47 minutes ago, Devaster said:

Those high scoring offenses won't score many points against our defense. They score points against defenses that can't stop them.

I saw a good point on a show this week or last that mentioned people will say what an amazing game when both teams are in a shootout and there is no defense, but they will do the reverse when the defenses come to play and the offenses struggle. The Eagles need to be less conservative on offense and more consistent, but the defense is a SB caliber defense and can win games all on its own. Their offense is somewhat complementary by not turning the ball over most of the time and putting the defense in compromising situations. But the offense really does need to be able to sustain more drives and help the defense out more.

I love our defense, but if a team can come in and just play slightly below to average offense and put up around 20-25 pts, we are probably in trouble. McVay is a really good offensive coach, and Stafford was on pace to be the MVP before the Falcons game. I like their chances of hitting that mark. Give me the Packers any day of the week.

33 minutes ago, Road to Victory said:

That’s what I worry about. The defense was tremendous against Buffalo but they were gassed at the end of the game. All we really needed was a FG in the 2nd half and the offense didn’t come close. They need to sustain some drives and keep the D fresh.

You can say the same thing for the Dallas game and the Denver game. Just get one more frickin score and we win those games. So frustrating as a fan. It's probably 1000x more frustrating as an Iggles player. Coulda Shoulda have been the 1 seed. Oh well. 🦅🙃

They have to win over the Commanders and the Bears to lose, in order to get #2 seed. They already said to rest some starters and play the back-ups in the finale. The outcome is not totally in our own control. Bottom line is that our back-ups could beat the Commanders, who may play for a higher draft position. We deliver our part of the results and see how the chips will fall. Resting the starters would be the right way to go and get ready for the playoff.

P***y Siri will rest the starters, even though the offense needs work and they need to grab that 2nd seed for another home game. They won't fire Siri, of course- I mean he hired the great Patullo fo Gods sake.

2 hours ago, Penn7980 said:

They have to win over the Commanders and the Bears to lose, in order to get #2 seed. They already said to rest some starters and play the back-ups in the finale. The outcome is not totally in our own control. Bottom line is that our back-ups could beat the Commanders, who may play for a higher draft position. We deliver our part of the results and see how the chips will fall. Resting the starters would be the right way to go and get ready for the playoff.

Agree resting the starters is right call. They need the break and the injury risk is not 0

Resting the Starters is the correct thing to do, I think. A meaningless game against Wash isn't going to change or make the Offense better, IMO. They are what they are, I mean, it's week 18. They have been who they are for the entire season. It's a shame too, because I thought the passing game would take off this season. But really, nothing has consistently worked on O. Grrrrrr......🫣

I'm on the fence. Higher seed is always best IMO but resting starters to be healthy for the playoffs is also a priority

Commies could also play dirty so you're also saving your starters from dirty hits

On 12/31/2025 at 11:41 AM, time2rock said:

Looks like it will be McKee and the 2s leading the way for the chance at that 2 seed.

I'm looking forward to seeing how well McKee plays. I'm sure polymarket will start posting odds soon on McKee getting flipped for a 2nd

I hope to God that McKee lights up that D.

18-25, 275 yards, 2TDs.

kind of ridiculous we're resting our starters. A win over the Redskins and a Bears loss would put us in 2nd seed. Would love to know what Rosie & Siri are thinking and why they don't see the opportunity here

The only thing the 2 seed changes is a Bears Eagles round 2 game in Chicago or Philly.

and playing Green Bay vs the worst of 3 overrated teams (I'd still rather play Green Bay)

It was a bigger deal when 4 was still in play so thanks to Baker for being an inferior QB.

It would be nice to be home if that game happens but the Bears could still lose and they could get a bunch of injuries on Sunday.

DC is a complete joke. McKee should be able to destroy them.

8 hours ago, JohnB said:

kind of ridiculous we're resting our starters. A win over the Redskins and a Bears loss would put us in 2nd seed. Would love to know what Rosie & Siri are thinking and why they don't see the opportunity here

Have to weigh the risk of players getting injured in this game vs the potential opportunity to move up to the 2 seed.

• even if it increased the likelihood of a win by playing our starters that still doesn't guarantee a win

• even if we win it still doesn't guarantee we get the 2 seed (since it is also based on what the Bears do)

• if we played the starters and a key player goes down with injury (like AJ Brown did in 2023 and had to miss the playoff game against TB), that would have a greater impact on our chances in the postseason than having to play on the road vs home in round 2

Best case scenario we give our starters some valuable rest and still pull out a W while Chicago drops their game to Detroit and we still end up the 2 seed.

I'm in agreement with resting the starters. It's the right call for the current situation. If we lose and Chicago loses, I'm sure we'll be like "F!!"...but I have a hard time seeing the Lions beating the Bears in Chicago. Goff in the cold outdoors and the Lions just aren't quite what they were last year. Chances are slim we'll get the 2 seed regardless if we play the starters.

That said, I'm definitely rooting for the W this week and also a huge Lions fan.

Assuming we'll be the 3 seed, we'll be playing the Rams or 49ers. If Seattle wins and Rams beat the Cards, we'll play San Fran. If Seattle loses, we play the Rams regardless.

Even though the Eagles are playing most of their backups in this game, I still believe they have a strong chance to win.

3 hours ago, EazyEaglez said:

Even though the Eagles are playing most of their backups in this game, I still believe they have a strong chance to win.

Hopefully the Iggles can get like a 17-3 halftime lead. Score once more in the 3rd quarter (FG or TD), and Wash packs it in and wants no part of trying in the 4th quarter. 🦅

19 minutes ago, LacesOut said:

Hopefully the Iggles can get like a 17-3 halftime lead. Score once more in the 3rd quarter (FG or TD), and Wash packs it in and wants no part of trying in the 4th quarter. 🦅

They can't even score that many points with the starters 😂

13 hours ago, JohnB said:

kind of ridiculous we're resting our starters. A win over the Redskins and a Bears loss would put us in 2nd seed. Would love to know what Rosie & Siri are thinking and why they don't see the opportunity here

I'll only question it if we see the bears in the playoffs on a road game

4 hours ago, EaglesAddict said:

I'm in agreement with resting the starters. It's the right call for the current situation. If we lose and Chicago loses, I'm sure we'll be like "F!!"...but I have a hard time seeing the Lions beating the Bears in Chicago. Goff in the cold outdoors and the Lions just aren't quite what they were last year. Chances are slim we'll get the 2 seed regardless if we play the starters.

That said, I'm definitely rooting for the W this week and also a huge Lions fan.

Assuming we'll be the 3 seed, we'll be playing the Rams or 49ers. If Seattle wins and Rams beat the Cards, we'll play San Fran. If Seattle loses, we play the Rams regardless.

That's what I was thinking last weekend with the Rams-Falcons and look how that turned out. This is a bit different though since Ben Johnson knows the Lions so well but I still get the feeling the Lions are going to give them a run for their money. And you know Campbell is going to have his guys fired up preaching pride, so we shall see.

4 minutes ago, time2rock said:

That's what I was thinking last weekend with the Rams-Falcons and look how that turned out. This is a bit different though since Ben Johnson knows the Lions so well but I still get the feeling the Lions are going to give them a run for their money. And you know Campbell is going to have his guys fired up preaching pride, so we shall see.

True enough. Imagine the b*tching around here and on sports radio if the Lions win and we lose because we played our backups. And then we watch GB get blown out in the first round while we lose to the NFC west team.

1 hour ago, Seventy_Yard_FG said:

I'll only question it if we see the bears in the playoffs on a road game

If we lose and the Bears lose there will be questions.

If we played the starters and lost there will be questions.

If we played the starters and lose a key player to injury there will be questions (especially if the Bears win).

8 minutes ago, EaglesAddict said:

True enough. Imagine the b*tching around here and on sports radio if the Lions win and we lose because we played our backups. And then we watch GB get blown out in the first round while we lose to the NFC west team.

It’s a calculated risk for sure. Personally I would have played the starters. I’d say we have about a 90% chance of beating WC with our starters and 60% with our backups. The Bears will probably beat the Lions, but I wouldn’t be shocked if they pull the upset.

Hopefully it’s irrelevant but I would much rather pay the Packers and have a home game guaranteed in the divisional round than the Rams/49ers followed by likely the Bears away.

2 hours ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

They can't even score that many points with the starters 😂

Maybe Tank and Tanner take over.

2 hours ago, EazyEaglez said:

Maybe Tank and Tanner take over.

T & T baby!

Although I would NOT play Tank.

Bring out the old, rusted, jalopy, piece of crap, one blown out tire, from the RB Garage.........AJ Dillion. Let him and Ship get all of the RB runs.

4 hours ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

They can't even score that many points with the starters 😂

It’s going to be interesting to see if the offense, even with the 2nd stringers, are more productive. And I don’t mean that as a knock on Hurts. I’m wondering if Patullo is just incapable of designing an offense that is more run heavy. He was a pass game coordinator after all … maybe he is more or less a one trick pony and incapable of adjusting (unlike someone like Reich or Steichen). McKee is much more of a pure passer so this could be interesting.

1 hour ago, time2rock said:

It’s going to be interesting to see if the offense, even with the 2nd stringers, are more productive. And I don’t mean that as a knock on Hurts. I’m wondering if Patullo is just incapable of designing an offense that is more run heavy. He was a pass game coordinator after all … maybe he is more or less a one trick pony and incapable of adjusting (unlike someone like Reich or Steichen). McKee is much more of a pure passer so this could be interesting.

I know, I'm interested as well to see how the offense looks. There are some fans that are happy about this and think the offense is held back by Hurts. I'm curious to see what they say if the offense still looks the same and performs the same. This board will become unbearable if they win this game with McKee and he plays well. Then they flop in the playoffs with Hurts.