6 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Actually they were 2-3, but is it really Dak's fault they lost games when he put up 31 and 38 points ??

Well, there's no doubt that they should have lost that game to Atlanta.  The Falcons really crapped the bed (sticking to the current theme) on that one... just like they did in the Super Bowl.

32 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

That Carolina game wasn’t even officiated by the rules in place at the time.  No contact rule, pass interference, defensive holding were all in place that game but when Carolina realized that the refs had swallowed their whistles they pushed as far as they could on those.  When I was a youth coach, I always told the kids to take what the ref was giving.  Go to the Carolinas and they would just say the refs let them play that day.

Just what rules other than defenseless receiver rule made it easier for WRs?  No contact rule was nicknamed the Mel Blount rule.  We have posters on here that really don’t remember seeing Blount play.  The blocking rule changes have really favored not get persons hurt. (Not leading with helmets, below the waist blocking limitations, no hands to the head, no lunging at the QBs legs).  The pick rules favor the defense.  Now they have created the protections for the QB that make some sacks harder but with that comes the more rigid enforcement of in the grasp.  

I do think that the protection rules make it easier on the offense than the defense, don’t get me wrong.  But the rule changes towards player safety, basically trying to protect the assets in the days of a salary cap, expanded league funded long term care and the concussion settlement.

Sure, they also look at the entertainment level. Casual fans love the OBJ one handed catches.  They love the long touchdown throws.  So if the rules make those more likely, so much better for the entertainment product. It’s why the clips we see of practice focus on circus catches not OL and DL use of hands and footwork.  It is why a poster on here complained that 50 minutes in "all” the Eagles had worked on in practice yesterday was "footwork”.  Well anyone watching the OL and DL last Thursday that didn’t see the horrible anchoring of Marlon T and the bad footwork of Pryor was focused too much on hoping for that circus catch.  But that circus catch sells. 

What footwork was that?

1 minute ago, BigEFly said:

You do realize the chart you put up shows him putting up no more than 24 points in any game.  It is a team game.  He threw for a boatload of yards but yet the other teams were putting up more points.   

There's a contradiction here.  

5 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

You do realize the chart you put up shows him putting up no more than 24 points in any game.  It is a team game.  He threw for a boatload of yards but yet the other teams were putting up more points.   

But you were agreeing with afan about QB stats being empty.  His stats where not empty, and he did what he had to do to win those games.

28 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Yep.  All the talk about Dak leading the league last year when he went down overlooks the fact his team was 1-4 and should have been 0-5. 

 

2 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I would hope that we do, but he is on the record now as saying that all that matters is PPG for a QB.  He didn't mention any context about that.  Maybe he was just being lazy or just typing out quickly, but we know that afan isn't always known for brevity.  So, I think he presented a very simplistic measure and didn't discuss the context and when he was talking about QB stats not mattering, he was referring to TD passes, ypa, total yards, etc.  But, I think those numbers in context absolutely matter for evaluating a QB.   I don't put hard and fast rules to it like PFF does and try to quantify it to a single numerical value, but I think that it must be factored into the evaluation.   That said, evaluation of a QB's performance is generally a very subjective measurement, no matter how it is sliced.  The objective numbers of hard statistics is what it is... objective.  However, it is the interpretation of those statistics that determines the overall evaluation, and frankly, there's no getting around the subjective nature of that.  (For the record, my issue with PFF has always been that they portray their evaluations as somehow objective, when they are, in fact, highly subjective.  Not that I want to go down that rabbit hole again.)

Stats are interesting but really one dimensional.  PFF looks at film and creates their own one dimensional stats based on their observations.  They claim to be more in depth but it isn’t really data modeling.  As you point out, there is inherent bias in their observations whether they want to see it that way or not. Ultimately, the only stats that matter are by the team for Wins and Losses.  

I use stats at times to prove a point, we all do.  But ultimately, that use can reflect our bias on the given subject. 

7 minutes ago, justrelax said:

What footwork was that?

It looks to me like Pryor gets his feet too tight in pass protection, I think when he is anticipating a bull rush and pardon the expression, gets caught flat footed.  He is glacial in speed, including reaction, and that allows him to get beat. I have said that I think he relies on his size to much.  It helps but that tightness in his footwork that I think I see, at times, is magnified by how slow he is. You are way better than I am at interpreting the nuances of OL play.   

@EaglePhan1986

14 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

There's a contradiction here.  

Of course there is.  That is kind of the point.  A three yard hitch to a receiver who then runs 80 yards for the score shows up as the QB have thrown for 83 yards, not 3.  And it shows up as a TD for the QB.   Passing the team down the field to have the RB run it in from the one, shows up in the yards thrown and the YAC but not the TD as being for the QB.  But "putting” up yards or scores.  He said Dak put up 38 and 31 in losing efforts.  Not Dak himself.  

Three types of lies, lies, damn lies and statistics.  But we will continue to use stats to prove our points.  At the end of the year, if Hurts puts up stats like the Ringer suggests, there will be some that use those to suggest he deserves another shot at QB and others that use the same stats to argue he is mediocre and that __________, who looks like he lit it up in college based on stats, maybe a game or two watched and what the draft "experts” on the internet say, would be the better option.  And we will probably all miss the target by a bit.  

5 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

OMG.   A huge contradiction.  He's too dumb or biased to see it.  

Reading comprehension still not your forte. If you had, you would realize I was responding to a post that said Dak had put up 38 and 31 points.   But posting a chart that said otherwise.  The conversation was on statistics out of context.   

52 minutes ago, downundermike said:

23 of 31 teams scored at least 23 PPG last year.  The QB can look like garbage and still score that many points.

Point is simply that if we traded Wentz and start Hurts, and get the same production, we are up a 3rd and potentially a 1st.

38 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

You do realize the chart you put up shows him putting up no more than 24 points in any game.  It is a team game.  He threw for a boatload of yards but yet the other teams were putting up more points.   

 

34 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

There's a contradiction here.  

 

7 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

OMG.   A huge contradiction.  He's too dumb or biased to see it.  

Such a huge contradiction, and only giving him credit for scoring that he does is idiotic.

Are we giving Tony Pollard credit for 7 points, when on that drive Prescott went 6-7 for 73 yards.

40 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I would hope that we do, but he is on the record now as saying that all that matters is PPG for a QB.  He didn't mention any context about that.  Maybe he was just being lazy or just typing out quickly, but we know that afan isn't always known for brevity.  So, I think he presented a very simplistic measure and didn't discuss the context and when he was talking about QB stats not mattering, he was referring to TD passes, ypa, total yards, etc.  But, I think those numbers in context absolutely matter for evaluating a QB.   I don't put hard and fast rules to it like PFF does and try to quantify it to a single numerical value, but I think that it must be factored into the evaluation.   That said, evaluation of a QB's performance is generally a very subjective measurement, no matter how it is sliced.  The objective numbers of hard statistics is what it is... objective.  However, it is the interpretation of those statistics that determines the overall evaluation, and frankly, there's no getting around the subjective nature of that.  (For the record, my issue with PFF has always been that they portray their evaluations as somehow objective, when they are, in fact, highly subjective.  Not that I want to go down that rabbit hole again.)

My point is if you're gonna judge a QB on statistics, the most important number is the points scored by the team, not the raw stats of the QB.

Of course statistics have to be taken in context, how good the team, what the situation is, etc.

But to focus on a QB's numbers and ignore whether he lead the offense and scored points is silly. You can pick up a lot of cheap yards against prevent defenses these days between the 20s yet not put points on the board. Conversely, a smart veteran QB will sell pass on draws, throw the ball away, and do other little things that don't pad the stats but lead to TDs.

So I'll take an efficient caretaker who commands a balanced offense that generate points over a fireballer who throws beautiful passes and racks up yards but takes key sacks.

4 minutes ago, austinfan said:

My point is if you're gonna judge a QB on statistics, the most important number is the points scored by the team, not the raw stats of the QB.

Of course statistics have to be taken in context, how good the team, what the situation is, etc.

But to focus on a QB's numbers and ignore whether he lead the offense and scored points is silly. You can pick up a lot of cheap yards against prevent defenses these days between the 20s yet not put points on the board. Conversely, a smart veteran QB will sell pass on draws, throw the ball away, and do other little things that don't pad the stats but lead to TDs.

So I'll take an efficient caretaker who commands a balanced offense that generate points over a fireballer who throws beautiful passes and racks up yards but takes key sacks.

Your QB metrics are not to be taken seriously.  You are the guy who said it is to early to say Mahomes is a franchise QB.

3 minutes ago, austinfan said:

My point is if you're gonna judge a QB on statistics, the most important number is the points scored by the team, not the raw stats of the QB.

Of course statistics have to be taken in context, how good the team, what the situation is, etc.

But to focus on a QB's numbers and ignore whether he lead the offense and scored points is silly. You can pick up a lot of cheap yards against prevent defenses these days between the 20s yet not put points on the board. Conversely, a smart veteran QB will sell pass on draws, throw the ball away, and do other little things that don't pad the stats but lead to TDs.

So I'll take an efficient caretaker who commands a balanced offense that generate points over a fireballer who throws beautiful passes and racks up yards but takes key sacks.

You're talking in circles.

14 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Your QB metrics are not to be taken seriously.  You are the guy who said it is to early to say Mahomes is a franchise QB.

You also said Reid didn’t develop QBs cause they had similar completion percentages in college. Those who live in glass houses…

2 minutes ago, WentzFan11 said:

You also said Reid didn’t develop QBs cause they had similar completion percentages in college. Those who live in glass houses…

And I also said that there was no significant, sustained progression.  That is just one QB.

What about all the other QB's he drafted with the Eagles that did nothing ??

30 minutes ago, hputenis said:

@EaglePhan1986

Should have been 15 minutes later after he shidded his pants 

4 minutes ago, downundermike said:

 

 

Such a huge contradiction, and only giving him credit for scoring that he does is idiotic.

Are we giving Tony Pollard credit for 7 points, when on that drive Prescott went 6-7 for 73 yards.

Maybe read what I had posted in conversation with @Iggles_Phan about just that.  Stats in context.   But the context matters more than most of the stats, doesn’t it?  You just stated such. And yes, statistically, Pollard gets credit for the TD, not Prescott.  And those TDs, Prescott is credited with?  The receivers that actually that got the ball in the end zone, they get credit for those too, but there isn’t two scores, just one.  

I think, but I will let Afan speak for himself, that AFan’s point was that ultimately PPG is the stat that matters.  You kind of made his point, didn’t you.   I mean if we just look at Dak’s stats in this five games he had two where he is credited with no points (TDs) and one where he is credited with only one TD.   But if we look at PPG, that credits the Pollard run.  It also credits the extra point and field goals plays that the QB may have put the team in position to score or maybe it was the special teams or defense and the offense failed to move the ball.  So that’s a little flawed too.  It’s context. Which was kind of the point, IIRC from the first time that Afan argued the point. 

3 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

Maybe read what I had posted in conversation with @Iggles_Phan about just that.  Stats in context.   But the context matters more than most of the stats, doesn’t it?  You just stated such. And yes, statistically, Pollard gets credit for the TD, not Prescott.  And those TDs, Prescott is credited with?  The receivers that actually that got the ball in the end zone, they get credit for those too, but there isn’t two scores, just one.  

I think, but I will let Afan speak for himself, that AFan’s point was that ultimately PPG is the stat that matters.  You kind of made his point, didn’t you.   I mean if we just look at Dak’s stats in this five games he had two where he is credited with no points (TDs) and one where he is credited with only one TD.   But if we look at PPG, that credits the Pollard run.  It also credits the extra point and field goals plays that the QB may have put the team in position to score or maybe it was the special teams or defense and the offense failed to move the ball.  So that’s a little flawed too.  It’s context. Which was kind of the point, IIRC from the first time that Afan argued the point. 

Afan argued that PPG is the only stat that matters as it pertains to a QB, which has been continually been proven to be a shallow, incongruous thought.

7 minutes ago, downundermike said:

And I also said that there was no significant, sustained progression.  That is just one QB.

What about all the other QB's he drafted with the Eagles that did nothing ??

But you just said Mahommes is a franchise QB.   Did you watch him in college?  He absolutely has developed.  His coach, Reid.  Seems a bit of a contradiction. 

59 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

It looks to me like Pryor gets his feet too tight in pass protection, I think when he is anticipating a bull rush and pardon the expression, gets caught flat footed.  He is glacial in speed, including reaction, and that allows him to get beat. I have said that I think he relies on his size to much.  It helps but that tightness in his footwork that I think I see, at times, is magnified by how slow he is. You are way better than I am at interpreting the nuances of OL play.   

I was joking. What he has doesn't qualify as footwork. Here are two consecutive plays to make the point. His set at the snap is the same for both so I only include it once. 

In the first, he takes one step and turns. You don't turn, you slide, but no. You can see his right foot isn't planted and he's given up his outside shoulder. That's pretty bad but the second play is worse. He's turned again but this time his back is to the DE. A spin move by the OT!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6 minutes ago, BigEFly said:

But you just said Mahommes is a franchise QB.   Did you watch him in college?  He absolutely has developed.  His coach, Reid.  Seems a bit of a contradiction. 

So tell me about the progression of Kafka, Feely, Kolb.

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

So tell me about the progression of Kafka, Feely, Kolb.

You arguing that Reid didn't develop any QB's is insanity. It seems like you're just being contrarian for the sake of it. He's widely recognized as a great offensive mind, and has had excellent results with many different QBs (McNabb, Garcia, Vick, Alex Smith, Mahomes). Those guys you list, he was able to even make them look good enough to trade away for assets (well not Kafka). He even made Koy f'n Detmer look amazing for a nationally televised game. 

Your logic is illogical, and you're flat out wrong on this one. Take the L and move on. 

2 hours ago, E-A-G-L-E-S Eagles said:

I know it's preseason, but Zach Wilson looked spectacular for the Jets against the Packers. So poised.  Works through his reads.  I haven't seen him play much, but that was impressive.

Big fan of his , and so far so good

per pff 

 

Zach Wilson: 137.7 passer rating this preseason 

1st among all QB

9 minutes ago, downundermike said:

So tell me about the progression of Kafka, Feely, Kolb.

Someone in here wanted Kafka to be the next Eagles head coach before the interviewing process started.