Just now, HazletonEagle said:

I cant believe it wont compute for you how much more unlikely the failed 2PC there made winning.... I have nothing left to say.

How much more unlikely would a failed 2PC on the second TD that may never happen made winning?

3 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Fair enough, I just see that as delaying the inevitable while also boxing yourself into a corner if you miss it on the second TD.

At that point, at least you survived till the end of the game with a chance... preferable to losing the game with 3 minutes left because of a terrible decision.

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

How much more unlikely would a failed 2PC on the second TD that may never happen made winning?

You play to win the game. Make it to the end with a chance. Dont lose it what a terrible decision prematurely.

Just now, HazletonEagle said:

At that point, at least you survived till the end of the game with a chance... preferable to losing the game with 3 minutes left because of a terrible decision.

They lost the game far more than because of that decision

2 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Another small benefit of going for 2 first (and getting it) is potentially getting a penalty on a game-tying XP and all of a sudden having a chance to win it from the 1 yard line. I’m not saying that should play any role in your decision making, but it’s a nonzero benefit.

Of course there was benefit. It wasnt worth the risk which was literally losing the game right then and there. Which is what happened.

5 minutes ago, judunno said:

Good chance if they kicked the XP, It would be missed. That's the kind of game they were having

Now that is a fair rebuttal

18 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Vibes, man.

”Vibes” = momentum. How long have you been watching football again?

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

They lost the game far more than because of that decision

Of course. In the meta view of things, they deserved to lose that game and it doesnt really come down to that decision.

But if we are focusing our discussion on the merits of that decision, then we can call it what it was- Wrong.

Just now, Mike31mt said:

That's pretty much exactly what youre doing

Now that is a fair rebuttal

Tbh I said earlier I’m guessing part of their decision-making probably came down to Elliott had just missed an extra point the last time they scored a touchdown. can say well they still try to kick a field goal later. That’s because they had too. They had no other option at that point besides go for a touchdown or kick the field goal, recover the onside and then have a Hail Mary catch for a touchdown.

28 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

You are wrong on this one

You dont force the lower probability play until you absolutely must. Kicking the xp is the right move there. Must avoid turning it into a 2 possession game

Oh FFS. You too? How are you guys not understanding this? In college OT, why is it better to put your defense out on the field first?

1 minute ago, HazletonEagle said:

Of course. In the meta view of things, they deserved to win that game and it doesnt really come down to that decision.

But if we are focusing our discussion on the merits of that decision, then we can call it what it was- Wrong.

I’m legit surprised you aren’t using this opportunity more to bash Hurts for whatever the hell it was he threw on that play

1 hour ago, ToastJenkins said:

You are dead right on the offense

But dead wrong on the expectations. Repeating is incredibly difficult. Talk of a dynasty after winning one title is rather insane

A dynasty doesn't have to equal winning consecutive championships or else there would never be any. But deep playoff runs are to be expected. Not a deep run then getting blown out in the wildcard, deep run then blowout.

The chiefs did win 2 in a row but even before the 2nd consecutive they were being called a dynasty.

Just now, LeanMeanGM said:

I’m legit surprised you aren’t using this opportunity more to bash Hurts for whatever the hell it was he threw on that play

A bunch more people are coming around on him lately and especially today. I pointed out Goedert being wide open before Hurts broke contain. He was looking right there and never threw it.

Im sure there is plenty to discuss about his performance but no one is debating that he played horribly this week.

22 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Game theory is precisely why they went for two to begin with.

It's like they think that postponing the 2pt conversion attempt magically makes it more likely to be converted.

3 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I’m legit surprised you aren’t using this opportunity more to bash Hurts for whatever the hell it was he threw on that play

Another example of terrible offense. Empty backfield? The design of the offense is moronic

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

Patullo stinks. Nick Sirianni’s offense only seems to only work when he has really good offensive coordinators. His offense is also very predictable. I said this during the game. When you watch them, you can tell when they’re gonna run and where they’re gonna run. It was very easy to pick up today. They also don’t use personnel well and is way way way too reliant on their talent. It’s a stale, non-creative and predictable offense.

Yup. Another week where Tank Bigsby gets no opportunities. 9 Carries for 104 yards spelling Saquon, and hasn’t hit 9 Carries in the last 4 games combined.

I’ve seen multiple ex-players point out the Eagles tells of when they’re running or passing and it’s so obvious. And when they do run, it’s the same 2-3 from the same looks.

When they pass there’s rarely any creativity or intention of influencing the defense to react poorly. Just a hodgepodge of routes hoping one of them is open.

We have 4 RBs and a mobile QB and won’t run other than 1st and 10.

We have 3 idk top 50ish WRs (2 in the top 12) and can’t scheme them open.

I’m still waiting for some HB screens, some PA Boots, some trick plays, some weird formation, extra motions before the snap.

Where the he’ll are the hotdog/whip routes?!? Easy man beater like 99% of the time and easy to take zone defenders out of position.

Where’s the back shoulder fades to AJ/Smitty everytime they're 1 on 1?

Where’s the diversity and creativity? Siriani is boring, KP is boring and the things they’re in control of are producing boring and stale results.

29 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

The logic is they needed a 2pt conversion at some point in time. You are stuck on the reality of them not getting it when they tried. It’s a hell of a lot harder to win the game if you fail the conversion with no time left.

That’s great - before they went for two I begged for the XP. I’m stuck on the bad coaching aspect of it.

If you miss the 2pt there - you need lightening to strike to win. Every player and fan knows that. You have to kick the onside now, which gives your defense and offense worse field position for their respective times. You kill the momentum and hopes of everyone involved.

Get your points, get guys razzed up, and it’s an 8 point game. Kick the ball downfield, play defense, hope they get the ball back. If you miss the 2pt at the end of the game, so be it. At least it wasn’t a fore gone conclusion at 4 minutes.

Just now, we_gotta_believe said:

It's like they think that postponing the 2pt conversion attempt magically makes it more likely to be converted.

I dont think anyone thinks that, or implied it. But, it would mean that the failed one never actually happened.

Its almost like you guys think the failed one there would have automatically happened again in the exact same way if they kicked an XP then and tried the 2PC later.

Could have ended up being an entirely different play call, personnel grouping, Chicago D more tired after another drive. Maybe chicago commits a penalty or something and gives you a closer shot, or a 2nd shot at it. Literally anything could have happened. Just because we saw one fail doesnt mean we were destined to see it fail if they tried it later instead.

And still, thats beside the point. Focusing on that misses the point completely. The right call was whatever made it more likely that we get that point to even have a shot at attempting it. We never got there because of the wrong decision.

14 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Fair enough, I just see that as delaying the inevitable while also boxing yourself into a corner if you miss it on the second TD.

Just now, we_gotta_believe said:

Yeah. Incorrectly. 

Just now, HazletonEagle said:

the failed one never actually happened

So if it didn't magically convert on the second attempt then the failed conversion never happened because it was never attempted? Ah yes, I forgot that losing by 8 is much better than losing by 9. My apologies.

1 minute ago, GoEagles614 said:

Yup. Another week where Tank Bigsby gets no opportunities. 9 Carries for 104 yards spelling Saquon, and hasn’t hit 9 Carries in the last 4 games combined.

I’ve seen multiple ex-players point out the Eagles tells of when they’re running or passing and it’s so obvious. And when they do run, it’s the same 2-3 from the same looks.

When they pass there’s rarely any creativity or intention of influencing the defense to react poorly. Just a hodgepodge of routes hoping one of them is open.

We have 4 RBs and a mobile QB and won’t run other than 1st and 10.

We have 3 idk top 50ish WRs (2 in the top 12) and can’t scheme them open.

I’m still waiting for some HB screens, some PA Boots, some trick plays, some weird formation, extra motions before the snap.

Where the he’ll are the hotdog/whip routes?!? Easy man beater like 99% of the time and easy to take zone defenders out of position.

Where’s the back shoulder fades to AJ/Smitty everytime they're 1 on 1?

Where’s the diversity and creativity? Siriani is boring, KP is boring and the things they’re in control of are producing boring and stale results.

I’ve said this before, the 2019 Eagles kinda had a similar thing going on. Where they didn’t utilize their personnel to what they should have and Doug just refused to change things. (Until after the dolphins game in December and then they finally started doing things). But that team you could argue at least didn’t have the talent that this team is wasting.

But frankly, I think sirianni is very similar to Doug in some regards except he’s not as aggressive. Both of them needed great OCs to Maximize their talent and offense (Doug in 2017). Furthermore, Doug was never a great innovator or play designer. He was a much better CEO type coach. (Do think he’s better play designer than Nick— but 2017 was more of an outlier for Doug). If we remember correctly and go on Twitter, there is people calling the same things out for the Eagles offense back in 2019 (2020 but it imploded with wentz imploding). That it was stale. That it was predictable. they did it maximize the personnel they did have. Like Carson wentz was better when he rolled outside the pocket. the analytics said he was like one of the best quarterbacks in the league when they did that. And yet Doug just routinely did it one time a game.

It feels like we’ve gone full circle, but with a more expensive and better talented roster.

6 minutes ago, pgcd3 said:

Another example of terrible offense. Empty backfield? The design of the offense is moronic

Ive learned to embrace empty. Hurts consistently does well out of that. 

I think people really underestimate how awful Patullo is. He’s not even qualified to be a position coach, and he has the keys to THIS roster on offense.

He’s been quickly removed from every position coach job he’s ever had. Put into vague roles after. He’s probably great at the "associate head coach” part of his job, organizing meetings and "pitching in” ideas. He has never shown he can lead anything.

It’s a next level bad hire. So many people have a share of the blame, but Patullo’s share is the biggest followed by Sirianni.