Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: SIMPLY PATHETIC
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
D Rock
You're not going to win any games when you start AGAIN (4th game in a row) with shit quarterback play for the first qurter and a half.

Anybody see the Time of Possession stat?

We had the ball for just under 12 mins. the entire game. When your opponent has the ball for 48+ mins of 60 min contest, you're screwed.

It's time to face facts. This team stinks. Excuses be damned. Ifs and Buts be damned. The team stinks. Coaching stinks. The quarterback stinks.

That was the most pathetic display of NFC East football we've seen in years.

PATHETIC !!!


JaxEagle
Donnie did not have a good game but he was among the least of the reasons we lost. He made a few bad throws and a couple bad decisions but the #1 reason was that our defense got beat, plain and simple. Maybe close to that was the coaching. Quarterback was a factor, but not among the top factors in why we lost.
md717
Are there any other ways to compare and contrast the performance of two football teams during a contest? I'm not a big football stat guy, so I thought I'd ask. Clearly time of possession is the most important, but -- are there any others?

hunch.gif:
D Rock
I'm not big on stats either believing one can often make just about any assertion and back it up with stats from this area or that.

That said, this ALARMING difference in the TOP of THIS game, tells a great deal of the story.

A shitload of 3 and outs from the O, and a complete inability to get off the field for the D. This game was no where near as close as the score would indicate in my opinion.
WiseGuy
The Giants had the ball 39:10, so we had the ball 20:50, not under 12 minutes.

However, that was pathetic. The D was awful for the most part. I could understand being worn down at the end of the game, but when you allow 10 play drives in the 1st quarter, that is ridiculous.
md717
I was being a wiseguy.

I was suggesting that stats like, I dunno, SCORE might be important considerations as well before issuing the "we suck" pronouncement.

ph34r.gif
BirdsWinBaby
QUOTE (D Rock @ Nov 10 2008, 03:33 PM) *
You're not going to win any games when you start AGAIN (4th game in a row) with shit quarterback play for the first qurter and a half.

Anybody see the Time of Possession stat?

We had the ball for just under 12 mins. the entire game. When your opponent has the ball for 48+ mins of 60 min contest, you're screwed.

It's time to face facts. This team stinks. Excuses be damned. Ifs and Buts be damned. The team stinks. Coaching stinks. The quarterback stinks.

That was the most pathetic display of NFC East football we've seen in years.

PATHETIC !!!


damn straight!!

thats only one of the words i thought of while watching the game....but that one works the best

i guess now with a HUGE win against the Bungals and a loss from either the dallas or wash and we will be "right back in it"

Bocadelphia Eagles John
QUOTE (md717 @ Nov 10 2008, 03:39 PM) *
Are there any other ways to compare and contrast the performance of two football teams during a contest? I'm not a big football stat guy, so I thought I'd ask. Clearly time of possession is the most important, but -- are there any others?

hunch.gif:


well it never helps to start out with some 3 and outs and just punting the ball away to the other guy. That's a really lousy strategy to employ when the other guy is a professional football team. The reigning super bowl champion no less.

another really lousy strategy is to fail getting the short yardage stuff. You know, 3rd and 1 or 2 or maybe even inches. 4th and 1. That kind of thing. If you can't COMPLETE to KEEP THE BALL then you just HAND OVER time of possession to the other guy. One LEADS to the other.

And to fail on getting short yardage when you KNOW you've been failing on it all night AND all year is a damned stupid strategy because it shows you haven't learned how to tell the difference between what works and what doesn't. I don't know if there is an I.Q. stat but, there it is ....

Oh, and another very dumb strategy is to throw away your time outs on challenges you KNOW you will lose when the game is TIGHT and you KNOW you have a shot at winning in the final waining moments when those precious time outs can come in handy ... but noooooo,
let's throw some time outs away just for the heck of it .... I don't know if there's a stat which says how many times you have put the dunce cap on and go sit in the corner and let everyone poke fun at you....but, there it is.



JYDPDX
I think the offense is more to blame than the D for the obscene TOP differential.

When your defense spends the entire 15 min of the 1rst QTR on the field getting the ball ran down their throats, you just can't expect them to have enough fuel to make it the whole game. That is the offense's fault. More specifically, the completely ineffective WCO script to start the game. And some blame has to fall on Mc3ndout for "not getting settled down" for half of the game.

I don't think that any defense in the NFL could withstand 40 minutes of that brutal road-grating.

The funny thing is despite all of this we still had ample opportunity to win the game in the end and it was again the (one yard or bust achilles heel) and the (retarded clock mgmt) that killed us. Thus the offense, the coach, the qb and the oline all had a chance to redeem their pathetic first half and fell flat. I just don't have any respect for that.

I don't like our brand of football anymore.
D Rock
QUOTE (JYDPDX @ Nov 10 2008, 11:06 PM) *
I don't like our brand of football anymore.

If by "brand" you mean our preference for tricking an opponent instead of hitting them in the phuqing mouth, I'm right with you.
Reality Fan
Now I readily admit that the coaching in this games was terrible but I love the knee jerk "the QB sucked" or the "offense sucked" responses. First thing is the early play. I suggest you go back and watch the game again. In the first quarter the Eagles offense had 2 possessions. They scored on the first one starting from the 9, 2 plays and in. The D started by failing on the 2nd possession and the O followed with a 3 and out in what was their first "real" possession. Wow, shocking, a teams offense not scoring on their first possession. The Giants followed by running over our D a 2nd time. Demps fumble was not our offense, it was a bad play by a rookie who has done well otherwise but shit happens with rookies.

The offense was certainly not sharp but we were down 3 at half and took the lead on the first possession of the 2nd half. The real story of this game was a terrible D. Terrible except for a few nice plays. They were run over from the get go.

I love the comment on the O causing the D to get tired. How about the D getting tired because they could not stop the run and because they could not get off the field the O never got into a rhythm.

This was a loss pinned firmly on the D and you can still blame coaching for that. The D was embarrassing.
JaxEagle
word RF
Phits
QUOTE (JYDPDX @ Nov 10 2008, 07:06 PM) *
I think the offense is more to blame than the D for the obscene TOP differential.

When your defense spends the entire 15 min of the 1rst QTR on the field getting the ball ran down their throats, you just can't expect them to have enough fuel to make it the whole game. That is the offense's fault. More specifically, the completely ineffective WCO script to start the game. And some blame has to fall on Mc3ndout for "not getting settled down" for half of the game.

The D started the game and forced a turnover after a whopping 80 seconds on the field. We scored a TD on our first possession and then your no fault defense allowed a 10 play, 80 yard TD drive and then another 10 play 80 yard drive and then guess what?? A nice 9 play 60+ yard drive.


QUOTE
(retarded clock mgmt)

Clock management had nothing to do with this loss...a defense that allowed the opposing RB's to average 5.5 ypc is what cost the game.
JYDPDX
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Nov 10 2008, 07:36 PM) *
Now I readily admit that the coaching in this games was terrible but I love the knee jerk "the QB sucked" or the "offense sucked" responses. First thing is the early play. I suggest you go back and watch the game again. In the first quarter the Eagles offense had 2 possessions. They scored on the first one starting from the 9, 2 plays and in. The D started by failing on the 2nd possession and the O followed with a 3 and out in what was their first "real" possession. Wow, shocking, a teams offense not scoring on their first possession. The Giants followed by running over our D a 2nd time. Demps fumble was not our offense, it was a bad play by a rookie who has done well otherwise but shit happens with rookies.

The offense was certainly not sharp but we were down 3 at half and took the lead on the first possession of the 2nd half. The real story of this game was a terrible D. Terrible except for a few nice plays. They were run over from the get go.

I love the comment on the O causing the D to get tired. How about the D getting tired because they could not stop the run and because they could not get off the field the O never got into a rhythm.

This was a loss pinned firmly on the D and you can still blame coaching for that. The D was embarrassing.

I never said the D wasn't at fault for getting their asses reamed. But an offense that sputters definitely exacerbates the situation.
TGryn
The defense gets the majority of the blame for last night. Supposedly this is a group that's better at LB and DB and at least as good on DL as the D that shut down Tomlinson last year, but then they turn in a performance like that & the one against the Redskins. JJ has gradually turned the defensive roster into a Tampa-style one emphasizing speed over size, but the flipside is he has to be able to adjust when a team is running at will and his front 7 is getting pushed around. If he can't, then he needs to get bigger players, period.

I'm getting increasingly worried about Bradley. A lot of his tackles are being made 7-10 yards downfield, which is something a lot of us were critical of Trotter for. He also hasn't shown the speed to get to the corner before the RB has blown by already, again something that was a liability for Trotter. If the DEs and OLBs were able to seal off the corners it wouldn't be an issue, but they can't do that against good teams.

I'd also put a good amount of the blame for this loss on Westbrook. He got his money, now he has to earn it every week, not just every other week. A top-5 back doesn't allow himself to get shut down in a big game like the Giants did to him. More to the point, when your head coach gives you the ball twice with the game on the line, I don't care how bad the blocking is by the OL or the FB, if you're a top RB as Westbrook implied he was when he was complaining about not getting paid, you have to find a way to pick up those two yards. That extension is looking like a mistake: if the #1 weapon on offense allows himself to get stuffed with the game on the line, might be time to start looking for another #1 weapon.
BgBry44
What comes first? The chicken or the egg?

Does the D being on the field for so long keep the O from getting into a rhythm or does the O being bad cause the D to get wore down?

I say a lot of both. Last night was a complete TEAM loss. Everyone on that sideline and in the booth wearing Green had a hand in it. Coaching staff on down.

Hopefully they figure out before this weekend because I get to see my first game in 4 years...
D Rock
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 11 2008, 12:55 AM) *
a defense that allowed the opposing RB's to average 5.5 ypc is what cost the game.

To be fair, the vagiants '3 headed monster' is averaging MORE than 5.5 a carry for the season, as a group. Not ONE of those 3 bastards is averaging under 5.5 ypc.

Perhaps you just overestimated the talent level of this team and staff.

Coaching? Not good enough.

Personnel? Not good enough.

That's all we need to know.

We can beat Seattle (who can't?) but it's HIGH TIME folks here wake up and realize this squad has devolved into a middle of the pack group. And, coaching has devolved into a laughing stock.


Phits
QUOTE (BgBry44 @ Nov 11 2008, 12:06 AM) *
What comes first? The chicken or the egg?

Does the D being on the field for so long keep the O from getting into a rhythm or does the O being bad cause the D to get wore down?

I say a lot of both. Last night was a complete TEAM loss. Everyone on that sideline and in the booth wearing Green had a hand in it. Coaching staff on down.

Hopefully they figure out before this weekend because I get to see my first game in 4 years...

My problem with the "wore down" theory is that the D put themselves in that position. They allowed the Gints to run a 10 play 7 minute drive on their 2nd possession of the game. That set the blueprint for the game. Remember, the offense scored 7 on their first possession. It's obviously a team loss, but the defense gets the bulk of the blame.
Pila
QUOTE (D Rock @ Nov 10 2008, 08:33 PM) *
You're not going to win any games when you start AGAIN (4th game in a row) with shit quarterback play for the first qurter and a half.

Anybody see the Time of Possession stat?

We had the ball for just under 12 mins. the entire game. When your opponent has the ball for 48+ mins of 60 min contest, you're screwed.

It's time to face facts. This team stinks. Excuses be damned. Ifs and Buts be damned. The team stinks. Coaching stinks. The quarterback stinks.

That was the most pathetic display of NFC East football we've seen in years.

PATHETIC !!!
The disproportionate time of possession is more telling of the defenses inability to get off the field than the inability of the Eagles' offense. Probably had something to do with the fact that the gnats could get 8 yards on first down, when we knew they'd run it and couldn't do anything about stopping it. The offense scored 31 points against a top 3 defense.

I think the run on 4th down was a terrible call - I've been the sole voice here since ever defending pass-play calls over the years - we have never been a power running team. It's always seemed silly to me to hear people complain over the years over passing plays in short yardage situations. So now that Andy's calling plays the way our couch coaches have been for years, seems strange to hear how terrible the coaching is.

The QB and the coaches didn't lose this game. The Gnats offensive line won it. They were bigger and badder than our defensive line.

I said before the game that the team only needed to do two things to win the game. Control the run and protect McNabb. They protected McNabb and the offense socre enough points to win. They did not control the run. Merely, they got run over. On this occasion, key number one trumped key number two.

Having said, the Eagles go 11-5 and make the playoffs. Hopefully some knocks the gants off before we meet them again in the playoffs. Otherwise, the defense will need their wheaties.

Eyrie
QUOTE (Pila @ Nov 11 2008, 07:26 PM) *
I think the run on 4th down was a terrible call - I've been the sole voice here since ever defending pass-play calls over the years - we have never been a power running team. It's always seemed silly to me to hear people complain over the years over passing plays in short yardage situations. So now that Andy's calling plays the way our couch coaches have been for years, seems strange to hear how terrible the coaching is.

Fair point, especially given that the running game had drawn a blank all night. But that comes back to Reid's coaching. He'd made the decision during the week to go for it on 4th&1, then failed to account of the fact that the VaGiants could have let us keep trying until the final whistle without us gaining that yard.
Pila
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Nov 11 2008, 07:44 PM) *
Fair point, especially given that the running game had drawn a blank all night. But that comes back to Reid's coaching. He'd made the decision during the week to go for it on 4th&1, then failed to account of the fact that the VaGiants could have let us keep trying until the final whistle without us gaining that yard.
I agree - it was a terrible call and said so. But one bad call doesn't make him a bad coach. The gnats won the game because they were significantly better in one key matchup than the Eagles were in there's. Credit to the stinkin Gnats' OL.
BgBry44
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 11 2008, 02:20 AM) *
My problem with the "wore down" theory is that the D put themselves in that position. They allowed the Gints to run a 10 play 7 minute drive on their 2nd possession of the game. That set the blueprint for the game. Remember, the offense scored 7 on their first possession. It's obviously a team loss, but the defense gets the bulk of the blame.


While that is true...the offense also did damn near nothing to keep the D off the field when they did have the ball. That did affect things as well.
D Rock
QUOTE (Pila @ Nov 11 2008, 08:26 PM) *
The disproportionate time of possession is more telling of the defenses inability to get off the field than the inability of the Eagles' offense. Probably had something to do with the fact that the gnats could get 8 yards on first down, when we knew they'd run it and couldn't do anything about stopping it. The offense scored 31 points against a top 3 defense.

I think the run on 4th down was a terrible call - I've been the sole voice here since ever defending pass-play calls over the years - we have never been a power running team. It's always seemed silly to me to hear people complain over the years over passing plays in short yardage situations. So now that Andy's calling plays the way our couch coaches have been for years, seems strange to hear how terrible the coaching is.

The QB and the coaches didn't lose this game. The Gnats offensive line won it. They were bigger and badder than our defensive line.

I said before the game that the team only needed to do two things to win the game. Control the run and protect McNabb. They protected McNabb and the offense socre enough points to win. They did not control the run. Merely, they got run over. On this occasion, key number one trumped key number two.

Having said, the Eagles go 11-5 and make the playoffs. Hopefully some knocks the gants off before we meet them again in the playoffs. Otherwise, the defense will need their wheaties.

I've advocated "more running." Not "more running in shrt yardage situations." Likewise, the offense has some culpability in the TOP area as well. Sure, the D needs to do it's job and get of the field. But the O needs to get first downs to assist in that area as well.
Phits
QUOTE (D Rock @ Nov 11 2008, 05:13 PM) *
Sure, the D needs to do it's job and get of the field. But the O needs to get first downs to assist in that area as well.

In a typical situation you are absolutely correct, this past Sunday's game the D was beaten at the LOS consistently and they put themselves in situations of 3rd short [as Pila pointed out].
D Rock
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 11 2008, 10:34 PM) *
In a typical situation you are absolutely correct, this past Sunday's game the D was beaten at the LOS consistently and they put themselves in situations of 3rd short [as Pila pointed out].

I don't disagree with this. But the problem is bigger than this week.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2018 Invision Power Services, Inc.