42 minutes ago, Thrive said:

Yes we know Gannon is garbage. At this point, I’m convinced Sirianni gave up play calling duties last year to have more time to hold Gannon’s hands. There have been hints.

gannon is not the 1 making mistakes on the field , bad safety play against dallas

4 hours ago, D-Shiznit said:

NFCE WR comparisons:

Safe to say we have the best of the bunch in AJ. Smitty is on the rise, he's already arguably better than McLaurin, and hopeful that he overtakes the rest as the best WO in the div in short order.

It is a pleasant surprise to see the Eagles using Smith on better routes the past two weeks.

On a side note, the Eagles and Cowboys totaled 74 points Saturday, when was the last Eagles game with that total?

23 minutes ago, RLC said:

It's almost like Jonathan Gannon is bad at this.

Me thinks Gannon isn't as bad as we think but he certainly isn't the guy on the staff who should be in discussions for HC openings last year and moving forward.  

5 minutes ago, vaeagle2 said:

gannon is not the 1 making mistakes on the field , bad safety play against dallas

Also 20 of their points came off the 4 offensive turnovers that kept putting them in short fields. 

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

 

Reversion to mean. Just need the upcycle in the playoffs

6 minutes ago, vaeagle2 said:

gannon is not the 1 making mistakes on the field , bad safety play against dallas

Also 20 of their points came off the 4 offensive turnovers that kept putting them in short fields. 

27 minutes ago, pisceschica said:

If you have good virus protection you can stream it. 

That is what I do each week in California.  There are some picture drawbacks, but those are minimal.

 

21 minutes ago, HazletonEagle said:

Wow.  Lots of stupidity in here right now bashing Gannon. 

When you don't make any adjustments and allow the opposing QB to complete damn near all his passes you are going to get some bashing.  Yes, it wasn't all his fault but he certainly didn't do anything to cover up his deficiencies in personnel.

7 minutes ago, wtfcares said:

Also 20 of their points came off the 4 offensive turnovers that kept putting them in short fields. 

This argument is absurd to me given the ease at which the Cowboys were moving the ball.

As it pertains to the defense, the turnovers are a red herring. The Cowboys were more than likely going to score on those drives anyway with how putrid our scheme was. Those turnovers merely stopped our offense from scoring itself

2 minutes ago, Cliftoma said:

When you don't make any adjustments and allow the opposing QB to complete damn near all his passes you are going to get some bashing.  Yes, it wasn't all his fault but he certainly didn't do anything to cover up his deficiencies in personnel.

So you are implying that if five of us from this board were playing secondary for Gannon, he should be able to cover up our collective ineptitude?

4 minutes ago, GroundAttack said:

 

Ugh.

2 minutes ago, Thrive said:

Ugh.

I’m sure if it were up to him he’d be playing this week but no need to rush him back at this point. 

41 minutes ago, vaeagle2 said:

gannon is not the 1 making mistakes on the field , bad safety play against dallas

Some of it has to fall on Gannon too. His defenses looked good when 3/4 of our starting secondary playing at an All Pro level. Then he loses CGJ and all of a sudden we can't stop anything in the passing game and we never adjust which lands squarely on him. The only reason this hasn't come up sooner is because we were playing putrid passing offenses since CGJ went down and the offense has been on fire.

6 minutes ago, Thrive said:

This argument is absurd to me given the ease at which the Cowboys were moving the ball.

As it pertains to the defense, the turnovers are a red herring. The Cowboys were more than likely going to score on those drives anyway with how putrid our scheme was. Those turnovers merely stopped our offense from scoring itself

Which would have led to more points for us and, because we would have possessed the ball longer, fewer points for the Cowboys.

The point is to win the game, not manage the opponent's completion percentage.

Brutal injury. We can get the #1 seed without him, but the O is clearly much worse without him.

Just now, Connecticut Eagle said:

Which would have led to more points for us and, because we would have possessed the ball longer, fewer points for the Cowboys.

The point is to win the game, not manage the opponent's completion percentage.

You’re right - we would have won the game 50-40, which would have absolved Gannon of criticism. Utterly absurd argumentation. He and his scheme were factually terrible, irrespective of the turnovers and whether we won or lost.

Now getting the 1 seed is imperative 

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

 

Not surprising. They’ve had a turnover in 5 of their last 7 games. I brought this up after the game they’ve had 2 or more turnovers in 4 of those 7. They’ve had 3 or more turnovers in 3 of the 7. Since the Washington game, they’ve had 8 fumbles lost. That’s over 1 fumble lost per game. At some point it was gonna catch up to them and on Saturday it did. 

 

9 minutes ago, Connecticut Eagle said:

So you are implying that if five of us from this board were playing secondary for Gannon, he should be able to cover up our collective ineptitude?

Hahaha maybe not that extreme but I would think he could figure out a way to not leave Josiah f'n Scott 1 on 1 with Lamb all damn game to get beat like a drum.

4 minutes ago, Thrive said:

You’re right - we would have won the game 50-40, which would have absolved Gannon of criticism. Utterly absurd argumentation. He and his scheme were factually terrible, irrespective of the turnovers and whether we won or lost.

He isn't as good as people give him credit for. 

The Eagles need to start getting ready for life without Lane Johnson.  His body is breaking down.  He’ll play in the post season, but you know it’s going to be musical chairs with Driscoll constantly spelling him.

Everyone wants to draft an edge rusher round 1, but it’s probably going to have to be OL/DB.

7 minutes ago, Thrive said:

You’re right - we would have won the game 50-40, which would have absolved Gannon of criticism. Utterly absurd argumentation. He and his scheme were factually terrible, irrespective of the turnovers and whether we won or lost.

19 minutes ago, GroundAttack said:

 

 

Awful