6 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Does it matter why it was canceled though? 

The NFL rulebook outlines what happens in the event of a canceled game, and it states that the league would rely on winning percentage to determine playoff seeding. 

Seems cut and dry to me. 

I ask again, when was the last time a game was cancelled and not scheduled to be made up?

3 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

I ask again, when was the last time a game was cancelled and not scheduled to be made up?

I don’t know why that matters. The rule is written to address a game not being made up. Taylor is completely right to challenge it.

From what I can find, the last cancelled individual regular season game in the NFL came in 1935, long before the AFL-NFL merger, the Super Bowl era and the current playoff format.  Are the league rules really the rules, or is precedent more the order of the day, aka, there is no precedent for this?

10 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

I don’t know why that matters. The rule is written to address a game not being made up. Taylor is completely right to challenge it.

Well... 1935 seems to be the answer and a lot has changed since 1935 in the NFL.

I'd add... that game was cancelled between Philadelphia and Washington...  they were the bottom two teams in that division... combining for 4 wins on the season (12 games, back then).   So, that game cancellation had zero impact on the playoff seeding anyway.

 

Interestingly, the 1935 Lions won the West Division at 7-3-2 (Winning pct of 0.700) over the Packers who went 8-4 (0.667 winning pct.).  

https://nypost.com/2023/01/05/peyton-hillis-in-intensive-care-after-saving-kids-from-drowning/?utm_source=twitter_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site buttons&utm_campaign=site buttons&fbclid=IwAR2ZJP3-V3jPydy5G1ZKWLlO2TfygLor-zdA2K6xxNXxRKHFkLCzS0RWiz4

Not sure of the context but dude should be getting more support in the news.  Unless he just put them on a floaty and shoved them off to sea

15 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

I don’t know why that matters. The rule is written to address a game not being made up. Taylor is completely right to challenge it.

It seems I was mistaken and that there is a rule in place...

When did that particular rule come in to being?  Was it a Covid year addendum, or is it a long established rule?

20 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

The most recent news to come out on Hamlin relieves a lot of the great pall that was cast over the league by this injury.  No more intubation.  No more induced coma.  He's talking, he's connecting with friends, he's looking to be on the road to recovery... This should lighten the hearts of the Bills' players, all the players that are close friends with him, and even Higgins who's been dealing with second guessing of himself.   The entire league can breathe a massive sigh of relief with all the great news that's come out over the past 24-48 hours.   And, the league can point to this as a player safety WIN, rather than the negative that it could have been if the folks on site weren't able to do their jobs so (seemingly) flawlessly.  It almost can turn from a PR nightmare to a PR coup.  If it comes out at some point that he was predisposed to a heart condition, that makes it all the more of a PR victory.  If not, that sort of negates the PR victory to a certain extent.  But, the vibe around the league will be dramatically different on Saturday and Sunday because of his progress towards recovery (to whatever extent that will be, full to include football, if that's even a possibility or just 'full to resume regular life activities').

Sure we can look at it from a PR perspective for the League but the reality is that the investment was made in player safety.  The investment paid off in a very measurable way.  I hope they can look beyond just the PR aspect and look for other ways to create a safer environment for players.  While Hamlin could have had a predisposition for the injury, I don't think that him having or not having that condition will give the NFL less of a win.  If anything, it is information the league and the sport can use to screen other players for the risk.  

12 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Well... 1935 seems to be the answer and a lot has changed since 1935 in the NFL.

I'd add... that game was cancelled between Philadelphia and Washington...  they were the bottom two teams in that division... combining for 4 wins on the season (12 games, back then).   So, that game cancellation had zero impact on the playoff seeding anyway.

 

Interestingly, the 1935 Lions won the West Division at 7-3-2 (Winning pct of 0.700) over the Packers who went 8-4 (0.667 winning pct.).  

By the way, it wasn’t until about 1970 that the league counted a tie, as far as winning percentage is concerned, as a half win/half loss. Prior to then, they were excluded from the math. Thats why 7-3-2 would calculate to .700 rather than .667, like a rational person would calc it.

31 minutes ago, BDawk_ASamuel said:

It feels like their strategy in the beginning of games is to try to assert their will against teams and get them in a hole. That’s why we see the lack of runs on first down and the attempt at quick scoring drives. I think they go into every week with the same goal:

1. Score quickly on the first offensive drive with a majority of passes moving down the field. 
2. Hold the opposing offense to a punt or a field goal.
3. Score again with the pass on the second offensive drive and go up 14-3. 

And to their credit, that’s been the case a lot this season and I really don’t have an issue with this gameplan for the first couple drives. 

It’s when this doesn’t happen is when it becomes a problem. They stay with the same strategy despite it not working and end up going 3 and out three straight times like they did last week. And then we don’t see adjustments until after half. 

But I don’t expect their mentality in the first quarter to change. 
 

 

There is nothing wrong with ntaking long methodical clock eating drives in the 1st qtr and running the ball. When you have the Oline the birds do, and the numbers (how the defense is playing you) is daring you to run, you should run the ball.

2 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

There is nothing wrong with ntaking long methodical clock eating drives in the 1st qtr and running the ball. When you have the Oline the birds do, and the numbers (how the defense is playing you) is daring you to run, you should run the ball.

Yes.  And if we had done exactly that last week, we would be the #1 seed already.  Instead, the Saints did that to us, and physically dominated us the entire 1st quarter.

32 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Obvious sarcasm, but there is legitimate concern around the team. The last two weeks have seen an abysmal performance from the D, followed by a really bad showing from the O. With the playoffs around the corner, the Eagles are not playing their best football right now.

Of course, securing a bye, getting rest and some guys back could change a lot of that…but the concern is certainly understandable 

Just as a matter of reference, the Eagles lost three or their last four games in 1980 after starting off 11-1. They did pretty well in the postseason. Obviously I’d prefer it if the current team was firing on all cylinders right now, but I’m not going to go nuts imagining all kinds of doomsday scenarios. 

3 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

There is nothing wrong with ntaking long methodical clock eating drives in the 1st qtr and running the ball. When you have the Oline the birds do, and the numbers (how the defense is playing you) is daring you to run, you should run the ball.

especially with minshew as QB

1 minute ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

Just as a matter of reference, the Eagles lost three or their last four games in 1980 after starting off 11-1. They did pretty well in the postseason. Obviously I’d prefer it if the current team was firing on all cylinders right now, but I’m not going to go nuts imagining all kinds of doomsday scenarios. 

Me either, I think we’ll have a decent run this post season health willing. Just saying I get why some are a bit concerned

3 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

There is nothing wrong with ntaking long methodical clock eating drives in the 1st qtr and running the ball.

Actually there is. When you’re the better team you want more possessions per game because that gives you a greater opportunity to demonstrate your superiority. So you want to score quickly as many times as you can. Long time consuming drives help the weaker team.

4 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

Actually there is. When you’re the better team you want more possessions per game because that gives you a greater opportunity to demonstrate your superiority. So you want to score quickly as many times as you can. Long time consuming drives help the weaker team.

Disagree.  The more possessions you give another team, the more opportunities there is for a blown assignment, a player falling down and leaving someone wide open, a bad penalty.

Physically dominate a team and score TD's, and give them less chances to do anything about it.

11 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

Actually there is. When you’re the better team you want more possessions per game because that gives you a greater opportunity to demonstrate your superiority. So you want to score quickly as many times as you can. Long time consuming drives help the weaker team.

The saints and the commanders both beat us in similar ways. Long 1st quarter drives, scoring points and then forcing us to give the ball back.

 

15 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

Actually there is. When you’re the better team you want more possessions per game because that gives you a greater opportunity to demonstrate your superiority. So you want to score quickly as many times as you can. Long time consuming drives help the weaker team.

Yes...your take reminds me of the "Niners Way" from the 80's...if the Niners won the coin toss, they won the game..it was that simple. They would get the ball and then score off their scripted plays. Sometimes something funny would happen like the sideline radio sets "being unable to work", hence the opposing team would have to remove their communication. If the opposing team could not respond right away, the rout was on. The Niners would have the opposing team tanking their game plans while still in the first half. 

In contrast, I do like the Eagles using a drawn out offense and limiting the number of possessions. It requires a highly efficient offense, especially on redzone and third down plays. In two of the three losses, the opposing teams flipped the Eagles script. Limiting possessions by sustaining long drives and being successful on third downs. In both games, the Eagles fought terrible field position all game.

 

56 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Obvious sarcasm, but there is legitimate concern around the team. The last two weeks have seen an abysmal performance from the D, followed by a really bad showing from the O. With the playoffs around the corner, the Eagles are not playing their best football right now.

Of course, securing a bye, getting rest and some guys back could change a lot of that…but the concern is certainly understandable 

The concerns for sure, but on the O-side if they would’ve committed to the run they could’ve beat NO, so IMO that part of the game is on siri, the D outside of a great passrush has not looked good at all, maybe coaching too

1 hour ago, ManuManu said:

 

He's not wrong!  It's a crazy story.  Will Hamlin play in the NFL again?  That's the next step.

OK, insane scenario.  Buffalo rolls through the playoffs to earn their first superbowl appearance in ~30 years. 

Hamlin sits out the playoffs but says he can return for the superbowl.  Hamlin returns for the superbowl to play ... our Eagles.  It would literally be Philly vs. the world. 

Injuries are the primary concern for the team, not coaching.  The Niners are currently the media's darlings -- was Shanahan an idiot because they were losing games early in the season to Chicago, Denver, and Atlanta in the first 6 weeks?  It was injuries.

Get the starting QB back into the lineup, along with Gardner-Johnson and reassess how the team looks.  If Hurts can't go this Sunday, it's fair to say we've not been told the entire truth on the extent of his injury.

1 minute ago, EricAllenPick6 said:

It would literally be Philly vs. the world. 

🎶  "no one likes us, we don't care" 🎶

4 minutes ago, EricAllenPick6 said:

OK, insane scenario.  Buffalo rolls through the playoffs to earn their first superbowl appearance in ~30 years. 

I wouldn't want any part of meeting Buffalo in the Super Bowl given the current circumstances.  It's very difficult to oppose someone motivated by a singular purpose -- see Buster Douglas: