Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: that feeling when....
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
make_it_rain
You realize it's Friday AND the Eagles season opener is on Sunday

Cheers









HOUSEoPAIN
jumpclap.gif

That's the first and hopefully last time I associate the Eagles season opener with the fat kid from 'Hook.'
koolaidluke
I don't think I've ever wanted a saturday to end so badly.

The most frustrating thing is that this is essentially a glorified pre season game. The Browns have no chance against us. We could play our backups and we'd still blow them out.
koolaidluke
my favorite part of Hook was when by imagining the food he could see it. That would be fucking awesome.
make_it_rain
Yeah, that food looked amazing during that scene as well too.

Hook == very under-rated flick.

Bangarang!
Rick
QUOTE (koolaidluke @ Sep 7 2012, 01:03 PM) *
I don't think I've ever wanted a saturday to end so badly.

The most frustrating thing is that this is essentially a glorified pre season game. The Browns have no chance against us. We could play our backups and we'd still blow them out.

Kinda like when we played Oakland a couple of years ago........
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Rick @ Sep 7 2012, 05:22 PM) *
Kinda like when we played Oakland a couple of years ago........


Ah, the 2009 Andy Reid special, quite possibly his worst game regular season game as head coach. The Raiders had 3rd & 8, as they were running down the clock, and His Walrusness calls timeout with 2:02 to play. Tom Cable checks to make sure he heard that correctly, then, naturally, calls a passing play, as it would be pointless to run the ball again down to the 2 minute warning - Jeremiah Trotter (2009 Trotter mind you, not 2002 Trotter) is assigned to Gary Russell, a fucking running back, who catches a short pass and burns Trotter, gaining 13 yards. End of game. Outcoached by Tom Cable.

P.S. We scored 9 points that game - interestingly enough, Westbrook had 6 carries for 50 yards - over 8 yards per carry. Rumor has it that someone noticed this by the 4th quarter, and gave Reid a nudge - unfortunately.....

*sigh*
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (make_it_rain @ Sep 7 2012, 04:51 PM) *
Hook == very under-rated flick.


One of the few movies where I don't find Robin Williams to be annoying as hell, saw it when I was a kid in the theater.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Sep 7 2012, 04:50 PM) *
Ah, the 2009 Andy Reid special, quite possibly his worst game regular season game as head coach. The Raiders had 3rd & 8, as they were running down the clock, and His Walrusness calls timeout with 2:02 to play. Tom Cable checks to make sure he heard that correctly, then, naturally, calls a passing play, as it would be pointless to run the ball again down to the 2 minute warning - Jeremiah Trotter (2009 Trotter mind you, not 2002 Trotter) is assigned to Gary Russell, a fucking running back, who catches a short pass and burns Trotter, gaining 13 yards. End of game. Outcoached by Tom Cable.

P.S. We scored 9 points that game - interestingly enough, Westbrook had 6 carries for 50 yards - over 8 yards per carry. Rumor has it that someone noticed this by the 4th quarter, and gave Reid a nudge - unfortunately.....

*sigh*


Remember that time the Eagles beat the eventual SB champion Giants with Vince Young at QB. What a terrible coach.
md717
I think we had a board tailgate for that game. Not sure tho.
Rick
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Sep 7 2012, 05:50 PM) *
Ah, the 2009 Andy Reid special, quite possibly his worst game regular season game as head coach. The Raiders had 3rd & 8, as they were running down the clock, and His Walrusness calls timeout with 2:02 to play. Tom Cable checks to make sure he heard that correctly, then, naturally, calls a passing play, as it would be pointless to run the ball again down to the 2 minute warning - Jeremiah Trotter (2009 Trotter mind you, not 2002 Trotter) is assigned to Gary Russell, a fucking running back, who catches a short pass and burns Trotter, gaining 13 yards. End of game. Outcoached by Tom Cable.

P.S. We scored 9 points that game - interestingly enough, Westbrook had 6 carries for 50 yards - over 8 yards per carry. Rumor has it that someone noticed this by the 4th quarter, and gave Reid a nudge - unfortunately.....

*sigh*

Unfortunately, I remember it all too well....

Problem is, it should have NEVER come down to that situation with two minutes to play. Oakland shouldn't have been in the game.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 7 2012, 07:02 PM) *
Remember that time the Eagles beat the eventual SB champion Giants with Vince Young at QB. What a terrible coach.


Yes, it was great to see the 'Dream Team' improve to 4-6 by splitting our yearly 2 game rivalry with the G-Men.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Sep 8 2012, 09:39 AM) *
Yes, it was great to see the 'Dream Team' improve to 4-6 by splitting our yearly 2 game rivalry with the G-Men.

It's just when you cherry pick a bad coaching performance by a guy with a 126-81 record, you look like an asshole. Especially when Reid has been very good about winning games we should win, historically.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 8 2012, 12:24 PM) *
It's just when you cherry pick a bad coaching performance by a guy with a 126-81 record, you look like an asshole. Especially when Reid has been very good about winning games we should win, historically.

The point being, Reid is good to give up at least 1 game per season to a team that we "should" beat.

Instead of name calling, how about trying to see the perspective of those you are so quick to ridicule?
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 8 2012, 11:45 AM) *
The point being, Reid is good to give up at least 1 game per season to a team that we "should" beat.

Instead of name calling, how about trying to see the perspective of those you are so quick to ridicule?

No. The point being that after 200 games as a head coach, you can pick and choose some bad efforts, but the overall record speaks volumes about his ability. I can pick out countless games where Reid's coaching led us to victory when his players didn't show up for quarters at a time.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE
It's just when you cherry pick a bad coaching performance by a guy with a 126-81 record, you look like an asshole.


Every blind Reid loyalist's go-to argument is the career record, how I love tearing this one apart (see below). First of all, me and a few others here were having a friendly, tongue-in-cheek conversation about a painful loss we all remember - until the 'asshole' showed up and started menstruating. 'Cherry-picking' would be harping on something that's happened once or twice in a decade - he has a historical, almost purposeful track record of continuous shitty clock management and not running the ball enough - this has cost many games, including the '09 AR Special against Oakland.

QUOTE
Especially when Reid has been very good about winning games we should win, historically.


Very true. Which is why we can always count on an entertaining, competitive team - that never wins anything. He has a sub-.500 record against winning teams in his career, and something like a 25-45 career regular season record against NFC teams that qualified for the playoffs - 2-15 against AFC playoff teams. That's 36% and 12% respectively. Just in case you forgot, we have to beat good teams at least twice (with a bye) or three times in a row in order to go to the Super Bowl - against the best AFC team. So, in other words, if we get a first-round bye, that means we have a 1.55% chance of winning it all based on his track record. If we don't get a bye, that becomes a 0.55% chance. If we didn't have a gift-wrapped road to the Super Bowl in '04 against the hapless Vikings and overrated Falcons, in arguably the worst NFC in a generation (Falcons were 11-5, Packers were 10-6, Seahawks were 9-7, nobody else had more than 8 wins), we'd be facing an 0-5 NFCCG record. As it stands, 1-4 isn't an accident.

QUOTE
I can pick out countless games where Reid's coaching led us to victory when his players didn't show up for quarters at a time.


Ok I'm game. Wanna go tit-for-tat? You describe a game where his coaching led us to victory despite the poor efforts of his players, and I'll describe a game where our normally talented teams have won despite his boneheaded coaching moves. We just took care of Oakland - your turn. happy.gif
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Sep 8 2012, 02:19 PM) *
Every blind Reid loyalist's go-to argument is the career record, how I love tearing this one apart (see below). First of all, me and a few others here were having a friendly, tongue-in-cheek conversation about a painful loss we all remember - until the 'asshole' showed up and started menstruating. 'Cherry-picking' would be harping on something that's happened once or twice in a decade - he has a historical, almost purposeful track record of continuous shitty clock management and not running the ball enough - this has cost many games, including the '09 AR Special against Oakland.

Ah yes, Reid the awful coach with his terrible clock management and not running the ball enough. Because the SB champion Giants weren't the worst running team in football last year...

Here's the thing, Reid was arguably the first guy in the league to have the foresight to realize the extent to which this would become a passing league and inability to run a "primary back" into the ground.

Unfortunately, the Reid-haters seem to think that everything which happens on Sundays is a product of the big guy, and won't put blame where it most often belongs -- the players.

Yes, there have been times where running the ball more often may have resulted in a different outcome. There are also times when our QB couldn't complete anything other than a screen pass, thus causing insane amounts of 3rd and longs throughout the game.

QUOTE
Very true. Which is why we can always count on an entertaining, competitive team - that never wins anything.

We always have a competitive team because of Reid, not despite him. We haven't won "anything" because we haven't had a top QB in the league since 2004. Take a look at the guys winning SB's. They all fit a similar mold and they're not easy to acquire.

QUOTE
He has a sub-.500 record against winning teams in his career, and something like a 25-45 career regular season record against NFC teams that qualified for the playoffs - 2-15 against AFC playoff teams. That's 36% and 12% respectively. Just in case you forgot, we have to beat good teams at least twice (with a bye) or three times in a row in order to go to the Super Bowl - against the best AFC team. So, in other words, if we get a first-round bye, that means we have a 1.55% chance of winning it all based on his track record. If we don't get a bye, that becomes a 0.55% chance. If we didn't have a gift-wrapped road to the Super Bowl in '04 against the hapless Vikings and overrated Falcons, in arguably the worst NFC in a generation (Falcons were 11-5, Packers were 10-6, Seahawks were 9-7, nobody else had more than 8 wins), we'd be facing an 0-5 NFCCG record. As it stands, 1-4 isn't an accident.

I'm going to give you a piece of information that may just boggle your mind. The reason those teams made the playoffs is because they were, at the very least, decent teams. Maybe our record against those teams is so poor because they were good teams. Largely better than the one we were fielding? When you don't have the best team on the field, it's tough to win games. I'm not saying that is always what the circumstances were, but it was quite often the case.

Assuming your numbers are correct, that would mean our record against non-playoff teams is 99-21. That would mean he has an 82.5% winning percentage against all non-playoff teams. If you were a sensible person, you could acknowledge that several of those losses came in Reid's first season and there are naturally games against division rivals that are going to inevitably be bumps in the road along the way. So, you get down to a very small, cherry-picked number of games where we were clearly the better team and lost. Now, you'd really have to be a schmuck to blame those losses entirely on the head coach. So I'll just assume that's not what you're doing.

Additionally, I'll have to assume you're not dense enough to use our NFCCG record as an indication that Reid is a bad coach. I suspect you didn't watch the game, against the all-time great defense, where our starting QB was playing on a broken leg, or the following year when we suffered a cheap shot injury to our QB that completely changed the outcome (after going into the game without our best offensive weapon), or the game where we were playing a stacked, defending SB winner on the road in a game no one gave us a chance. Or that other one where our starting QB simply didn't show up for the entire first half. Certainly you're not blaming Reid for getting thoroughly out-coached in all of those?

QUOTE
Ok I'm game. Wanna go tit-for-tat? You describe a game where his coaching led us to victory despite the poor efforts of his players, and I'll describe a game where our normally talented teams have won despite his boneheaded coaching moves. We just took care of Oakland - your turn. happy.gif


While this game sounds fun, I'd much rather look at the big picture. This is a guy that has rebuilt our franchise 3 different times during his tenure, while keeping us relatively competitive (i.e. not missing the playoffs in back-to-back season) for 13 years. This includes turning a 3-13 team into a playoff contender almost immediately.

If you really believe that Bill Belicheck would be revered without having stumbled upon his 6th-round, pot o' gold QB, than you're beyond naive.

It's a QB league and unless you get a great one, you have virtually no chance of winning a championship. When you're facing a team that has one and you don't, the odds are stacked heavily against you.

I admire the fact that Reid understands this. It's why he made the unpopular decision to draft McNabb. It's why he made the unpopular decision to draft Kolb. It's why he made the unpopular decision to sign Vick. It's why he made the unpopular decision to draft Foles.

I truly believed McNabb would win, at minimum, one SB. You couldn't have been a bigger fan. Unfortunate circumstances (a broken leg) diminished what, in my opinion, was our best team/chance since Andy has been in Philly. I also don't believe McNabb was ever the same QB/threat after that injury. He bulked up and tried to become a passing only QB, which wasn't a great decision, given the fact that pure passing was the weakest part of his game.

Kolb didn't turn out to be the guy they thought he would be, but they made a brilliant, yet controversial decision to bring Vick into the mix. While I'm not convinced Vick can win us a championship, I do believe he gives us an excellent chance to be competitive and make the playoffs. Once you get there, who knows what can happen...maybe you can take a cheap shot on Aaron Rodgers, fuck up his ribs, and make him a non-factor.

Is Andy a perfect coach? Absolutely not. His game management often leaves me with question marks. I believe we haven't had consistency at the QB position in quite some time, which likely drives some of those questionable decisions.

He also is one of the best on Monday - Saturday, he clearly understands modern football -- and has questionably been ahead of the game, and the players absolutely love him. Now, I don't think you're an asshole, but you look like an asshole when you disregard those great qualities wink.gif
HOUSEoPAIN
Results are results my friend. I've never in my life said he was a bad coach - as I've explicitly stated, he's a good coach, which is why we'll always have a competitive team under him - just not a championship team. I personally want to win a Super Bowl, therefore his record against good teams shows us why he will never win one.

Nobody 'stumbles' into 5 Super Bowl appearances and 3 Super Bowl wins. I hate Belichick as much as the next man, but he's a damn good coach, and he's provided those degenerates in Boston with 3 rings in the last decade.

Your argument seems to be that the supposedly greatest QB coach in the history of mankind hasn't had a great QB since 2004 - do you not see the logical fallacy in that statement? If McNabb was as bad as Reid apologists say he is, certainly this great coach would've realized that betwenn 2005-2010?

C'mon, just give me one game where his great coaching saved the day - just one. Description and details please.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 8 2012, 05:43 PM) *
I also don't believe McNabb was ever the same QB/threat after that injury. He bulked up and tried to become a passing only QB, which wasn't a great decision, given the fact that pure passing was the weakest part of his game.

If an "inaccurate" QB decides to become a passing QB, one would hope the powers that be put him in check -or at least arm him with weapons that would disguise his 'weakness'. This is where Andy failed the franchise. When we needed a strong receiving corp, at the height of our competitiveness, he failed us time and again. while the league was still a rushing league, Reid failed to adapt and insisted on playing up to our own weakness by passing the ball...over and over and over and over....

I fault McNabb for not having the talent to develop into a precision passer, but it's Reid's fault for not 'putting the team in a better position to win'.

He's was a very good coach, but that time has passed.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Sep 8 2012, 05:16 PM) *
Results are results my friend. I've never in my life said he was a bad coach - as I've explicitly stated, he's a good coach, which is why we'll always have a competitive team under him - just not a championship team. I personally want to win a Super Bowl, therefore his record against good teams shows us why he will never win one.

This is where your argument becomes stupid. We were 3 points from winning a SB and we've put our self in position many times.

QUOTE
Nobody 'stumbles' into 5 Super Bowl appearances and 3 Super Bowl wins. I hate Belichick as much as the next man, but he's a damn good coach, and he's provided those degenerates in Boston with 3 rings in the last decade.

Hmmm - Bill Belichick's record before Tom Brady: 41-55 with one winning record. In the one successful season in Cleveland, do you want to know what their record was against teams with winning records? 2-4. They played 6 games all season against winning football teams.

I think Belichick has proven to be a good coach. He's also proven that he hasn't won a championship, despite having Tom Brady, since he got caught video taping the other teams. That's no longer looking coincidental.

If he never lucked into Tom Brady, I don't think he'd be working in New England right now.

QUOTE
Your argument seems to be that the supposedly greatest QB coach in the history of mankind hasn't had a great QB since 2004 - do you not see the logical fallacy in that statement?

When did I ever call him this? I think he's good at developing QB's, but I also think you can't coach a guy into being a great QB. I, unlike you apparently, believe that players are largely responsible for their own greatness and their success on the field.

QUOTE
If McNabb was as bad as Reid apologists say he is, certainly this great coach would've realized that betwenn 2005-2010?

Well, 2005 shouldn't really count, should it? Unless you're being unreasonable (*disclaimer: you are) -- I mean McNabb had led us to the SB the previous year and then went down with injury in the first game of the season and never really came back. Then in 2006, he tore his ACL and missed most of the season. In the following offseason, we shockingly and controversially drafted Kevin Kolb. So actually, Reid realized it about as quickly as he could have. Much quicker than everyone that slammed the decision.

Ya bit.

QUOTE
C'mon, just give me one game where his great coaching saved the day - just one. Description and details please.

This is seriously the dumbest concept in the world. Going against NFL coaches, most of whom are extremely good at their job, any game in which the teams are relatively evenly matched and we won, would likely be a product of Reid's abilities.

With that said, just last season against Dallas in week 8. Two relatively evenly matched teams, we were in an obvious must-win, given our early season struggles, and we absolutely manhandled the Cowboys on both sides of the ball, embarrassingly so on offense. McCoy ran for 185 yards and Vick threw for 279 against a defense that looked like they weren't familiar with the game we were playing.

We've had far, far more games under Reid where we have been the dominating force, than when our team has been embarrassed.

But inevitably, you're going to tell me that our players were responsible for that domination. Whereas when we lose, it's because Reid sucks. I get it.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 8 2012, 05:36 PM) *
If an "inaccurate" QB decides to become a passing QB, one would hope the powers that be put him in check -or at least arm him with weapons that would disguise his 'weakness'. This is where Andy failed the franchise. When we needed a strong receiving corp, at the height of our competitiveness, he failed us time and again. while the league was still a rushing league, Reid failed to adapt and insisted on playing up to our own weakness by passing the ball...over and over and over and over....

No, early in McNabb's career, Reid wisely relied heavily on McNabb's total skillset. What you don't remember is that when Reid inherited the Eagles, we were absolutely terrible. 3-13 before he arrived. It's not as though he had a team with tons of weapons was filling in pieces. He was building a team, specifically on offense, from scratch.

It made sense to drop McNabb back 65% of the time early in his career, because he was our best weapon on offense. It was actually brilliant. Ask those Tampa defenses in 2000 and 2001 what it was like to deal with that.

After the 2002 injury, McNabb's running ability never came back, so that threat was gone. We went the following season with no offensive weapons, although Westbrook started to emerge. He was unfortunately injured at the end of the regular season and it really hurt our chances.

So we went one season with McNabb's diminished running skills and no receivers. Then we got T.O. Obviously that relationship spoiled much quicker than anyone anticipated, so we were shit out of luck after the 2005 season. Now, I behoove you to take a look at the available WR prospects that came out of the 2006 draft. Santonio Holmes was the only first-round talent and he had major, major question marks.

The following season, we drafted Desean, who was the absolute perfect wide receiver for McNabb's primary remaining asset -- his ability to throw a deep ball.

QUOTE
I fault McNabb for not having the talent to develop into a precision passer, but it's Reid's fault for not 'putting the team in a better position to win'.

I don't fault him for that. You can't teach accuracy. I fault McNabb for getting fat and losing the natural talents he did have.

QUOTE
He's was a very good coach, but that time has passed.

If we don't win the division this year, I would be fine with moving on (although I think it would be a mistake.) His track record indicates that he deserves this season.

HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE
McCoy ran for 185 yards and Vick threw for 279


yes. Before the game, Reid told McCoy 'i want you to run for 200 yards, got it?' And Vick, 'I want you to throw for 300 yards.' It's like the Simpsons episode where Burns tells Strawberry to keep hitting home runs - great strategy coach!
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Sep 8 2012, 06:58 PM) *
yes. Before the game, Reid told McCoy 'i want you to run for 200 yards, got it?' And Vick, 'I want you to throw for 300 yards.' It's like the Simpsons episode where Burns tells Strawberry to keep hitting home runs - great strategy coach!

Seriously, dude? Is that really your retort? I even said, "But inevitably, you're going to tell me that our players were responsible for that domination. Whereas when we lose, it's because Reid sucks. I get it."

How do you think those guys were able to achieve that dominating success? You think Vick was just drawing plays on his chest while they were in the huddle?

I realize I crushed that discussion, but I was expecting a bit more out of you.
mcnabbulous
So back to the original point of this thread. Super stoked about tomorrow and the season kicking off. Don't know that we are a SB team, but I think we can compete. Looking forward to what team shows up.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 8 2012, 12:45 PM) *
The point being, Reid is good to give up at least 1 game per season to a team that we "should" beat.

Instead of name calling, how about trying to see the perspective of those you are so quick to ridicule?


that can be said about virtually any coach in the NFL......
Reality Fan
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Sep 8 2012, 03:19 PM) *
Very true. Which is why we can always count on an entertaining, competitive team - that never wins anything. He has a sub-.500 record against winning teams in his career, and something like a 25-45 career regular season record against NFC teams that qualified for the playoffs - 2-15 against AFC playoff teams. That's 36% and 12% respectively. Just in case you forgot, we have to beat good teams at least twice (with a bye) or three times in a row in order to go to the Super Bowl - against the best AFC team. So, in other words, if we get a first-round bye, that means we have a 1.55% chance of winning it all based on his track record. If we don't get a bye, that becomes a 0.55% chance. If we didn't have a gift-wrapped road to the Super Bowl in '04 against the hapless Vikings and overrated Falcons, in arguably the worst NFC in a generation (Falcons were 11-5, Packers were 10-6, Seahawks were 9-7, nobody else had more than 8 wins), we'd be facing an 0-5 NFCCG record. As it stands, 1-4 isn't an accident.


ok....I have to say, I get really tired of every "I hate Andy Reid" ranter who immediately uses any resistance to their point as blind allegiance to Reid. I read your post and the first thing that jumped out at me was your stats which seemed ridiculous on their face in regards to his regular season record against teams that made the playoffs from the NFC. He has not had great luck against AFC teams but the NFC stuff had me scratching my head so I figured what the hell, the Phils are rained out, why not. Well.....simply put....bullshit.......and here is why......you should have known it was ridiculous from the start because of 70 games......6 teams make the playoffs and the Eagles have made the playoffs repeatedly so that reduces the number of teams to 5 that they could play and in the early going they won a lot of regular season games but they didn't play all the playoff teams each regular season so it could never be close to 70 games. Reid's actual record against NFC playoff teams during the regular season is 23-25 with 11 of them coming in 2 seasons in particular 05 and 07. Further of note is 2 losses were end of season losses where they sat their regulars because they had already clinched. Feel free to check for yourself but those are the simple facts and pro football reference is a wonderful tool to avoid such crazy mistakes. He is 10-9 in the playoffs so that won't help the argument either.

I know you looked at the Bleacher report site for data but you fucked that up also because they use the number you use against nfc teams as their number against all playoff teams. That being said their number appears to be slightly wrong also, not a shock....they are guys like you and me masquerading as writers.

The funny part about the whole argument is that the teams in the NFL play similar schedules so if he was such a bad coach blessed with incredible luck of scheduling there would be a hell of a lot of coaches doing the same thing because the other teams in the division play similar schedules. The other argument is time management and I did another research project not long ago that thoroughly debunked that also. Has he had some bad moments? sure but they were notoriously good at getting points to either end the first half or the game. I am trying to remember the game where they scored over 10 points in the last 3 minutes to win the game.

I am more than happy to debate with facts.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE
ok....I have to say, I get really tired of every "I hate Andy Reid" ranter who immediately uses any resistance to their point as blind allegiance to Reid


No you misunderstand me, I would LOVE to hear some resistance to my point other than using his regular season record. Constantly pointing out that we've won double digit games multiple times against shitty teams, if it isn't blind loyalty, what is it?

QUOTE
you should have known it was ridiculous from the start because of 70 games


It seemed high, but I didn't feel like doing a half hour of research. After your response, I decided to do it thoroughly - it's 23-32 by the way. That's 0.418 - slightly less pathetic than when I used the Bleacherreport numbers for all playoff teams.

QUOTE
Further of note is 2 losses were end of season losses where they sat their regulars because they had already clinched.


As were a couple of our wins, when we were out of it, playing a 2nd team. Interestingly enough, in his first year when we went 5-11 he was actually 3-3 against playoff teams. One of them was against the Rams' 2nd squad at the end though. I forget the other one.

QUOTE
He is 10-9 in the playoffs so that won't help the argument either.


That IS my argument. We (used to) beat inferior teams in the first round, or after the bye, then get owned by the elite teams in the divisional round or in the championship. Some of those games we were supposed to lose, but more of them we were supposed to win.

QUOTE
The other argument is time management and I did another research project not long ago that thoroughly debunked that also


And this goes back to the blind Reid loyalist thing I mentioned earlier. I did a research project too, it's called watching every game since 1999. How can anyone say his time management is anything other than abysmal with a straight face? Whatever, just show me the project you did, I need a good laugh.

QUOTE
I am trying to remember the game where they scored over 10 points in the last 3 minutes to win the game.


Yeah, I remember a game like that too, I forget which one - see my point? I'm glad to see we came back late once, but there's quite a few games off the top of my head I can recall him pissing away late because he doesn't know how the clock works, and he won't run the damn ball to keep the clock running.

HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 8 2012, 09:15 PM) *
So back to the original point of this thread. Super stoked about tomorrow and the season kicking off. Don't know that we are a SB team, but I think we can compete. Looking forward to what team shows up.


cheers.gif
Jerome Brown Experience
The first major Andy Reid dustup of the season.......I am super pumped for the next 24 weeks.
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 © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.