6 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I think the movement for that already started last year. That’s why when they got to the owners meetings they had a discussion on it and put out how they might change it. Ultimately, they tabled it because frankly, I think it wasn’t going to pass at that time. Also the changes really weren’t very well thought out and imo for a lack of better words was stupid in how they were going to implement it. If the ram lose, it probably gets brought up again this offseason as not only do they have a better record but they also have the highest SOS of any playoff team and highest SOV of any playoff team (I’d add once again all 3 wild card teams in nfc and afc have better records than at least 1 divisional winner… which is happening more and more frequently over the last decade and really the last 5 years)

I’ve said this before the day is coming where they are going to change it. It’s only a matter of time when they do it. It’s like the tush push being banned and a 18 game schedule eventually being implemented. Imo It’s a matter of when not if.

Leave the seeding as it is... but just change the venue. Panthers are the 4 seed, but the Rams host. I don't like any change where the seeding changes based on this. I really hate the idea of changing any of this and to the teams that don't win their division... too bad, so sad.

OK. A statistical perspective on things....

Based on the betting markets, there was a 33% probability that Chicago would lose yesterday. It was the same for the Eagles. So there was a combined 11% probability that yesterday's outcome would actually occur. Conversely, there was a 22% percent probability the we would win AND the Bears lose - leading to the two seed and a divisional round home game.

"But we should have played our starters!" OK. So say we played everybody and Vegas gave us -10 pts/-520 odds. That's a 84 percent win probability. Which increased the probability of us getting the two seed and hosting the division round game from 22% to 28%.

So fast forward. We are 3.5 point favorites over the Niners, or a 67% win probability. The Bears are 1.5 point favorites over the Packers, or a 47% loss probability. Those correlate to a 31% likelihood that we host the division round game.

Discuss amongst yourselves.

2 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

OK. A statistical perspective on things....

Based on the betting markets, there was a 33% probability that Chicago would lose yesterday. It was the same for the Eagles. So there was a combined 11% probability that yesterday's outcome would actually occur. Conversely, there was a 22% percent probability the we would win AND the Bears lose - leading to the two seed and a divisional round home game.

"But we should have played our starters!" OK. So say we played everybody and Vegas gave us -10 pts/-520 odds. That's a 84 percent win probability. Which increased the probability of us getting the two seed and hosting the division round game from 22% to 28%.

So fast forward. We are 3.5 point favorites over the Niners, or a 67% win probability. The Bears are 1.5 point favorites over the Packers, or a 47% loss probability. Those correlate to a 31% likelihood that we host the division round game.

Discuss amongst yourselves.

38 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

Honestly, I'm kinda tired of the Patullo hate. It's sports fan copium. Whenever something isn't going well, sports fans find one guy to blame because it's easier to cope that way. If you convince yourself one guy is the issue then it's easier to stay optimistic that if you just rid yourself of that guy everything will be ok. And Patullo is the low hanging fruit, everyone is dog piling on.

There's a 53 man roster. The team has lot a dozen offensive coaches. The idea that the reason this team has been disappointing this season is one man... an assistant coach at that, is crazy.

Multiple things can be true.

Is Patullo good? No, I don't think so.

Is he the only coach doing poorly this season? No. Sirianni has been awful. Stoutland has been awful at a minimum.

Are the coaches more to blame than the players? Yes.

But the players do have blame. McKee yesterday for instance was awful.

Point is: I hope the owner doesn't think it's just the OC. If he does we are in serious trouble. If these playoffs end poorly, the offensive staff needs to be blown up. The offensive side needs a restocking of talent, particularly at OL and TE. The idea that if you swap out one man, a coordinator, with another man, and this team goes from 11 wins and bad offense to 14 wins and a great offense is so ridiculous. Lurie needs to take a long look and realize the problems run deeper or this offense isn't going to be fixed.

Insanity.

He’s in charge of playcalling. To compare his impact to the Offensive Quality Control Coach is disingenuous.

"It’s everyone” means it’s the people in charge. That’s Lurie/Howie/Sirianni and, one down, Patullo himself. Lurie/Howie should’ve never let Sirianni hire his unqualified best buddy, Sirianni shouldn’t have been dumb enough to want to do it in the first place, and Patullo, despite being given a job much better coaches have never even sniffed, hasn’t improved even one iota. That last part is why Patullo himself deserves nothing but contempt from a fan base that knows this is a Super Bowl team with even a baseline OC.

5 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Leave the seeding as it is... but just change the venue. Panthers are the 4 seed, but the Rams host. I don't like any change where the seeding changes based on this. I really hate the idea of changing any of this and to the teams that don't win their division... too bad, so sad.

You might hate it, but the NFL doesn’t give a crap if you, me and any of the fan hates it. most hated the idea of 17 games and they still did it. Most also hate 18 games being implemented and they are going to do it eventually. Heck people also hated the idea of a MNF wild card game. People hated the niners complaining all offseason about losing their 2 QBs in nfc title game and the nfl implemented a new rule about emergency Qb. Heck they moved team from divisions and even a team from one conference to the other. A lot of people didnt like that either.

The issue is this owners already started pointing it out, discussing ways to change it and begun discussing it more in depth. It wasn’t by accident that they started too and it got leaked out. It also wasn’t an accident they knew to table it last year and come up with a better implementation. imo whether or not we like it doesn’t matter. As the NFL and goodell tends to do what its owners want to do.

Just now, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

You might hate it, but the NFL doesn’t give a crap if you, me and any of the fan hates it. most hated the idea of 17 games and they still did it. Most also hate 18 games being implemented and they are going to do it eventually. Heck people also hated the idea of a MNF wild card game. People hated the niners complaining all offseason about losing their 2 QBs in nfc title game and the nfl implemented a new rule about emergency Qb. Heck they moved team from divisions and even a team from one conference to the other. A lot of people didnt like that either.

The issue is this eventually owners who’ve already started pointing it out, discussing ways to change it and begun discussing it more in depth. It wasn’t by accident that they started too and it got leaked out. imo whether or not we like it doesn’t matter. As the NFL and goodell tends to do what its owners want to do.

The NFL doesn't give a crap about their fans, I am well aware of that fact, and they highlight it just about every chance they get.

1 minute ago, Saltpeter said:

Insanity.

He’s in charge of playcalling. To compare his impact to the Offensive Quality Control Coach is disingenuous.

"It’s everyone” means it’s the people in charge. That’s Lurie/Howie/Sirianni and, one down, Patullo himself. Lurie/Howie should’ve never let Sirianni hire his unqualified best buddy, Sirianni shouldn’t have been dumb enough to want to do it in the first place, and Patullo, despite being given a job much better coaches have never even sniffed, hasn’t improved even one iota. That last part is why Patullo himself deserves nothing but contempt from a fan base that knows this is a Super Bowl team with even a baseline OC.

Play calling alone doesn't take one team from a championship team to not. If you think that if Moore were still here there would be a night and day noticeable difference in this offense you're falling into the same trap. Play calls don't impact a season that much. They just don't.

3 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

OK. A statistical perspective on things....

Based on the betting markets, there was a 33% probability that Chicago would lose yesterday. It was the same for the Eagles. So there was a combined 11% probability that yesterday's outcome would actually occur. Conversely, there was a 22% percent probability the we would win AND the Bears lose - leading to the two seed and a divisional round home game.

"But we should have played our starters!" OK. So say we played everybody and Vegas gave us -10 pts/-520 odds. That's a 84 percent win probability. Which increased the probability of us getting the two seed and hosting the division round game from 22% to 28%.

So fast forward. We are 3.5 point favorites over the Niners, or a 67% win probability. The Bears are 1.5 point favorites over the Packers, or a 47% loss probability. Those correlate to a 31% likelihood that we host the division round game.

Discuss amongst yourselves.

I have no problem with the Eagles playing the players that they put out last night...they were the second/third string guys, after all...what I DO have a problem with is the issue that the Eagles have had all season...bonehead play calls.

That was a totally winnable game yesterday, and instead of a 31% chance of a home game in the Divisional round, we should have had a 100% chance, had plays like the 3rd & 1 and 4th & 1 at the 5 yd line been called correctly...

Who on earth goes for two pass plays in that situation, especially when you are using a backup QB who hadn't played all season, nor had he proved himself earlier in the game! Just get the 1 darn yard, and then try a couple of fancy plays, if you must...but my belief is that (plus the stupid Cooper penalty) cost the Eagles the game...two times at the 5 yd line, and coming away with zero points is typical Eagles/Patullo football!

18 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I really hope so. I worry that the offense can't find its stride and Purdy will limp his way to a victory.

Could definitely go that way but I think the defense is going to come out like gang busters and Jalen will add a dynamic with his legs they haven’t been using.

This guy is right again!! We need to play close attention to his scoops.

1 hour ago, Sack that QB said:

Honestly, I'm kinda tired of the Patullo hate. It's sports fan copium. Whenever something isn't going well, sports fans find one guy to blame because it's easier to cope that way. If you convince yourself one guy is the issue then it's easier to stay optimistic that if you just rid yourself of that guy everything will be ok. And Patu Youllo is the low hanging fruit, everyone is dog piling on.

There's a 53 man roster. The team has lot a dozen offensive coaches. The idea that the reason this team has been disappointing this season is one man... an assistant coach at that, is crazy.

Multiple things can be true.

Is Patullo good? No, I don't think so.

Is he the only coach doing poorly this season? No. Sirianni has been awful. Stoutland has been awful at a minimum.

Are the coaches more to blame than the players? Yes.

But the players do have blame. McKee yesterday for instance was awful.

Point is: I hope the owner doesn't think it's just the OC. If he does we are in serious trouble. If these playoffs end poorly, the offensive staff needs to be blown up. The offensive side needs a restocking of talent, particularly at OL and TE. The idea that if you swap out one man, a coordinator, with another man, and this team goes from 11 wins and bad offense to 14 wins and a great offense is so ridiculous. Lurie needs to take a long look and realize the problems run deeper or this offense isn't going to be fixed.

Yup structurally the offense has weak spots

The o line has been awful and while one can argue well theyve been hurt or recovering from injury one could also argue the coaches should have sit those players ( jurgens, dickerson) down and played healthy-ish guys who might have as much talent or experience but are more functional because their broken bodies dont handicap them

TEs cant block on a team that wants to run the ball

In the past Goedert has been a good blocker, this year he seems disinterested, and Calcaterra is useless as a blocker

The best non OL run blocker has been Latu and he plays like 5 snaps a game

If eagles want to be a running team they need to have TEs that can block, currently they do not.

QB, RB, WR, theyre all good there, they have enough talent there to compete with anybody, but if you cant block it doesnt matter.

And even when you can patullos play calling isnt outting those players in enough favorable positions

Welcome back Shane!

39 minutes ago, DaBirds said:

??

I wouldn't say a ton either. Hurts was bad against KC, giants (first time), detroit, chargers (obviously) and buffalo. You can blame the weather for Detroit and Buffalo. He wasn't good against Chicago either, sub 60% completion and a pick but he did throw 2 TDs so I personally see it more as mediocre than bad, others may disagree.

The original tweet about McKee having the worst game in recent history is 100% rage bait because it is the single dumbest thing someone can say after this year of football where minnesota cleveland and Cincinnati had like 10 QBs start between them, josh johnson is starting, and geno smith is on the raiders. It wasn't even the worst QB performance this team has seen all year (chargers game, and it isnt even close)

8 minutes ago, Sack that QB said:

Play calling alone doesn't take one team from a championship team to not. If you think that if Moore were still here there would be a night and day noticeable difference in this offense you're falling into the same trap. Play calls don't impact a season that much. They just don't.

What? This is such a bad take. Play calling doesn’t matter that much? Lol

1 minute ago, BwianWestbwook said:

Welcome back Shane!

Shane Victorino is back!!!

The Colts didn't fire anybody. Fake news

1 minute ago, pgcd3 said:

The Colts didn't fire anybody. Fake news

Worse than CNN eh?

I just hope Dickerson and Jurgens actually look like their feet aren't in cement blocks. The interior OL actually looked competent yesterday and the Commanders have good DTs, so it wasn't some fluke.

It's ridiculous that those guys basically torpedoed the running game this year because Sirianni wants to wax poetic about how tough they are and wear tshirts with their faces on it or whatever.

They could have plugged in Kendall and Toth and had at least an average running game where 1 out of 4 runs doesn't go backwards

1 hour ago, Eriv20 said:

Seattle also plays them twice a year. Lot of familiarity there. The offense needs to show up, this is a game the defense will need them to sustain drives or we will gas out the defense faster than normal

Fangio D vs Kyle Shanahan O has been pretty one sided, to be fair. Sure it could go the other way, but the trends are pretty decent.

6 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

NFL doesn't give a crap about their fans, I am well aware of that fact, and they highlight it just about every chance they get.

They also BS about player safety being important too.

I also kind of think this is going be brought up when they discussed doing a redo seeding rules. Not that it happens every year (although believe in the last couple years it would’ve been more frequently). The eagles (some other teams as well) sat major players. Current rules at worse the eagles were locked into the 3. At best could win and bears lose get 2. Eagles decided rest was more important. if the rule had been changed where just went by record and the division winner just gets a playoff spot with having a tiebreaker of record go to division winner over WC then the eagles could’ve fallen to the 5 seed with the outcomes that happened in week 18. I’m guessing the eagles are playing guys in week 18 knowing they could fall to 5 seed and needing to win to at least lock up the 3 seed. So wouldn’t have eagles and some teams just sitting guys.

Can totally see the NFL and goodell even though it’s not that way every year using this argument to get what they want and push an agenda.

10 hours ago, AmericanEagle77 said:

Yeah I think it's Sirianni who does the script too. I'm not 100% sure, but it wouldn't surprise me.

Truthfully, I don't think he wants to try, but I don't think he'd call a worse game than Patullo. Some people have this weird idea that a more conservative Eagles offense is mainly Sirianni, and that's a negative thing. However, I look at it differently. Sirianni basically stopped calling plays because he was the opposite of conservative, calling way too many pass plays and being way too aggressive. However, if it really is him that influences so much conservatism, that kind of shows his mentality is adaptable.

I think he'd call a more even game now, but I think he really doesn't want to go back to play calling. I think he legitimately does not like doing it. Which is kind of a shame because this is probably the one time he really needs to consider it.

I think it's fairly simple. Siri's approach went like this:

• He previously called plays for Philip Rivers (who had years of success before Siri and his numbers and style didn't really change)

• He then called plays for Andrew Luck, a #1 overall pick who also had success before Siri and he was in Frank Reich's system so was it Siri or was it Reich and the QB?

• He was hired here and called a lot of pass plays and fans were pissed he wasn't running the ball. He had Hurts, rookie Smitty, Reagor and JJAW and he was trying to throw it like Rivers

• Steichen took over and focused more on the run game and actually schemed to Jalen Hurts strengths

• They promoted Brian Johnson due to familiarity with Hurts. In retrospect he wasn't as bad as Patullo, and if the defense wasn't among the league's worst that season wouldn't have been so bad

• The 2023 collapse which included career high turnovers from Hurts is what made Nick conservative. He became obsessed with the turnover stat. We see it on Hard Knocks, he preaches it as the top priority.

• 2024 Hurts with yet another OC doing new things, with Siri having everyone scared to turn it over we saw Hurts more hesitant, taking sacks instead of throwing it away, likely fearing an INT. Hurts himself said they "took the straight jacket off." That turned out ok because of the dominant run game and great defense under Fangio, Hurts became a game manager QB. But, at times they opened up the pass game and were more explosive with deep passes. The NFCCG and Super Bowl the offense played great. In the SB they shut down Barkley and Hurts led in the passing game. So it's possible, the coaches just limit what they will do.

• This year you have Patullo who doesn't have experience calling plays so he's taking his marching orders from Nick. If Nick doesn't like things, he is the head coach and should address them but it hasn't changed. Cowards draws, misuse of TEs, not giving Tank carries despite his production. Nick doesn't know how to fix the offense. He couldn't in 2023, he couldn't this year. That's why they hired Moore, an outside OC with experience and why they should have done that again. Patullo has been a coach in the NFL and college since 2007 and has never called plays in that time, hmm.

Siri does the CEO Head Coach well. Motivates players, runs the process of practices, meetings, preparation. All that must be going well, you don't just have that much success and not contribute anything. But he doesn't know how to fix the offense, or he would have. Plus, his obsession with turnovers and being conservative tightens up and limits the offense. What he needs is an OC experienced in calling plays who knows game flow, situational football, uses the right personnel, adjusts. They don't have to be a genius at scheme, they need to have wisdom in decision making, efficiency in getting the play call in, utilize the personnel better and have a feel for the game and the right call in the right moment. The roster should be producing so much more on offense. And yes Hurts is part of that, he's not a prolific passer and he is a dual threat so a coach needs to scheme to his strengths.

My hope is that they hire an experienced OC who will push back on Nick and balance him out, to open things up and not play so scared. And get more out of the roster they have. Because the time will come that AJ Brown, Barkley, Goedert and Lane Johnson will be gone, and maybe others. They have to get younger and cheaper on offense, and you need an experienced OC to coach the young guys up.

25 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

OK. A statistical perspective on things....

Based on the betting markets, there was a 33% probability that Chicago would lose yesterday. It was the same for the Eagles. So there was a combined 11% probability that yesterday's outcome would actually occur. Conversely, there was a 22% percent probability the we would win AND the Bears lose - leading to the two seed and a divisional round home game.

"But we should have played our starters!" OK. So say we played everybody and Vegas gave us -10 pts/-520 odds. That's a 84 percent win probability. Which increased the probability of us getting the two seed and hosting the division round game from 22% to 28%.

So fast forward. We are 3.5 point favorites over the Niners, or a 67% win probability. The Bears are 1.5 point favorites over the Packers, or a 47% loss probability. Those correlate to a 31% likelihood that we host the division round game.

Discuss amongst yourselves.

Very few people are criticizing the fact that they rested starters.

It's the fact that they had a very winnable game with the players on the field and still coached like morons.

4 minutes ago, WentzFan11 said:

What? This is such a bad take. Play calling doesn’t matter that much? Lol

It has value, but people way overrate it. It's mindless sports fan cult thinking nonsense. "If only the play calling was better, we'd have gone from 15 ppg to 35 ppg baby!"

People have overrated play calling for years. Of scheme, execution, talent, it ranks last behind those in terms of importance.

4 minutes ago, jojodancer said:

Worse than CNN eh?

When thinking of fake news CNN is the first to come to mind? Interesting.

Just now, DaBirds said:

When thinking of fake news CNN is the first to come to mind? Interesting.

Actually, MSNBC wins that title.