@mattwill

Eagles 27

Commanders 10

Bigsby with a TD

@mattwill

Eagles 24

Redskins 13

Quinyon gets his first interception of the season.

Random thought. In the draft, CB2 target has to have hands. Im tired of no one in our secondary holding on to INTs. Ill sacrifice a little bit of stickiness if hes a threat to pick it. Im looking for ball skills.

2 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Random thought. In the draft, CB2 target has to have hands. Im tired of no one in our secondary holding on to INTs. Ill sacrifice a little bit of stickiness if hes a threat to pick it. Im looking for ball skills.

It’s a challenge to find that and a guy who runs in the 4.3s.

4 minutes ago, Waiting4Someday said:

It’s a challenge to find that and a guy who runs in the 4.3s.

Im gonna find it.

13 hours ago, Iggles_Phan said:

We're back to this again? BTW, Steichen was his OC for two consecutive years. Patullo has been here every year Hurts has been with Sirianni. And he knew Brian Johnson for most of his life, and he was his QB coach for the two years Steichen was the OC, so he wasn't some fresh face with a whole set of fresh ideas either.

So what’s the logic that Hurts had the best year of his career under Steichen in 2022 and then it went to hell in 2023 under Johnson? I’m sure the concepts are similar with familiar faces in the building, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to be a seamless transition with him in there or when it comes to structuring play calling. The same goes for Patullo.

It’s probably not going to happen, but I’d like for Hurts to have the same OC for a 3 or 4 year stretch that he can grow with instead of having someone new in there every year. I don’t really understand how people can think that this doesn’t have an impact not only on Hurts, but the offense as a whole.

@mattwill

34

13

Bonus: TD

10 hours ago, jamiller said:

I don't get it. If you score first and miss the XP or 2 point conversion, then the other team gets the ball, scores and gets its XP, doesn't the first team lose?

Yes. But if you score first and kick the XP, then the other team gets the ball, scores and converts the 2pt, the first team also loses. So the question is how aggressive should the first team be? Do you take control of the game with the ball in your hands or do you let the other team control its destiny?

11 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Strategy question. With the new rules in OT, if you get the ball first one way or the other with the coin toss and you score a TD. Do you go for 2? At worst you lose by giving up a TD/XP if you don’t convert. At best, you basically put yourself in a can’t lose position of either tying or winning on the next drive.

It feels like the general strategy for the 2nd team is to score and go for 2 to win or lose. It will be interesting to see if teams start trying to counter that.

From an analytics perspective, it would only make sense if you believe the conversion rate is above 50%, otherwise you're squandering the advantage gained by scoring a TD on your first possession. The second team only goes for 2 in a scenario where they answer with their own TD because they are kind of boxed in by the fact that the first team scoring on their next possession wins the game and the remaining time left on the clock might not be enough for them to win the game if their defense forces a punt.

16 hours ago, NOTW said:

I agree with you overall here, but a couple things.

One: let's not pretend the Super Bowl is the only good game he played last year. His stats were actually better in the NFCCG where they scored 55 points. He had 1 pass TD and 3 rush TD in that game, whereas in the SB he had 2 pass TD, 1 rush TD and an INT. He also had some very good regular season games last year. He had the Steelers "is that what y'all wanted to see?" game with 290 yards, 2 pass TD, 1 rush TD and a 125.5 passer rating. Saints game he had his season high 311 pass yards, albeit no TDs and an INT. Opener in Brazil vs the Packers he had 278 yards, 2 pass TD, 2 INT. The Browns game was 264 yards, 2 TD. Now, before you or anyone would respond to that saying those aren't really great numbers compared to other passing QBs, I agree overall but we're talking about the context of a season that was heavily dominated by the run game and Barkley's historic season and they were winning by run game and defense (something Philly fans used to beg for) and they didn't need as much passing.

Second: since the high interception year of 2023 and the collapse, Siri has played it very conservative. He's talked a lot about the turnover factor in winning. Last year Hurts was taking sacks and more hesitant than in the past and it was apparent to many people that he was trying to overcorrect from interceptions. Then he started getting rid of the ball more instead of taking as many sacks. When he was passing more toward the end of the season in certain games he said they "took the straight jacket off." He said this season that he didn't like playing not to lose and alluded to the coaching being too conservative.

Hurts has had ups and downs in his career. He will never, ever be a top passer in the league. He's supposed to be a dual threat QB that will do just enough in the passing game while also keeping defenses on their toes with his running ability, which it seems he's slower in the last couple years and more hesitant. The offense needs to be built around his strengths including his running threat, and the type of throws he does well. We've seen many analysts including respected former players and coaches break down that Patullo's scheme is more vanilla than prior OCs, some even calling it a "high school offense." You can't blame Jalen Hurts for that when he's been proven to do more than that in offenses with Steichen and yes even Brian Johnson. I think it's a combination: Siri wanting conservative to avoid turnovers and rely on run game, Patullo never called plays before, Hurts has his limitations and needs the play calling to cater to his strengths (so does every QB btw), the O line was banged up and not performing like it did last year, the run game wasn't dominant most of the season like it was last year. Then there are other factors like receiver drops, bad field position from the return game, it was a lot of issues together and not all of them are on Hurts. They have taken a long time all season to sloooooowly correct issues like calling some better plays and running some better routes, getting the run game going. We're all very interested to see how they play tomorrow, they need another positive showing on offense to help ease our minds!

Penalties have been huge this year too, it would be interesting to see how many drives have been ruined

26 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Yes. But if you score first and kick the XP, then the other team gets the ball, scores and converts the 2pt, the first team also loses. So the question is how aggressive should the first team be? Do you take control of the game with the ball in your hands or do you let the other team control its destiny?

Seems like the conversation rate on 2pt tries was 41% last season, league wide. Obviously this differs by team, so you'd have to believe your own offense is significantly outperforming the league average conversion rate for it to increase your win probability higher than just kicking the PAT would.

17 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

From an analytics perspective, it would only make sense if you believe the conversion rate is above 50%, otherwise you're squandering the advantage gained by scoring a TD on your first possession. The second team only goes for 2 in a scenario where they answer with their own TD because they are kind of boxed in by the fact that the first team scoring on their next possession wins the game and the remaining time left on the clock might not be enough for them to win the game if their defense forces a punt.

Yea, I think it is overly aggressive. I just saw a lot of people suggesting the Rams should have went for 2 but it feels more like a hindsight take.

Also there’s no way McVay ever would do it. He’d probably kick the XP if he was the second team scoring.

5 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Yea, I think it is overly aggressive. I just saw a lot of people suggesting the Rams should have went for 2 but it feels more like a hindsight take.

Also there’s no way McVay ever would do it. He’d probably kick the XP if he was the second team scoring.

Yeah it's hard to reconcile that he's the same guy who went for it on 4th down in the super bowl from his own 30 with 5 min left and 3 time outs. Granted they were down 3 so you could argue it's kind of a do or die scenario, but he made the right call then only to make the wrong call so many other times.

9 hours ago, devpool said:

I do, I almost didn't get it because I felt the same way but I didn't want to spend another $300+ on a signed picture from the game (my wife bought me the Jordan Spector painting that Saquon signed for my bday and that was a hefty purchase). It's on my to do list tomorrow so i'll send you a close up before it goes up as well as once its up

I trust you and got the framed one as well. You have an awesome wife!! That is a cool thing to have.

I'm ticked we have a game on CFP playoff Saturday. But at least it's during the crappiest games I guess.

17 hours ago, DeathByEagle said:

Disagree

Hurts had the same issues last year as well. We saw it in the few 4 weeks of the season before the bi-week. What covered it up was the coaching staff changing the identify of this team to a dominate running game and sprinkle in Hurts here and there. Don't get me wrong, Hurts played an amazing Super Bowl but during the season he was having the same issues he does this year. It looks worse cause the run game is not working this year and the coaching staff was not changing it up to make Hurts look better then he is.

Hurts was struggling with his new protection call responsibilities early last year for sure. Saquon and the D carried the team till week 10. Once he got that down he was much better. Also last year he was smarter picking spots to run, was actually stepping up and using the pocket, seeing the field, going through progressions well. This year he’s got Kevin Kolb syndrome retreating, back his his dumb spin move against phantom pressure, appears to be going through reads slow.

Now a lot of that is attributed to how slow play calls are coming in. He barely has time to set up and adjust, his head is spinning when the ball is snapped because all the pre snap stuff is rushed.

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Yes. But if you score first and kick the XP, then the other team gets the ball, scores and converts the 2pt, the first team also loses. So the question is how aggressive should the first team be? Do you take control of the game with the ball in your hands or do you let the other team control its destiny?

Copy. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something. I think the easier make is the kick. So I want the full 7 and then go defend against their score and then their kick or 2 point try.

Puka is having himself a week!

14 hours ago, Nivraga said:

The rule book makes a clear distinction between a lateral and a fumble. The Holy Roller rule only applies to fumbles. This is why you can have those funky miracle plays at the end of games where one team just keeps lateraling the ball around hoping to spring loose and score. Even when the lateral hits the turf it can still be scooped up and advanced. They couldn't do that if it was a fumble.

And yet that sounds like a slippery slope ruling type thing... if on a crazy Stanford band style play, what if the guy is hit (as he often is) as he's trying to lateral... is that a fumble or a lateral? On any other play, it would be a fumble... but does the first lateral on the play make all future loss of control of the ball automatically become a fumble? Why not just clarify the rule... if the fumble goes backwards... then it can be advanced by anyone... but if the fumble moves forward in those situations (4th down, last 2 minutes, etc.) then it can only be recovered and advanced by the fumbling player. A fumble that goes backwards and then is recovered by the fumbling team is essentially a lateral, but just called something different.

The play between the Rams and Seahawks... that was a backwards fumble, knocked forward (offensively) by the defense and recovered by the 'fumbling' team. No problem for me according to the way that the rules were ORIGINALLY written. The grey area comes in where they had to rewrite things because of the Holy Roller. But, that 'fumble' doesn't fall under the 'Holy Roller' clause to me, because the intent of the Holy Roller rule is to stop offensive teams from fumbling FORWARD... there was no forward action on the fumble by the fumbling team.

It seems like a very easy rule to fix and far less of a controversy than all the focus they have put on the Tush Push.

18 hours ago, LeanMeanGM said:

This is what I read that explained it pretty well

https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/1pqdetw/explaining_the_2point_conversion_ruling_in_the/

It’s weird that statistically it is scored a fumble.

I know I’m arguing semantics here, but the NFL.com website has the Falcons eliminated from the playoffs. If they win their last 3 games they would finish 8-9. The Bucs and Panthers are both 7-7 and play each other 2X in the last 3 weeks; what if both of those games end in ties? Wouldn’t that mean both could finish at 7-8-2, and doesn’t 8-9 win the division over 7-8-2?

I know it’s a somewhat ridiculous argument and a minuscule possibility, but still …… maybe I woke up too early this morning.

11 hours ago, NOTW said:

Well comparing Refs to lawyers is an all-time low.

4 hours ago, ToastJenkins said:

@mattwill

Nfc east champs 31

Skins 17

Goedert scores again

That was my initial prediction, but I revised it down to 31-10. I just don't see this Defense giving up 17 points, unless some of those points are in garbage time. Then I looked at the Team Stats page on ESPN and saw that if they only allow 7 they probably move into the #2 scoring Defense spot behind the Texans, and just ahead of the Seahawks, so my prediction now is 31-6.