Just now, downundermike said:

Another false narrative.  We have a top 3 running game because we have a top 3 offensive line.

Eagles average 160 rushing yards per game, and ran for 185 in Minshew's start.

We ran for fewer yards against the Jets than we did against the Saints.

Short bus, pickup for one.

They ran fewer against the Jets because Minshew threw more passing yards then trash did in his last 4 games

6 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

We ran for fewer yards against the Jets than we did against the Saints.

No way.  In a game that we had more rushing attempts we had more rushing yards.  

Running backs in those games.

Saints - 38 carries for 173 yards

Jets - 36 carries for 174 yards.

Running back production slightly better with Minshew as the QB.

 

9 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

We ran for fewer yards against the Jets than we did against the Saints.

Short bus, pickup for one.

50 carries for 242 yards at a 4.8 average 

41 carries for 185 at a 4.5 average

Those above include the QB rushes. Without them, the lines are near identical.

Conveniently, you fail to mention that they were without Howard and Scott for the Jets game. Even so, the running game was every bit as efficient. You know what wasn't? The passing game.

Hurts had 147 and no TDs 

Minshew had 242 and 2 TDs 

Just now, downundermike said:

No way.  In a game that we had more rushing attempts we had more rushing yards.  

Running backs in those games.

Saints - 38 carries for 173 yards

Jets - 36 carries for 174 yards.

Running back production slightly better with Minshew as the QB.

 

You do realize that the Saints may be slightly better than the Jets at stopping the run, right? So our success against the Saints is slightly more impressive than our success against the Jets in this respect. 

Again, take the short bus back to the blog, please. 

Just now, Swoop said:

50 carries for 242 yards at a 4.8 average 

41 carries for 185 at a 4.5 average

Conveniently, you fail to mention that they were without Howard and Scott for the Jets game. Even so, the running game was every bit as efficient. You know what wasn't? The passing game.

Hurts had 147 and no TDs 

Minshew had 242 and 2 TDs 

So now the Jets and Saints are equal on defense? We suddenly have to stop taking the quality of opponent into consideration because it fits your narrative?

Please, go back to the blog. You have friends there. They will agree with you. 

5 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

So now the Jets and Saints are equal on defense? We suddenly have to stop taking the quality of opponent into consideration because it fits your narrative?

Please, go back to the blog. You have friends there. They will agree with you. 

No one said that, but speaking of quality opponent, how many of those has Hurts beaten this year? Hell, the Saints were down to their third stringer. Narrative? Go take a look in the mirror.

Does it not make a difference that two of our rushers were out against the Jets? That we had a hobbled Sanders and a rookie?

Saints play a better defense, but the Jets had less of a rotation to worry about and could key somewhat on the running game because that is Hurts only value and Minshew isn't a runner to that extent.

It goes both ways.

As is, the running game performed above the season average and the passing game was better. 

6 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

You do realize that the Saints may be slightly better than the Jets at stopping the run, right? So our success against the Saints is slightly more impressive than our success against the Jets in this respect. 

Again, take the short bus back to the blog, please. 

Yes, but if you are looking at total yards, obviously the Jets are worse, as they have 65 more rushing attempts against them.   Teams are also ahead of the Jets, and run the ball more.  

4 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Yes, but if you are looking at total yards, obviously the Jets are worse, as they have 65 more rushing attempts against them.   Teams are also ahead of the Jets, and run the ball more.  

Just stop. The Eagles have a top 10 offense and Hurts is a top 10 QB even though factually across the board this is false in almost every sense of the word.

1 minute ago, Swoop said:

No one said that, but speaking of quality opponent, how many of those has Hurts beaten this year? Hell, the Saints were down to their third stringer. Narrative? Go take a look in the mirror.

Does it not make a difference that two of our rushers were out against the Jets? That we had a hobbled Sanders and a rookie?

Saints play a better defense, but the Jets had less of a rotation to worry about.

It goes both ways.

As is, the running game performed above the season average and the passing game was better. 

Just give up. When your argument is "Boston Scott didn't even play so we had to run Miles Sanders a bunch," it's time to step away from the keyboard.

2 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

Just give up. When your argument is "Boston Scott didn't even play so we had to run Miles Sanders a bunch," it's time to step away from the keyboard.

Why did you not address the fact that Hurts is 21st in QBR, the stat that accounts for QB running impact ???

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

Why did you not address the fact that Hurts is 21st in QBR, the stat that accounts for QB running impact ???

Dak is 23rd. Maybe this isn't the best stat you are looking for to make your argument.

3 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

Just give up. When your argument is "Boston Scott didn't even play so we had to run Miles Sanders a bunch," it's time to step away from the keyboard.

It matters because Miles Sanders was/still is hurt, but okay. Its a hole in your argument so you want to ignore it, fine.

Here are the facts, feel free to look them up: 

The Eagles are not top 10 in scoring. 

The Eagles are not top 10 in yards. 

Hurts is not top 10 in every possible scenario as a passer and is in the bottom third of the league in every single passing measurement, though he's a good runner, but no one disputes that.

So again, in what way is he a top ten QB other than in your heart?

5 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

Dak is 23rd. Maybe this isn't the best stat you are looking for to make your argument.

Because he is averaging 2.9 YPA, has 1 TD and 5 fumbles.  Do you even know how the stat works ??

hurts is a great qb and he needs to start for the next 3 weeks so he can lead me to a fantasy football championship in my money league. 

#teamhurts

3 minutes ago, Swoop said:

It matters because Miles Sanders was/still is hurt, but okay. Its a hole in your argument so you want to ignore it, fine.

Here are the facts, feel free to look them up: 

The Eagles are not top 10 in scoring.   ( 12th )

The Eagles are not top 10 in yards.   ( 15th )

Hurts is not top 10 in every possible scenario as a passer and is in the bottom third of the league in every single passing measurement, though he's a good runner, but no one disputes that.

So again, in what way is he a top ten QB other than in your heart?

I will also add the Eagles are 30th in passing  yards per game.

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

Because he is averaging 2.9 YPA, has 1 TD and 5 fumbles.  Do you even know how the stat works ??

So Hurts is better than Dak? That's your argument?

Really brave hill to die on.

Of all the bad takes today, you are really trying for the gold medal.

4 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

So Hurts is better than Dak? That's your argument?

Really brave hill to die on.

Of all the bad takes today, you are really trying for the gold medal.

No, Dak is top 10 in QB rating.  You keep saying Hurts is top 10, but the #1 stat that takes QB rushing into account, Hurts is 21st.  

4 minutes ago, Swoop said:

The Eagles are not top 10 in scoring. They are 12th, 13 points out of 10th place.

The Eagles are not top 10 in yards. 14th in yards per play, .1 ypp out of 8th place.

If you combine those two stats, they are top 10. Sorry to disappoint you.

 

3 minutes ago, downundermike said:

No, Dak is top 10 in QB rating.  You keep saying Hurts is top 10, but the #1 stat that takes QB rushing into account, Hurts is 21st.  

The Eagles offense is top 10 with Hurts at qb.

There's a pretty big difference between what you want the argument to be and what the argument is.

6 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

The Eagles are not top 10 in scoring. They are 12th, 13 points out of 10th place.

The Eagles are not top 10 in yards. 14th in yards per play, .1 ypp out of 8th place.

If you combine those two stats, they are top 10. Sorry to disappoint you.

What ??

So they rank 12th and 14th, but combined they are 10th ??

7 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

The Eagles offense is top 10 with Hurts at qb.

There's a pretty big difference between what you want the argument to be and what the argument is.

In what metric, you just said they are 14th in yards per play.

6 minutes ago, jsb235 said:

 

15th in yards per game 

12th in points scored 

12th in points per game 

So again, no, they aren't.

Jesus talk about the short bus.

 

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

So they rank 12th and 14th, but combined they are 10th ??

Because not all the teams ranked above them in points generate as many yards. So being ranked just outside the top 10 in two categories means your overall position improves.

You really don't get that? That a team with the fifth best passing offense and the third best rushing offense might have the best overall offense?

Are you that dim?

1 minute ago, Swoop said:

15th in yards per game 

Yards per game isn't an accurate measure of an offense. Yards per play is a much better stat. You don't know why this is, and it is honestly getting exhausting explaining basic stuff to you guys.

Just now, 4for4EaglesNest said:

FYP

Pretty much. 

What's more comical is the complete dismissal of the running game as a whole outside of Hurts. 

You know the one that went for almost 200 without him.