1 minute ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

One other point, they were using the majority of the play book during the joint practices.  Unless the Pats decided to sell the coach's tape, they had the opportunity to work on most everything they expect to run against the Falcons.  

They are upfront in saying that their preseason scheme is ultra-vanilla.  Your game situation argument falls short if you don't have all your tools available.

I don't put anything past the Pats.

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Yes, but the practice them in groups, they don't start at the 20 and run a full drive.  Also, you can not sack the QB, so they don't go from 1st and 10 in the red zone to 2nd and 20 outside the redzone.  They run that play and don't get sacked, and then run the same play again.  They never run the next play as a result of the previous play.

No.  That's not what was happening.  It was a simulated game situation.  If the Eagles didn't get a first down, then the period ended and it was the Jets turn.

3 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

One other point, they were using the majority of the play book during the joint practices.  Unless the Pats decided to sell the coach's tape, they had the opportunity to work on most everything they expect to run against the Falcons.  

They are upfront in saying that their preseason scheme is ultra-vanilla.  Your game situation argument falls short if you don't have all your tools available.

That is also flawed.  Let's practice one thing, and then go play a game and do something else.  How are you evaluating the guys playing if they are not doing what they practice.

3 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

No.  That's not what was happening.  It was a simulated game situation.  If the Eagles didn't get a first down, then the period ended and it was the Jets turn.

Are they allowed to sack the QB ??

2 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Football is the most 'team' of all the 'team sports'.  All 11 need to be on the same page as each other, and when a new scheme is introduced, that's a new variable.  Preseason games are dress rehearsals... no pausing, no resetting, just learning to deal with whatever comes your way and reacting to it.  And unlike practice, you don't know what the other side is going to do in response to you.  In theater, they have practices, and then they have dress rehearsal... and even the most experienced actors participate, because there are important pieces to be learned from the dress rehearsal and 'making it work' no matter what.    NOW, there's almost no chance of injury in a play production, versus a football game.  So that's why the amount of reps are normally limited in an NFL dress rehearsal, but these 11+ players on the first team offense and defense haven't really played together and haven't been in this new system.  There's a learning curve, even for the most veteran of players.  They all need some reps together, as a unit.  And the Eagles are basically just punting away these opportunities in the name of 'health'.  Its just them allowing themselves to be controlled by fear.

I understand, and to some extent agree with your position that joint practices and some game reps would be ideal. But, I'm interested to see how the emphasis on joint practices works out. It may totally fail, and if I had to bet, I'd probably wager we'll see more injuries due to it. But I like that we are trying something different, especially in a year where we aren't going to be competing. Some in here are acting like the joint practices are nothing more than line up, 1st and 10, keep playing till you get it right, which I don't think is the case at all. 

Just now, downundermike said:

That is also flawed.  Let's practice one thing, and then go play a game and do something else.  How are you evaluating the guys playing if they are not doing what they practice.

Ugh!

Let's say they have 20 plays in the playbook.  They practice ALL of them during the week.  They have coaches film to evaluate these practices.

Then the PRESEASON game comes along on and they just show maybe the 8 simplest plays in the playbook.  It is also an opportunity to evaluate the backups.

 

You don't need to diminish the value of the joint practices to bolster your argument.  It already has merit.

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Are they allowed to sack the QB ??

Why do the QBs wear red shirts at all? Why not let them get hit from day 1? 

1 minute ago, downundermike said:

Are they allowed to sack the QB ??

YOU WANT THE QB SACKED DURING PRACTICE?

38 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

To be fair...I'm not in Connecticut anymore.

But hey, you spend a few decades building a brand. 

Really didn't want to Carmen Sandiego my handle like afan did.

To be fair, Afan stopped at Austin and didn’t change it when he left there.  

Just now, Connecticut Eagle said:

YOU WANT THE QB SACKED DURING PRACTICE?

IT MAKES THEM tOuGhZZZZZZZZZ!

Just now, BigEFly said:

To be fair, Afan stopped at Austin and didn’t change it when he left there.  

From what I heard and from people I know....he didn't leave Austin, he was "removed" 

1 minute ago, BigEFly said:

To be fair, Afan stopped at Austin and didn’t change it when he left there.  

The fact that you and I share this trivial knowledge, makes my point. 

 

8 minutes ago, Hawkeye said:

But preseason games aren't "real" games; there's no game-planning, no schemes being worked out, etc.   Sometimes they matter - just ask Jameis Winston who won the starting job in New Orleans based on Monday night's preseason game - but not to the Eagles.  

They aren't "real" games like a regular season game, but they are an actual game that has live tackling to the ground, game flow, unpredictable situations and other things practice doesn't. It's a bridge to take you from practice to regular season. There is a reason all the veterans that don't play anymore say you need it, as well as veterans who do play like Graham, Jenkins, Brady etc saying you need it. 

4 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Why do the QBs wear red shirts at all? Why not let them get hit from day 1? 

I didn't say hit the QB, I said sack the QB.  They do not blow the play dead and credit it as a sack, the defense holds up and the QB is allowed to complete the play, and then he is credited for it in the stats you see from practice.

As I already said, they talked about in 97.5 this morning.  Hurts was credited as completing 17 of 19 passes, or whatever it was, but they said he would have been sacked 5 times if the defense did not hold up.  They do not take the result of what would have been a sack when running the next play, they take the positive result of the play.

Andy Reid, who a bunch of you consider the GOAT at QB development, played Patrick Mahomes an entire half last week.

/discussion.

Anyone think there may be validity in the more you try to keep a player from injury possibly the more he thinks about it and gets injured?

3 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Andy Reid, who a bunch of you consider the GOAT at QB development, played Patrick Mahomes an entire half last week.

/discussion.

He's also extremely anti joint practices

Even if the starters played a full quarter of preseason game 1 and into the second quarter of preseason game 2 -- how many drives is that as a unit?  3 drives per quarter?  We're making a big argument about 8-10 drives total, at the most.

If the coaching staff feels they've gotten 5-6 drives per joint practice out of the starters, then IMO that should be an adequate substitute.  It all depends what the intensity level of those joint practices were, and I don't think anyone here can adequately evaluate that.  A big point is being made about lack of tackling; that concerns me for the defense; it doesn't concern me at all for the offense.  These guys have all played many years of football through the highest levels of college -- they all remember what being tackled feels like.

4 minutes ago, downundermike said:

I didn't say hit the QB, I said sack the QB.  They do not blow the play dead and credit it as a sack, the defense holds up and the QB is allowed to complete the play, and then he is credited for it in the stats you see from practice.

As I already said, they talked about in 97.5 this morning.  Hurts was credited as completing 17 of 19 passes, or whatever it was, but they said he would have been sacked 5 times if the defense did not hold up.  They do not take the result of what would have been a sack when running the next play, they take the positive result of the play.

How do you know on those supposed sacks, Hurts wouldn't have broken the tackle and made a play? You don't know jack ish, and are far too concerned about d-linemen's sack totals in practice. How do you know they didn't run another play as 2nd down, 16 to go due to a sack? Do you have any sources to say this is how they ran things? 

3 minutes ago, greend said:

Anyone think there may be validity in the more you try to keep a player from injury possibly the more he thinks about it and gets injured?

100%

1 hour ago, downundermike said:

These are the games you and I have different. 

Starting QB will not have taken a game rep in 31 days, and the full offensive starting group has not taken one rep together in a game.  Falcons will jump out early, only hope is they remember they are the Falcons and collapse in the second half.  Plus, your favorite player Kyle Pitts will start getting fitted for his gold jacket 

Coming off the Chiefs game, and looking ahead to playing Tampa Bay on a short week on Thursday night, the Panthers will take advantage.

I'm attending that game so it's definitely an Eagles win.  

1 minute ago, greend said:

Anyone think there may be validity in the more you try to keep a player from injury possibly the more he thinks about it and gets injured?

Yep, it's very possible. 

2 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

How do you know on those supposed sacks, Hurts wouldn't have broken the tackle and made a play? You don't know jack ish, and are far too concerned about d-linemen's sack totals in practice. How do you know they didn't run another play as 2nd down, 16 to go due to a sack? Do you have any sources to say this is how they ran things? 

I see the tweets live from practice.  "Jalen Hurts with a nice completion to Watkins, would have been a sack in a game, but the defense had to hold up"

There is a bunch of tweets like this all through the blog.

50 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

To be fair...I'm not in Connecticut anymore.

But hey, you spend a few decades building a brand. 

Really didn't want to Carmen Sandiego my handle like afan did.

ContEagle? I could see where some bloggers may tease you for that handle.  

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

I see the tweets live from practice.  "Jalen Hurts with a nice completion to Watkins, would have been a sack in a game, but the defense had to hold up"

There is a bunch of tweets like this all through the blog.

So nowhere does it say, "On the next play, they lined up as though he had been sacked and played from there". You don't really know how they handled it. 

2 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

So nowhere does it say, "On the next play, they lined up as though he had been sacked and played from there". So you don't really know how they handled it. 

When they say he was 17 of 19 passing in the practice, but would have been sacked 5 times, it is pretty clear.  If they were doing that, he would be 12 of 19 passing.