Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: No way is this a playoff team w/ this coach and this QB
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Mr. Bonko
I am officially rooting for VIck to get hurt so we can see Foles.
Dreagon
Well, if Reid doesn't give the call to McCoy more than four times a half, you will likely get your wish.
Pbfan
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Sep 23 2012, 05:50 PM) *
Well, if Reid doesn't give the call to McCoy more than four times a half, you will likely get your wish.

Let's not pretend that was the cause of the mistakes
Dr. Claw
QUOTE (Mr. Bonko @ Sep 23 2012, 05:45 PM) *
I am officially rooting for VIck to get hurt so we can see Foles.


you guys are a bunch of overreacting drama queens.

this game is on Andy/Marty's playcalling early in the game as much as it was the turnovers.

when the team can't get their offense going the right way until the second half, down 24-0?

there is nuance to this sure loss.

and Kolb playing under the same conditions would have still lost, so kill that agenda unless you want to look like the kind of Eagle fan they talk about on deadspin. or a "wangnut".
xsv
QUOTE (Dr. Claw @ Sep 23 2012, 06:31 PM) *
you guys are a bunch of overreacting drama queens.

this game is on Andy/Marty's playcalling early in the game as much as it was the turnovers.

when the team can't get their offense going the right way until the second half, down 24-0?

there is nuance to this sure loss.

and Kolb playing under the same conditions would have still lost, so kill that agenda unless you want to look like the kind of Eagle fan they talk about on deadspin. or a "wangnut".


Sorry, CLAW, but this game is squarely at the feet of one Mike Vick. He's playing terrible. he's not the only one having a bad game, but this is the 3rd game in a row he's looked lost. Very poor decision maker.
xsv
QUOTE (Dr. Claw @ Sep 23 2012, 06:31 PM) *
and Kolb playing under the same conditions would have still lost, so kill that agenda unless you want to look like the kind of Eagle fan they talk about on deadspin. or a "wangnut".


And BTW, Fuck Off with that comment.
Dr. Claw
QUOTE (xsv @ Sep 23 2012, 06:43 PM) *
And BTW, Fuck Off with that comment.


LOL. Nope.

and look. THIRD AND NINE, DOWN 18.

YOU CALL A PLAYACTION PASS.

it's Michael Vick's fault! LOLZ!!!!!!!
xsv
QUOTE (Dr. Claw @ Sep 23 2012, 06:45 PM) *
it's Michael Vick's fault! LOLZ!!!!!!!


Yeah, the coaches taught Vick to be as dumb as a rock, hold the ball too long, throw turnovers and make generally make bad decisions all game.

LOLZ!!!11L!! rolleyes.gif



Dr. Claw
QUOTE (xsv @ Sep 23 2012, 06:50 PM) *
Yeah, the coaches taught Vick to be as dumb as a rock, hold the ball too long, throw turnovers and make generally make bad decisions all game.

LOLZ!!!11L!! :rolleyes:


Vick's decision making in this game was perfectly fine.
He had two bad passes, total; one went nowhere, and the other one was tipped.
He didn't force anything.
He threw it away when he didn't see anything.

The reason he held the ball so long was because the AZ DBs kept tight coverage on Eagle WRs. No one was open.

Vick didn't handle the ball in two critical carrying situations (ironically, "playing like a RB" which you guys swear he's better at doing anyway). Two fumbles, which eventually led to some AZ points. That you can blame Vick for.

Passing? Not at all.

Picking up a DB Blitz wouldn't have saved him on that second fumble. The Eagles should have kicked a field goal there anyway. So if Vick secured the ball and time expired, it'd have only been marginally less an issue.

Again, the failures of Vick to overcome the greater sin that is Andyball is only for the likes of you (who have admitted you have a hurt butt over doing what he did, despite him actually going to jail for it and not getting off "scot free") to party and cling to inaccurate perceptions of his game.

If Nick Foles or some other QB had done the exact same, would there be the same degree of crying in the beer?

Maybe. But even if it was Foles doing the same crap, it's still Andy calling the plays. It's highly unlikely there is a QB in the NFL today who could sustain drives (and other things) under a system that refuses to adjust no matter how much opposing defenses feast on their stubborness.

Throw the baby out with the bathwater if you will, but I'm not drinking the Kool-Aid.

Kolb still sucks, and blown coverages made him look better than he actually is.

Much like in the past, when high-scoring Eagles offenses obscured the fact that Andy Reid's offensive team calls some of the most inane plays in football.


randomcardsfan
QUOTE (Dr. Claw @ Sep 23 2012, 10:52 PM) *
Vick's decision making in this game was perfectly fine.
He had two bad passes, total; one went nowhere, and the other one was tipped.
He didn't force anything.
He threw it away when he didn't see anything.

The reason he held the ball so long was because the AZ DBs kept tight coverage on Eagle WRs. No one was open.

Vick didn't handle the ball in two critical carrying situations (ironically, "playing like a RB" which you guys swear he's better at doing anyway). Two fumbles, which eventually led to some AZ points. That you can blame Vick for.

Passing? Not at all.

Picking up a DB Blitz wouldn't have saved him on that second fumble. The Eagles should have kicked a field goal there anyway. So if Vick secured the ball and time expired, it'd have only been marginally less an issue.

Again, the failures of Vick to overcome the greater sin that is Andyball is only for the likes of you (who have admitted you have a hurt butt over doing what he did, despite him actually going to jail for it and not getting off "scot free") to party and cling to inaccurate perceptions of his game.

If Nick Foles or some other QB had done the exact same, would there be the same degree of crying in the beer?

Maybe. But even if it was Foles doing the same crap, it's still Andy calling the plays. It's highly unlikely there is a QB in the NFL today who could sustain drives (and other things) under a system that refuses to adjust no matter how much opposing defenses feast on their stubborness.

Throw the baby out with the bathwater if you will, but I'm not drinking the Kool-Aid.

Kolb still sucks, and blown coverages made him look better than he actually is.

Much like in the past, when high-scoring Eagles offenses obscured the fact that Andy Reid's offensive team calls some of the most inane plays in football.


As a long time Cardinals fan I can tell you this game looked very familiar and a long time cards fan cannot gloat over a victory like this. We have a long history of quarterbacks running for their lives because of a bad O line. Yeah Vick hung on a bit long giving the appearance of coverage sacks a couple times. I truly feel bad for him just like I did a couple dozen cardinal qb's in the past who got beat up week after week.

I wouldn't give up on him yet. Anybody you put behind a line like that is going to get creamed. Cards D is outstanding but I don't think that was the whole story.

Regarding Kolb. Cards fans are still not convinced. He found Fitz one time last week. Week 1 he was getting pounded until we went no-huddle and then they could not tee off on him and it turned the game around. (Eagles should try that) Our OL is still inconsistent but looked decent alot of the time today. I'm not sure I'd take Kolb over Vick. We have good receivers; once I see a couple 300 yard games maybe I will think he's a decent qb.

Good luck. Hope you can get some blocking and turn things around. You have a ton of talent and are fun to watch when you get rolling.

RCF

D Rock
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Sep 23 2012, 09:50 PM) *
Well, if Reid doesn't give the call to McCoy more than four times a half, you will likely get your wish.

He had no chance to. They had as many turn overs as first downs.
Dreagon
QUOTE (Pbfan @ Sep 23 2012, 04:59 PM) *
Let's not pretend that was the cause of the mistakes


No, seriously, McCoy only had four carries in the first half. How do you think the Cardinals defense responded to that? They pinned back their ears and went after Vick. They knew that even if McCoy got the ball and gashed them from time to time, he probably wouldn't get it again for four or five plays.
Dr. Claw
QUOTE (randomcardsfan @ Sep 24 2012, 12:44 AM) *
As a long time Cardinals fan I can tell you this game looked very familiar and a long time cards fan cannot gloat over a victory like this. We have a long history of quarterbacks running for their lives because of a bad O line. Yeah Vick hung on a bit long giving the appearance of coverage sacks a couple times. I truly feel bad for him just like I did a couple dozen cardinal qb's in the past who got beat up week after week.

I wouldn't give up on him yet. Anybody you put behind a line like that is going to get creamed. Cards D is outstanding but I don't think that was the whole story.

Regarding Kolb. Cards fans are still not convinced. He found Fitz one time last week. Week 1 he was getting pounded until we went no-huddle and then they could not tee off on him and it turned the game around. (Eagles should try that) Our OL is still inconsistent but looked decent alot of the time today. I'm not sure I'd take Kolb over Vick. We have good receivers; once I see a couple 300 yard games maybe I will think he's a decent qb.

Good luck. Hope you can get some blocking and turn things around. You have a ton of talent and are fun to watch when you get rolling.

RCF


Likewise. I felt like this was the shoe on the other foot, personally.

The AZ defense is legit. LBs are very quick and swarm the ball, and the secondary might be among the best in the NFL. They had all the Eagles WRs locked up more or less. At least on the deep ball that Andy loves so much. No surprise shots down field.
Eyrie
QUOTE (Dr. Claw @ Sep 24 2012, 04:52 AM) *
Again, the failures of Vick to overcome the greater sin that is Andyball is only for the likes of you (who have admitted you have a hurt butt over doing what he did, despite him actually going to jail for it and not getting off "scot free") to party and cling to inaccurate perceptions of his game.

Vick's execution of the playcalling is piss poor. Better QB play would at either give the playcalling a chance to work or cover for its indequacies.

QUOTE
If Nick Foles or some other QB had done the exact same, would there be the same degree of crying in the beer?

If Foles had played that poorly we'd bitch but accept he's on the rookie learning curve in week three. If he played like that all season then we'd say he isn't good enough. For any veteran (Vick or Edwards) to play that poorly and show such poor decision making is unacceptable.

Don't let the inept playcalling obscure that.
Dr. Claw
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Sep 24 2012, 05:27 AM) *
Vick's execution of the playcalling is piss poor. Better QB play would at either give the playcalling a chance to work or cover for its indequacies.


If Foles had played that poorly we'd bitch but accept he's on the rookie learning curve in week three. If he played like that all season then we'd say he isn't good enough. For any veteran (Vick or Edwards) to play that poorly and show such poor decision making is unacceptable.

Don't let the inept playcalling obscure that.


Outside of the fumbles, I'm not buying the blaming of Vick for "execution" in Week 3. That's an issue of ball security, which could easily be as laid on Damaris Johnson during the fumble. Had Vick been playing like he did in Week 1 and Week 2 where the clear issue was his execution (forcing throws, throwing absolutely dumb throws), it'd be relevant. However, I will add that when it mattered in both those two games (4th quarter), Vick's execution was where it should be, and that (along with defensive play and offensive playcalling in the 2nd half) becomes more of the reason why the game was won.

Throw a rookie in there who does the same thing and it's the same outcome, copped plea for rookie play or not.

We've seen this story before, and in the past, it's always been meathead fans who try to appear "balanced", pointing fingers at the QB, which hasn't been the constant over time, but "fancy" but unnecessary playcalling has been.

In both cases, the inept playcalling IS the bigger picture and will continue to be until the coaching staff realizes that there are 60 minutes of football game time, and killing drives with playfakes that no defense in the NFL should respect, while you have an O-Line depleted at key positions is about as bad as a QB throwing an INT or turning the ball over otherwise if not worse.

If the gameplan is good in the first place, then the individual mistakes become more worthy of review IMO. Which is why had the Eagles lost Week 2, I'd have no problem with people taking Vick apart.

However, both in Week 1 and Week 3 the overall picture is of a coaching staff who continues to have no perception of their opponent until it's too late. The turnovers made a situation that was already bad worse. The way the AZ defense was playing, the end zone was wishful thinking.

But party on. This is exactly what a certain faction of fans really have wanted.
xsv
Claw, you're delusional. Vick's performance yesterday was not 'fine'.

He played terribly. He held the ball too long. He made bad throws. He made bad decisions. He continues to turn the ball over.

Regardless of the playcalling, Vick has sucked, not just this game, but all three games. Not just this year, but last year too. Not just this year and last year, but the last 4 games of 2010 as well. And not just all that, but his entire career.

Vick blows.

We all agree with you that the play calling sucks, and I think we're all ready for a change at head coach, but you are clearly delusional if you think that Vick's play has been 'fine'. I don't think there's another person on the board that would agree with you. I don't think even RF would defend Vick after that game.
iggleslover49
Vick holds on to the ball too long. Guys are not getting open, but even when guys ARE open Vick ain't hittin em'. The offense is a timing based offense. And if Vick had any clue on how to read coverages he should be hitting his receivers coming outta their breaks. I have been a supporter of Vick, but I'm no longer sold on him being the kind of QB to sit in the pocket and deliver the ball. Foles is that type of QB. Ried has to realize that the offense has to be centered around McCoy and the depth at RB. Give vick the ball on the playaction, outside the pocket, and he'll have success. But the you've got to get that running game going in the first half, to set up passes in the second. If you gonna be pass happy, do it with a QB that is tall enough to stand in the pocket and really see the field over those tall linemen. Like Brady, Manning (both of them), or Nick Foles
Dr. Claw
QUOTE (xsv @ Sep 24 2012, 07:47 AM) *
He played terribly. He held the ball too long. He made bad throws. He made bad decisions. He continues to turn the ball over.


your bias is showing, as are all the "I never liked him" bunch, like chickens coming to roost.

Only thing you said that was true in game 3 is that he continues to turn the ball over. He had 2-3 bad throws out of 37. Most of those incompletions (and long time waiting to throw) is because NO ONE WAS OPEN. All-22 will largely exonerate him on that part.

NO QB WOULD HAVE WON WITH THAT 1ST HALF PLAYCALLING. NONE.
D Rock
QUOTE (Dr. Claw @ Sep 24 2012, 03:24 PM) *
NO QB WOULD HAVE WON WITH THAT 1ST HALF PLAYCALLING. NONE.

No gameplan or playcall is going to look good when the quarterback is locking onto his first read and coming off it waaay too late. He's holding the ball and going through his progressions at way too slow a pace.

No matter your bias or mine . . . turnovers are simply not attributable to coaching. 12 in 3 games? Ints? Fumbles? How do you attribute those to the coaching staff? Seriously. I'm looking for some reason. Help me out.
Dr. Claw
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 24 2012, 11:33 AM) *
No gameplan or playcall is going to look good when the quarterback is locking onto his first read and coming off it waaay too late. He's holding the ball and going through his progressions at way too slow a pace.

No matter your bias or mine . . . turnovers are simply not attributable to coaching. 12 in 3 games? Ints? Fumbles? How do you attribute those to the coaching staff? Seriously. I'm looking for some reason. Help me out.


You don't gameplan turnovers. But those turnovers hurt less if you can at least get something on the board early. And those 3-and-outs, unnecessary sacks caused by calling a PA pass when the run has not been established (the Eagles should just abandon PA IMO) are just as bad as turning the ball over.
D Rock
QUOTE (Dr. Claw @ Sep 24 2012, 06:52 PM) *
You don't gameplan turnovers. But those turnovers hurt less if you can at least get something on the board early. And those 3-and-outs, unnecessary sacks caused by calling a PA pass when the run has not been established (the Eagles should just abandon PA IMO) are just as bad as turning the ball over.

Uh, yeah. I get it. You don't like the play action. I'm not disagreeing with you on that. Nor am I giving coaching a pass in any way shape or form.

But...

Vick has 2 Ints and 1 fumble for each TD thrown thus far this season. (that's 6 ints and 3 fumbles to go against 3 TD passes).

Anyway you shake it out, that's dog shit production from the quarterback position. His passer rating has him firmly at #29 in the league.

There is no hiding from the fact that those numbers simply aren't good enough.

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.