minutes ago, mattwill said:

The problem with your argument is that in the first 4 games the Eagles did exactly what you are arguing for … unleashing Moore’s O that should have proved unstoppable … except because of the high risk it inherently had, it stopped itself.

They were learning and installing a new u proven O. Four games still? Convince me relevance defining everything with that Bucs game first

No team has mastered a new O all in one TC. Sorry but I just feel that’s such obvious simple plain FACT. Expectations of perfection first action(no PS)is ludicrous…insane frankly even.

32 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Or a scenario where bad luck or whatever got us down multiple scores. Pretty much any adversity…wanted us to be the best prepared to face and overcome.

We were prepared. You must not have been watching.

10 minutes ago, mattwill said:

The point is simple if you look at the Super Bowl play by play. AR’s willingness to accept the increased risk associated with his choice of a one dimensional Offense played into the hands of Sirianni, Moore, and Fangio. It was bad clock management that meant the Chiefs’ defenders got very short rest before having to again take the field.

Further, that high risk scheme on Offense meant that the Chiefs’ O-Line was absorbing punishment rather than dishing out punishment. The Offense you are advocating for has the individual O-Linemen taking their first step after the Snap backwards and waiting for the D-Linemen to hit them hard. The Offense that Stoutland and the O-line convinced Moore to adopt has those same O-Linemen taking their fist step forward … firing out and hitting the D-Linemen hard. The difference between blows given and blows received takes its toll on the denizens of the trenches. As a result the Eagles O-Line was much fresher in the second half of the game than the Chiefs O-Line even though the Eagles 1st half snaps were 40 and the Chiefs 1st half snaps were 20.

Run or pass…3 and out puts the D right back out there. Actual game clock rocking or not isn’t a factor over players actual time recovering.

32 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Do I need to even add in how the league offices are so very against us? Worse…so favoring Brady..then Mahomes. Anything short of blowing out the Chiefs was a mine field waiting for us.

That is fantasy.

Just now, mattwill said:

We were prepared. You must not have been watching.

Yes….so much more than I believed we were. Volunteer that.

12 minutes ago, mattwill said:

The point is simple if you look at the Super Bowl play by play. AR’s willingness to accept the increased risk associated with his choice of a one dimensional Offense played into the hands of Sirianni, Moore, and Fangio. It was bad clock management that meant the Chiefs’ defenders got very short rest before having to again take the field.

Further, that high risk scheme on Offense meant that the Chiefs’ O-Line was absorbing punishment rather than dishing out punishment. The Offense you are advocating for has the individual O-Linemen taking their first step after the Snap backwards and waiting for the D-Linemen to hit them hard. The Offense that Stoutland and the O-line convinced Moore to adopt has those same O-Linemen taking their fist step forward … firing out and hitting the D-Linemen hard. The difference between blows given and blows received takes its toll on the denizens of the trenches. As a result the Eagles O-Line was much fresher in the second half of the game than the Chiefs O-Line even though the Eagles 1st half snaps were 40 and the Chiefs 1st half snaps were 20.

AR always been pass first coach. Short passing game West Coast O revolutionized as almost similar to a running play

15 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Week one low value define a season to begin with. Then add on every single extreme other details out of any ordinary to chose that game to define our O with. The list is crazy extensive on just so so many reasons it shouldn’t be very defining.

Week one value in the Standings is exactly the same as every one of the 16 other weeks. You clearly don’t understand numbers.

But Mahomes was flat out shaky. Wasn’t AR fault or anything to be done really about that. He wasn’t ready to play SB level QB football that day.