40 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Our RBs had 17 carries for 50 yards. Our non-QBs were 18 for 38, thanks to Killins’ 12-yard loss. 

Yikes.

I think you agree that Miles left some meat on the bone, but for the most part there wasnt much space

They did get a couple gaping lanes but our RBs didnt really capitalize on them

1 minute ago, DeathByEagle said:

Our worse case is we win the div with 6,7, or 8 wins in a really bad div again. Then we get another year of the fans who don't understand football saying "Well we made the playoffs 4 years in a row with Doug so no changes need to be made, its just injuries" 

If our div winner is a sub .500 team the NFL will change the playoff rules next year to go by record not div winners. A few years back the Saints won the div at 8-8 and caused a uproar cause 10 win teams were not making the playoffs cause of the current rule. They reviewed it then but didnt pass the change. But if you get a sub .500 team getting in, there is a problem and will open up eyes for a change. 

Didn't the Seahawks win their division at 7-9 one year?

3 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

Our worse case is we win the div with 6,7, or 8 wins in a really bad div again. Then we get another year of the fans who don't understand football saying "Well we made the playoffs 4 years in a row with Doug so no changes need to be made, its just injuries" 

If our div winner is a sub .500 team the NFL will change the playoff rules next year to go by record not div winners. A few years back the Saints won the div at 8-8 and caused a uproar cause 10 win teams were not making the playoffs cause of the current rule. They reviewed it then but didnt pass the change. But if you get a sub .500 team getting in, there is a problem and will open up eyes for a change. 

The 7-9 2011 Seahwawks say hello.

2 minutes ago, Asg 15 said:

Didn't the Seahawks win their division at 7-9 one year?

Yes, thats what it was the Hawks made it and beat the saints in the wildcard game. I reversed and said saints made it. 

4 minutes ago, Asg 15 said:

Didn't the Seahawks win their division at 7-9 one year?

2010, that was also when they beat the Saints in the playoffs on that crazy Marshawn Lynch run where the entire Saints defense just bounced off of him.

7 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

Our worse case is we win the div with 6,7, or 8 wins in a really bad div again. Then we get another year of the fans who don't understand football saying "Well we made the playoffs 4 years in a row with Doug so no changes need to be made, its just injuries" 

If our div winner is a sub .500 team the NFL will change the playoff rules next year to go by record not div winners. A few years back the Saints won the div at 8-8 and caused a uproar cause 10 win teams were not making the playoffs cause of the current rule. They reviewed it then but didnt pass the change. But if you get a sub .500 team getting in, there is a problem and will open up eyes for a change. 

Didnt we win the f'ing Super Bowl after a 7-9 season?

What are you guys afraid of?  You play sports to win.  

This is just that "Process" mentality that needs to be banished from the Philadelphia sports psyche

6 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

Our worse case is we win the div with 6,7, or 8 wins in a really bad div again. Then we get another year of the fans who don't understand football saying "Well we made the playoffs 4 years in a row with Doug so no changes need to be made, its just injuries" 

If our div winner is a sub .500 team the NFL will change the playoff rules next year to go by record not div winners. A few years back the Saints won the div at 8-8 and caused a uproar cause 10 win teams were not making the playoffs cause of the current rule. They reviewed it then but didnt pass the change. But if you get a sub .500 team getting in, there is a problem and will open up eyes for a change. 

Imagine hoping your team makes the playoffs for a chance to go all the way. Even just getting a playoff game, where the national spotlight shines bright, you enjoy watching it with family and friends. A loss there sucks, but that's the game. 

Naw, instead you'll cheer for us to win the draft, cause that's worked out for the Giants/Jets/Browns/Lions, etc over the last how many years. GTFO yah loser. 

6 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

there may be a new opinion of these OL after next week's game. The Steelers front 7 is the real test. 

It did look like Mailata did a decent job passing off stunting players.  It's not like SF's defense gave them a vanilla look.  It will be different playing Pittsburgh.  I think Wentz will need to do a better job with his protection calls on blitzes.  

11 minutes ago, RLC said:

As someone who defended the Genard Avery trade, I feel pretty good this morning. Avery might have been our best pass-rusher. 5 QB hits is a lot for someone not playing all the snaps.

He played great last night.  I think both Sweat and Barnett had good games against a good LT.  

9 minutes ago, Asg 15 said:

Didn't the Seahawks win their division at 7-9 one year?

2010, yep. 

3 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Imagine hoping your team makes the playoffs for a chance to go all the way. Even just getting a playoff game, where the national spotlight shines bright, you enjoy watching it with family and friends. A loss there sucks, but that's the game. 

Naw, instead you'll cheer for us to win the draft, cause that's worked out for the Giants/Jets/Browns/Lions, etc over the last how many years. GTFO yah loser. 

Yup - There is no way to successfully tank in football.  Good teams have cultures that make for perennial winners regardless of draft position.  

19 minutes ago, metal said:

He's completely right. Singleton and/or Bradley should be in there. But, as I have said before, the coach loves him some Whitesnake, so nothing will change.

Duke Riley didn't look great either.  

17 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

I found the Fulgham PS signing completely unexciting. Another slow WR. And then he caught a TD last night. And then I got to thinking WHAT IF we hit on a move. What if his unathleticness can still be like a Golladay or Gallup? Just saying...

Jus

That's a very optimistic take, way more than even I take as the perpetual team apologist and optimist.   I mean... it's possible.  And maybe he's the JJAW replacement we are ALL looking for at this point.  If he can do what he did last night, which is 'run the right routes', he's already a step up on JJAW.   

 

Last night we at least saw the 'design' for what they want at WR.   Speed guy outside on one side (Hightower), Big guy on the opposite side (Fulgham) and shifty guy in the slot (Ward).  If this is rock bottom for the skill positions... it could be worse.   I mean, its not good by any stretch, but... it could be worse.

I would have felt a little better if Fulgham had caught that deep pass for the TD clean instead of almost dropping it.

Just now, NCiggles said:

Duke Riley didn't look great either.  

Nope, he played well week 1 but hasn't been that good since.

16 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

Our worse case is we win the div with 6,7, or 8 wins in a really bad div again. Then we get another year of the fans who don't understand football saying "Well we made the playoffs 4 years in a row with Doug so no changes need to be made, its just injuries" 

If our div winner is a sub .500 team the NFL will change the playoff rules next year to go by record not div winners. A few years back the Saints won the div at 8-8 and caused a uproar cause 10 win teams were not making the playoffs cause of the current rule. They reviewed it then but didnt pass the change. But if you get a sub .500 team getting in, there is a problem and will open up eyes for a change. 

Interesting, so fans that "do know football" don't think that injuries have anything to do with it?

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

 

 

The defensive line is finally starting to feel like something worth getting excited about. I’m not a Barnett guy at all and even I’ll admit he’s looked good. I’d only imagine it getting better as Hargrave’s reps continue to increase. 

Dont know if this had been posted but, LOL

 

 

1 minute ago, TorontoEagle said:

Imagine hoping your team makes the playoffs for a chance to go all the way. Even just getting a playoff game, where the national spotlight shines bright, you enjoy watching it with family and friends. A loss there sucks, but that's the game. 

Naw, instead you'll cheer for us to win the draft, cause that's worked out for the Giants/Jets/Browns/Lions, etc over the last how many years. GTFO yah loser. 

What does anything about my post say about winning the draft? LOL Theres a diff between wanting change to better your team and saying lets tank, lol. Your one of those guys who looks at a team making playoffs means they are automatically a good team and want to look at excuses instead of a deep dive and the root causes. We made the playoffs , there is hope, lol. This is not the CFL. I think there is a word for when someone does the same thing over and over and expecting different results? Change is the key to success and fans like you who see us making the playoffs being the best of the worst as a successful season is more of a loser mentality then being realistic. 

7 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

That's a very optimistic take, way more than even I take as the perpetual team apologist and optimist.   I mean... it's possible.  And maybe he's the JJAW replacement we are ALL looking for at this point.  If he can do what he did last night, which is 'run the right routes', he's already a step up on JJAW.   

 

Last night we at least saw the 'design' for what they want at WR.   Speed guy outside on one side (Hightower), Big guy on the opposite side (Fulgham) and shifty guy in the slot (Ward).  If this is rock bottom for the skill positions... it could be worse.   I mean, its not good by any stretch, but... it could be worse.

I would have felt a little better if Fulgham had caught that deep pass for the TD clean instead of almost dropping it.

He's already done more than JJAW this year

1 minute ago, BDawk_ASamuel said:

The defensive line is finally starting to feel like something worth getting excited about. I’m not a Barnett guy at all and even I’ll admit he’s looked good. I’d only imagine it getting better as Hargrave’s reps continue to increase. 

It was good to see but it needs to continue. The last two weeks they played O-lines that are banged up and struggling. They need to dominate in those situations and they did, but you can't just rack up stats against bad lines and disappear against good ones. The Steelers line is pretty damn good so we will see.

1 minute ago, DeathByEagle said:

What does anything about my post say about winning the draft? LOL Theres a diff between wanting change to better your team and saying lets tank, lol. Your one of those guys who looks at a team making playoffs means they are automatically a good team and want to look at excuses instead of a deep dive and the root causes. We made the playoffs , there is hope, lol. This is not the CFL. I think there is a word for when someone does the same thing over and over and expecting different results? Change is the key to success and fans like you who see us making the playoffs being the best of the worst as a successful season is more of a loser mentality then being realistic. 

You're saying you want the team to lose games to get a better draft pick. Or to force Lurie to fire people, I guess. Here's a newsflash, Doug isn't getting fired this year, or after this year. It's not happening. Nor should it. Change for the sake of change is idiotic. How many QBs have the Browns gone thru? How many head coaches have the Lions gone thru? But they changed! You're a clown bruh. So long as this team is mathematically alive, I'll cheer for them to win every game, and I want them to make the playoffs. Even if they get bounced in the first round, so be it. It happened last year and we ended up with Reagor and a bunch of other speed guys, so we did in fact change, even while making the playoffs. Sometimes it's nice to have your cake and eat it too. 

5 minutes ago, BDawk_ASamuel said:

The defensive line is finally starting to feel like something worth getting excited about. I’m not a Barnett guy at all and even I’ll admit he’s looked good. I’d only imagine it getting better as Hargrave’s reps continue to increase. 

The problem is the LBs can't cover so short throws are immediately open.  

26 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

Our worse case is we win the div with 6,7, or 8 wins in a really bad div again. Then we get another year of the fans who don't understand football saying "Well we made the playoffs 4 years in a row with Doug so no changes need to be made, its just injuries" 

If our div winner is a sub .500 team the NFL will change the playoff rules next year to go by record not div winners. A few years back the Saints won the div at 8-8 and caused a uproar cause 10 win teams were not making the playoffs cause of the current rule. They reviewed it then but didnt pass the change. But if you get a sub .500 team getting in, there is a problem and will open up eyes for a change. 

There was a sub-0.500 team that has gotten in.  Years ago, the 7-9 Seahawks got in, hosted a playoff game and beat the Saints, who had 10 or 11 wins, I think.  

 

This isn't the first time this would have happened.  And, last year for all the consternation, the Eagles had the same record as the #7 team that just missed the playoffs last year (the Rams), so its basically as if the Eagles merely won the tie-breaker.   

And if they go to a straight overall record, rather than divisions, then they might as well dissolve the divisions entirely, what would be the reason for their existence at that point?    Or just go to 2 divisions, within the 2 conferences, and virtually eliminate inter-conference and inter-divisional play.   Put 8 teams in each division, play the 7 other teams in your division twice to make 14 games, and then play 1 game against the team in the other conference in the same division (east/west) at the same ranking as the previous year... and 1 game against the team in the other division within the same conference with the same ranking as the previous year.   But, the league will NEVER do that.  So, don't count on it.  

Alternatively, they could just play division opponents once for 7 games, match up the top 2, 3-4, 5-6 and 7-8 finishers from the previous year to get to 8 games.  Then split each division by top 4/bottom 4.  Top 4 in each division play each other for 4 more games on the schedule to get to 12 games.  Then, play the top 4 or bottom for from the other conference on a rotation basis East/West... to get to 16 games.   And whenever they want to get to the 17 game schedule, the final game can be a 'regional matchup' against an opponent from the other conference.   

 

 

But... it will not happen.  The magical symmetry of the 16 team 4x4 conference is too good.  Instead, they will just add another playoff team and get #7 in to eliminate the debate.   Which makes for 2 more playoff games (1 per conference), without extending the playoff timeframe... and means more $$$.    (which is all that really drives he decision making)

1 minute ago, TorontoEagle said:

You're saying you want the team to lose games to get a better draft pick. Or to force Lurie to fire people, I guess. Here's a newsflash, Doug isn't getting fired this year, or after this year. It's not happening. Nor should it. Change for the sake of change is idiotic. How many QBs have the Browns gone thru? How many head coaches have the Lions gone thru? But they changed! You're a clown bruh. So long as this team is mathematically alive, I'll cheer for them to win every game, and I want them to make the playoffs. Even if they get bounced in the first round, so be it. It happened last year and we ended up with Reagor and a bunch of other speed guys, so we did in fact change, even while making the playoffs. Sometimes it's nice to have your cake and eat it too. 

ok, your all over the place, lol. Im over here, and your off in no mans land just making up other topics that I said nothing about, lol. 

After the first 2 weeks, I thought the best thing for this team going forward - LONG TERM- was to play as many of the young guys now. Injuries are forcing us to do just that.

Last night I turned on the TV after avoiding all football all weekend (except to watch the 3rd QTR of Dallas getting their a** handed to them by the Browns) and I was pleasantly surprised to see the Oline was all new guys except Kelce, that JJAW was sitting out. WHY? Because if this team is going to get better, it's going to come from young guys getting valuable playing time, not from guys like DJAX, Alshon or Peters coming back only to get injured again. 

Our long term future after this year depends on us rebuilding with younger/ cheaper guys. If we were going to be bad anyway, I'd rather be bad, playing young guys with upside so they can get better together, while we are bad, and hopefully be better down the road.