Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: If they lose next week (and they should)
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
xsv
We will be 3-3 and I think Andy will officially be on watch.

Time to start lining up the coaching candidates. Personally, I think it's a desirable job. We've got great talent here already. Just need a few pro level O Lineman, a safety or two, a cornerback, and a veteran qb to back up Foles. Also have an owner who spends money to bring in big FAs, and has a hands off approach, and a GM that seems to be good at hitting on some good picks.

HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (xsv @ Oct 9 2012, 11:57 AM) *
We will be 3-3 and I think Andy will officially be on watch.

Time to start lining up the coaching candidates. Personally, I think it's a desirable job. We've got great talent here already. Just need a few pro level O Lineman, a safety or two, a cornerback, and a veteran qb to back up Foles. Also have an owner who spends money to bring in big FAs, and has a hands off approach, and a GM that seems to be good at hitting on some good picks.


I can't help but assume that Lurie is going to look for any excuse to resign him. He's not 'on watch' for a while still.

Would this not be a very attractive gig for a proven HC who's an announcer or retired? I think with the right scheme and approach (not to mention clock mgmt.) we are legit Super Bowl contenders already. That's why it's so goddam frustrating watching us piss away winnable games under this guy.
xsv
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Oct 9 2012, 12:21 PM) *
I can't help but assume that Lurie is going to look for any excuse to resign him. He's not 'on watch' for a while still.

Would this not be a very attractive gig for a proven HC who's an announcer or retired? I think with the right scheme and approach (not to mention clock mgmt.) we are legit Super Bowl contenders already. That's why it's so goddam frustrating watching us piss away winnable games under this guy.


I think Lurie is running out of patience. His "8-8 is not good enough" comments were very telling. If we actually finish 8-8, which looks very likely at the moment, then I think Reids a goner.

I'd be OK with giving Gruden 2 years to try to do it with the core mostly intact. If it doesn't work out, then bring in a new guy to rebuild the whole thing from scratch.

But I don't really think we are 'legit Super Bowl contenders already'. I think we're a QB, 3 good O Lineman, 2 safeties, a WR and a CB from being legit contenders.
make_it_rain
QUOTE (xsv @ Oct 9 2012, 01:28 PM) *
I think Lurie is running out of patience. His "8-8 is not good enough" comments were very telling. If we actually finish 8-8, which looks very likely at the moment, then I think Reids a goner.

I'd be OK with giving Gruden 2 years to try to do it with the core mostly intact. If it doesn't work out, then bring in a new guy to rebuild the whole thing from scratch.

But I don't really think we are 'legit Super Bowl contenders already'. I think we're a QB, 3 good O Lineman, 2 safeties, a WR and a CB from being legit contenders.


There is zero doubt in my mind Reid is gone if they end up 8-8. Reid could very well be gone after a 10-6 finish with a loss in the Wild Card round. I think anything less than an NFC Championship appearance will mean the end of Reid, I could see him resigning if they get to the divisional round (or earn a bye) and just simply fall flat against our divisional opponent.

To me at least, I think it's pretty cut and dry the scenarios in which Reid stays/leaves. Less clear are the scenarios where Vick is/is no longer the starter, and whether or not that could potentially happen mid season. I think he's likely out of a job if he continues his rechid play for the rest of this season, but I'm not convinced they will bench him mid season (whether or not you think that is the right thing to do).

One other scenario is if we get to something like 5-5 or 5-6 and Reid does what he does with McNabb in 2009 and benches Vick for like a second half or something like that, more to send a message then indicate a personnel change. McNabb came back from that and tore shit up. What will it take for Reid to sit him down for a quarter, or maybe a half, just to try to send a message to him?
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (make_it_rain @ Oct 9 2012, 02:25 PM) *
To me at least, I think it's pretty cut and dry the scenarios in which Reid stays/leaves.


Meh. 8-8 I agree, he's gone.

What about 9-7, a wild card appearance, and we eek out a playoff win before getting annihilated in the 2nd round? Or we go 11-5, earn a bye, and lose in the 2nd round by a hair?

Personally, I've seen enough roads end in the NFCCG to last a lifetime - it's Super Bowl or bust if I'm Lurie, but I'm not Lurie. I agree an NFCCG appearance and he gets resigned.
make_it_rain
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Oct 9 2012, 02:34 PM) *
What about 9-7, a wild card appearance, and we eek out a playoff win before getting annihilated in the 2nd round? Or we go 11-5, earn a bye, and lose in the 2nd round by a hair?


Yikes. I failed to really consider how much they would win or lose by in playoff games when I was thinking that out. Good call. I think both scenarios are pretty messy and could go either way.

I think he would still be gone if they come up short of an NFCCG (regardless of how much they won/lost a playoff game by), but it would certainly make the debate very interesting.

Now that I think about it more, there are a few other scenarios that could stir the pot:

  • What if Vick continues his abysmal play, Reid benches him when the season is basically out of reach, and Foles comes in and rips it up to lead us back to 9-7(but still out of the playoffs)? Reid could play the card that he knows how to develop young QBs and Lurie decides to give him another year or two to coach Foles.
  • What if Reid benches Vick, but Foles comes in and does decent (better than Vick, but not stellar), but the birds squak into the playoffs and get killed?



It's actually kind of a fun game when you consider all of the variables.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE
  • What if Vick continues his abysmal play, Reid benches him when the season is basically out of reach, and Foles comes in and rips it up to lead us back to 9-7(but still out of the playoffs)? Reid could play the card that he knows how to develop young QBs and Lurie decides to give him another year or two to coach Foles.
  • What if Reid benches Vick, but Foles comes in and does decent (better than Vick, but not stellar), but the birds squak into the playoffs and get killed?


Ugh - I've thought about this already, especially with a majority of the venom currently being spewed at Vick (even though Vick magically seems to be a decent QB when we run a balanced attack). He'll play this card if Foles sees any action at all and looks better than Bubby Brister. I maintain in my warped conspiracy-theorist mind that part of Reid's motivation to make Castillo DC was to both set him up as the fall guy for a season's failures, and to make sure no experienced DC came in that threatened his position as HC. Right now, the D isn't the problem, so he'll damn well try to milk the 'QB whisperer' card.


QUOTE
It's actually kind of a fun game when you consider all of the variables.


I'd say scary more than fun, but yeah there's a million different things that can happen. I guess the bottom line is Lurie's looking for an excuse to keep him IMO.
JeeQ
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Oct 9 2012, 12:07 PM) *
I'd say scary more than fun, but yeah there's a million different things that can happen. I guess the bottom line is Lurie's looking for an excuse to keep him IMO.


I'm 99.9% sure if we start approaching 8-8 levels, we're going to bring in Foles and let Andy use building up a rookie as his excuse. McNabb went 11-5 and Reid threw him under the bus and traded him to save his job. Remember, even though we haven't won 11 games in a season since McNabb, he was without a doubt the problem.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Oct 9 2012, 04:22 PM) *
McNabb went 11-5 and Reid threw him under the bus and traded him to save his job. Remember, even though we haven't won 11 games in a season since McNabb, he was without a doubt the problem.


We haven't won a playoff game since he left, much less advance, unfortunately our amazing genius HC just can't get any luck in landing a good QB!

If you wanted to create a psychological profile on the fellatio-performing-Reid-apologist, and just how demented they are, you would have to look at what happened in '09 - we go 11-5, McNabb has one of his best statistical seasons, and every know-nothing moron in Philly calls for his head.

We point out obvious problems with our bonehead coach, and obvious statistics that can't be disputed (we are 10-1 when McCoy has 20 carries, 21-21 when he has less) and it doesn't matter to them - all that matters is some childish will to remain in a bubble where they're right.

Let's recap the end of that 2009 season: we're 11-4, and looking to beat Dallas and clinch a first-round bye. Now remember, at this point we already had loads of data on how successful we always were when running the ball.....so, Reid calls 8, yes EIGHT RUNS - 5 to Westbrook, 1 to Weaver, 1 to McCoy, 1 to DJax. He calls 38 passes, there are 36 attempts (a 'balance' of 83/17), and we get annihilated 24-0. Now we get to travel to Dallas as the 6th seed.

So, next week I'm feeling ok, after all Reid has a history of getting his head out of his ass after a humiliating defeat - he learned his lesson, right? McNabb is fired up, comes out of the tunnel playing the air guitar (another move the fellatio crowd frothed at, how dare he not walk erect and stare out at the tunnel). Ok, game on.....Reid calls 11, yes ELEVEN runs, including one useless wildcat carry by Vick - 5 to McCoy, 5 to Weaver. He calls 41 passes, including 2 by Vick, there are 39 attempts (a 'balance' of 73/27, at least it was an improvement), and we get annihilated by slightly less, 34-14.

Months later, Keith Brooking would offer up this gem during an interview:

"The way we dominated them, obviously McNabb didnít play his best, but they were very predictable," said Brooking of the Eagles' offense. "We knew exactly what was coming on every play. A lot of that didnít have to do with Donovan McNabb."
Whoa! I'd say that's pretty obvious shot at Andy Reid and Marty Mornhinweg. And something tells me that quote will get passed around the Eagles' coaching offices. But wait, there's more:
"Sometimes the old thing about you donít know what youíve got until itís gone Ö I promise you," said Brooking. "Now, that [Kevin] Kolb kid may end up winning three or four Super Bowls for that city. I canít predict that. But Donovan McNabb, his body of work and what heís done for that franchise, there's not a lot of guys who come into this league who have played as long as he has and can say theyíve accomplished what heís accomplished."

This is Keith Brooking, taking an obvious shot at The Walrus and his sidekick, while defending McNabb. Not some psycho troll, not some tard hippie from Hollywood - an actual 5-time Pro-Bowl, 2-time All-Pro LB talking about how retarded Andy's playcalling is, and how we'll miss McNabb.

Also, McNabb was traded on Easter Sunday - I could make up plenty of Judas jokes about Reid, who 3 days earlier said #5 was still the starter, but I've said enough for now. Fuck Andy's fat ass.
Dr. Claw
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Oct 9 2012, 04:22 PM) *
I'm 99.9% sure if we start approaching 8-8 levels, we're going to bring in Foles and let Andy use building up a rookie as his excuse. McNabb went 11-5 and Reid threw him under the bus and traded him to save his job. Remember, even though we haven't won 11 games in a season since McNabb, he was without a doubt the problem.


Pretty much... if the Eagles look like they're out of the playoff picture this year, expect to see Foles and the team go into mutiny

edit: holy shit @ HOUSEofPAIN's reply...

It was a good thing Favre came in there and totally obliterated them right after that game. I was so disgusted with Andy after it, I wanted him outta there more than McNabb, but would have taken a package deal.
BirdsWinBaby
1) we will not be 8-8. we will almost certainly win this division (given the state of the other 3 teams: injuries, insufficient talent, etc...)...not sure how the playoffs will go but we will be there

2)Reid does not get a pass for rookie growing pains if he benches Vick for Foles. Vick is here because Reid brought him here and made him his franchise QB. if that turns out to be a bad decision its a scenario of his own making...its why AR cant bench Vick
Reality Fan
ahhhh....why do people think many Eagles' fans are idiots?....just read a majority of this thread.....maybe it is just a love of being miserable.......I don't know........they lost to a team picked to be one of the best in the AFC that was coming off a bye and playing at home and but for one horrible TO they lose and again the sky is falling.......some folks here must be a real hoot to party with......wow
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 9 2012, 08:10 PM) *
ahhhh....why do people think many Eagles' fans are idiots?


Because half of us still support this guy?
Reality Fan
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Oct 9 2012, 08:30 PM) *
Because half of us still support this guy?


supporting a team and hoping/expecting it to do well is not blind allegiance..........losing to a team that is coming off a bye, playing on the road is not a horrible loss........the Steelers were 12-4 last year and went 7-1 at home.....it was a shame to lose that game, no question and the fumble on the goal line was brutal....but it was hardly a loss to go bonkers over
xsv
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 9 2012, 10:12 PM) *
supporting a team and hoping/expecting it to do well is not blind allegiance..........losing to a team that is coming off a bye, playing on the road is not a horrible loss........the Steelers were 12-4 last year and went 7-1 at home.....it was a shame to lose that game, no question and the fumble on the goal line was brutal....but it was hardly a loss to go bonkers over


Playing like absolute shit for 4 out of 5 games is a reason to question the fucking team. Vick BLOWS. He turns the ball over more than any starting QB in NFL fucking history. The coach BLOWS. Worst play calling in the NFL. The rest of the team is playing half decent.


xsv
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 9 2012, 10:12 PM) *
supporting a team and hoping/expecting it to do well is not blind allegiance..........losing to a team that is coming off a bye, playing on the road is not a horrible loss........the Steelers were 12-4 last year and went 7-1 at home.....it was a shame to lose that game, no question and the fumble on the goal line was brutal....but it was hardly a loss to go bonkers over


Playing like absolute shit for 4 out of 5 games is a reason to question the fucking team. Vick BLOWS. He turns the ball over more than any starting QB in NFL fucking history. The coach BLOWS. Worst play calling in the NFL. The rest of the team is playing half decent, xcept the oline, which alows, but injury is the main problem there. Depth on he oline BLOWS.

Sorry, but this team isn't even close to how good I hoped they would be this year.


Reality Fan
QUOTE (xsv @ Oct 10 2012, 12:24 AM) *
Playing like absolute shit for 4 out of 5 games is a reason to question the fucking team. Vick BLOWS. He turns the ball over more than any starting QB in NFL fucking history. The coach BLOWS. Worst play calling in the NFL. The rest of the team is playing half decent, xcept the oline, which alows, but injury is the main problem there. Depth on he oline BLOWS.

Sorry, but this team isn't even close to how good I hoped they would be this year.


so good you had to repeat it?...lol

and actually he has not turned it over more times than any QB in history....but besides that foolishness.....I love the coach blows stuff.....that explains his record.....god I love stupidity......and how do you plan for 2 of your top O linemen to be injured? do you have 2 pro bowlers on the bench? I see lots of teams with that kind of depth....

and as far as this team? Reid's teams are notoriously slow starters......and strong finishers.......could they have been better? yes but 3-2 at this point? one bad loss one somewhat expected loss.....most would have thought that Baltimore was a loss but they won that one.....looking at it realistically neither loss was a surprise but the play in the Az loss made that ugly.....and while the fumbles hurt in the first half he still played a fairly good game and they led in the 4th........I guess you thought they would be undefeated at this point.......coach sucks, QB sucks.....someone is a miserable son of a gun.....have fun
koolaidluke
You think we'll lose to the Lions? The Lions are terrible.
koolaidluke
supposedly the FO forced Reid to bench McNabb.

Although that decision ended up working, it remains the weirdest coaching call I ever have ever seen. Reid's explanation made sense, but it was still hard to believe. What would have happened if Kolb had won that game? There would have been a brutal QB controversy. Perhaps Reid was so desperate at that point he just was willing to risk a QB controversy to get McNabb's head straight.

Reid is definitely gone if they miss the playoffs, I don't think anybody doubts that. The question is how many playoff games do they have to win for Reid to keep his job?

If they get steamrolled like they did by Dallas in 2010, I think he's still gone. Even a close loss I'm not so sure about.

If he wins a playoff game I think he stays.


As for Vick. One more double fumble game and he's gone. I bet fumbles will not be a major issue with him going forward. <=5 fumbles for the rest of the season. ~6 picks. We can live with that.



The offensive line is a terrible and apparently unsolveable problem. Watkins, Reynolds and Bell are simply bad players. Three awful players is too much for an OL to overcome. Dunlap should eventually return and solve the problem of Bell, but there is no solution at guard and center. I expect the blocking to improve, but only enough to go from horrid to just bad. Maybe that will be enough.




HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 10 2012, 12:44 AM) *
Reid's teams are notoriously slow starters......and strong finishers


I hear this all the time and I don't buy it. The 2 years we've finished 8-8 we started out 2-4 in the first 6 games, then after the season was almost lost we would go on a 'magical' 3 or 4 game run against mostly shitty teams to finish at .500 - since 2005, we've started out 4-2 4 times, and 3-3 once, and of course the mentioned 2-4 starts. Prior to 2005 I won't bother looking up, considering our records from those years I assume we were good beginning and end.

I figured we would be 3-2 at this point, but beating the Cards and losing to Balt. I'm not bitching about where we're at, just that we're pointed towards another inevitably futile season, where games like the one against Pitt should have been won, and the same old bonehead playcalling and clock management mistakes sink us, as they always do when we have to play elite teams (playoffs).
Reality Fan
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Oct 10 2012, 01:33 PM) *
I hear this all the time and I don't buy it. The 2 years we've finished 8-8 we started out 2-4 in the first 6 games, then after the season was almost lost we would go on a 'magical' 3 or 4 game run against mostly shitty teams to finish at .500 - since 2005, we've started out 4-2 4 times, and 3-3 once, and of course the mentioned 2-4 starts. Prior to 2005 I won't bother looking up, considering our records from those years I assume we were good beginning and end.

I figured we would be 3-2 at this point, but beating the Cards and losing to Balt. I'm not bitching about where we're at, just that we're pointed towards another inevitably futile season, where games like the one against Pitt should have been won, and the same old bonehead playcalling and clock management mistakes sink us, as they always do when we have to play elite teams (playoffs).



now this stuff I love...besides the fact that his record in November and December speaks for itself even if you want to ignore the numbers the assinine argument that the last 4 games of last year were "fools gold" is funny seeing as 2 of those games, the Cowboys and the Jets were playing for playoff spots so even if the game meant nothing for Eagles fans they sure meant something for those 2 teams

and do you mean like 2003 where we started 2-3? or 02 where we started 3-2?....or 09 where we started....3-2 and went 11-5......
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 10 2012, 11:19 PM) *
and do you mean like 2003 where we started 2-3? or 02 where we started 3-2?....or 09 where we started....3-2 and went 11-5......


Ok, so we went 2-3 once, and 2-4 twice. And you being the Reid apologist you are is using this as your argument that we're 'notoriously slow starters?' Pathetic.

3-2 isn't a 'slow start' - it translates to 10 wins. It just isn't a 'great' start. At least stick to illogical arguments based on Reid's career win percentage, instead of denying basic mathematics.

And yes, it was truly magical beating 4 shitty teams last year to end the season at .500 - you got me there.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Oct 11 2012, 09:11 AM) *
Ok, so we went 2-3 once, and 2-4 twice. And you being the Reid apologist you are is using this as your argument that we're 'notoriously slow starters?' Pathetic.

3-2 isn't a 'slow start' - it translates to 10 wins. It just isn't a 'great' start. At least stick to illogical arguments based on Reid's career win percentage, instead of denying basic mathematics.


He is a slow starter when compared to his overall record. ie: compared to late in the season.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 11 2012, 12:52 PM) *
He is a slow starter when compared to his overall record. ie: compared to late in the season.


Prior to this season, he had 126 regular season wins - divided by 13 seasons, that's 9.69 wins per year.

Starting 3-2, that translates over 16 games to 9.60 wins per year.

Honestly, will you just give it up?
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Oct 11 2012, 01:00 PM) *
Prior to this season, he had 126 regular season wins - divided by 13 seasons, that's 9.69 wins per year.

Starting 3-2, that translates over 16 games to 9.60 wins per year.

Honestly, will you just give it up?


I'm not cherry picking one season as an example. In Reid's career, his win percentage is much better late in the season than early. What point are you even trying to make? Are you denying this truth?
xsv
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 11 2012, 01:43 PM) *
I'm not cherry picking one season as an example. In Reid's career, his win percentage is much better late in the season than early. What point are you even trying to make? Are you denying this truth?


Perhaps, but he's got a terrible winning percentage on the last game of each year. So, by your logic, it's very likely that we'll never win the SB under Reid.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (xsv @ Oct 11 2012, 02:28 PM) *
Perhaps, but he's got a terrible winning percentage on the last game of each year. So, by your logic, it's very likely that we'll never win the SB under Reid.


What's my logic? I'm simply pointing out that he wins more at the end of the regular season than beginning. I'm adding no narrative beyond that. It is undeniable.
xsv
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 11 2012, 02:31 PM) *
What's my logic? I'm simply pointing out that he wins more at the end of the regular season than beginning. I'm adding no narrative beyond that. It is undeniable.


Sorry, I thought you might be implying that since we normally do well in the latter parts of the regular season, that we should expect the same this year.

Glad to hear that you are not offering any such thing.


HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 11 2012, 01:43 PM) *
I'm not cherry picking one season as an example. In Reid's career, his win percentage is much better late in the season than early. What point are you even trying to make? Are you denying this truth?


I'm saying we have, according to averages of his career as HC, started out the same as we are now - not 'slow' not great. We win 3 out of 5 games on average, or 10 out of 16. So saying we're notoriously slow starters as an excuse to say we're going to go on another crazy run at the end is naive at best.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Oct 11 2012, 03:36 PM) *
I'm saying we have, according to averages of his career as HC, started out the same as we are now - not 'slow' not great. We win 3 out of 5 games on average, or 10 out of 16. So saying we're notoriously slow starters as an excuse to say we're going to go on another crazy run at the end is naive at best.


Statistically we are more likely to win about 3 out of every 4 starting in November, so I would expect about the same this season.
xsv
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 11 2012, 05:25 PM) *
Statistically we are more likely to win about 3 out of every 4 starting in November, so I would expect about the same this season.

And statistically we are more likely to lose before we make the SB so I would expect about the same this season.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (xsv @ Oct 11 2012, 05:56 PM) *
And statistically we are more likely to lose before we make the SB so I would expect about the same this season.


Statistically every team is. I expect the same as well.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 11 2012, 05:25 PM) *
Statistically we are more likely to win about 3 out of every 4 starting in November, so I would expect about the same this season.


Well no, again this is basic math - we average 3 out of 5 wins over the season in his career - we are 3-2. So statistically, we will average 3 out of 5 for the rest of the season, which would match our statistical season total in his career.

Quite simple really.....
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Oct 12 2012, 11:56 AM) *
Well no, again this is basic math - we average 3 out of 5 wins over the season in his career - we are 3-2. So statistically, we will average 3 out of 5 for the rest of the season, which would match our statistical season total in his career.

Quite simple really.....


No, this is basic statistics. We win a bit less than 3 of 4 games in November and December. What happens early in the season dictates how successful our total showing is going to be. It would be like disregarding the fact that we are statically more likely to win a game after a bye, if it doesn't fit into your 3 of 5 logic. The odds/statistics have proven to change during the course of the season.
Eyrie
I'd like to have a coach who can prepare his team to win consistently from week one and not one that needs to spend September and October working out what he's doing so that he can have a better winning percentage in November and December to compensate for not having a clue at the start.

And if Reid's November/December winning percentage is such a positive, why can't he replicate it in January?

Just for once I'd like to be a fan of the SuperBowl winners.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Oct 12 2012, 01:42 PM) *
And if Reid's November/December winning percentage is such a positive, why can't he replicate it in January?
I think it's pretty obvious that come playoff time, you're playing a higher caliber of opponents. Reid's playoff record is pretty solid in the whole scheme of things.
QUOTE
Just for once I'd like to be a fan of the SuperBowl winners.

We all would, but this idea that our coach is the lone reason that hasn't occurred is embarrassing. It takes talent (which we've rarely had the most of) and luck (which we've often had none of.)

The fact that we are consistently in the conversation is something we should all be pretty happy about. It boggles my mind how easily people forget the Kotite/Rhodes years. Or the Ryan years, when we had the greatest defense in NFL history and still couldn't win playoff games.
Phits
We have had luck, but, our HC knows the counter move to good luck.

I don't think anybody forgets the lean years, but that shouldn't be th reason we are afraid to move on. After 14 years our HC has proven an inability to win the big one. Success i the regular season does not translate to post season success.

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 12 2012, 02:27 PM) *
I think it's pretty obvious that come playoff time, you're playing a higher caliber of opponents. Reid's playoff record is pretty solid in the whole scheme of things.
We all would, but this idea that our coach is the lone reason that hasn't occurred is embarrassing. It takes talent (which we've rarely had the most of) and luck (which we've often had none of.)

The fact that we are consistently in the conversation is something we should all be pretty happy about. It boggles my mind how easily people forget the Kotite/Rhodes years. Or the Ryan years, when we had the greatest defense in NFL history and still couldn't win playoff games.

Eyrie
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 12 2012, 07:27 PM) *
I think it's pretty obvious that come playoff time, you're playing a higher caliber of opponents. Reid's playoff record is pretty solid in the whole scheme of things.

But by being in the playoffs we are meant to be a higher calibre team ourselves.

QUOTE
We all would, but this idea that our coach is the lone reason that hasn't occurred is embarrassing. It takes talent (which we've rarely had the most of) and luck (which we've often had none of.)

We've had the talent to get there regularly enough that the luck should even itself out. We're not talking about two appearances in thirteen years, it's been nine playoff years. Whilst some blame undoubtedly attachs to the players in each year, the one constant is Reid.

QUOTE
The fact that we are consistently in the conversation is something we should all be pretty happy about. It boggles my mind how easily people forget the Kotite/Rhodes years. Or the Ryan years, when we had the greatest defense in NFL history and still couldn't win playoff games.

When calling for Reid to be replaced I always acknowledge that it is unlikely that we will get as good a head coach but I'm of the firm opinion that we have enough evidence to know that Reid's good will never be good enough.

We won't win the SuperBowl this year because of Vick, but if it is time to move on from an underperforming QB then it will also be time to move on from Reid.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Oct 13 2012, 07:08 AM) *
But by being in the playoffs we are meant to be a higher calibre team ourselves.

No doubt we are generally in that class. I'm simply saying that win percentage is going to level out when facing similar to better competition. Bear Bryant, often regarded as the best college football coach ever had a .780 career win percentage. In bowl games, when facing a more even playing field, his record dropped to .552.
QUOTE
We've had the talent to get there regularly enough that the luck should even itself out. We're not talking about two appearances in thirteen years, it's been nine playoff years. Whilst some blame undoubtedly attachs to the players in each year, the one constant is Reid.
I would argue that our best team (2002) happened to coincide with us getting the worst luck (McNabb breaking his leg.)
Everything has to work together to win a championship. Given the questions surrounding spy gate, it's quite possible that we were cheated out of our other finest opportunity. I don't think it's a product of our coach simply not being able to win one game. Frankly, the same people that make that argument often bemoan Belichick as a cheater. Not grasping the irony in that statement, given how close we were to winning that game.

QUOTE
We won't win the SuperBowl this year because of Vick, but if it is time to move on from an underperforming QB then it will also be time to move on from Reid.

The only argument I can make against this is the current state of the NFC. We are capable of beating every team, no question. While SF looks the best at this time, I don't know that anyone fully trusts their offense. I'm not willing to give up on this team, if only because we've beaten some of the better teams in football, while still not playing our best ball yet. Time will tell.
Dreagon
With this divisional schedule, coupled with the fact that you guys have already beaten the Ravens, ya'll have a very good chance of winning the division, even if it's with a 9-7 or 10-6 record.

For example, this week you guys have Detroit who you should most likely beat. NY has San Francisco, who looks like a better team. And we have Baltimore, who we have never, ever beaten. By Sunday evening the odds are better than even that ya'll will be sitting alone at the top of the division, with the added advantage of having a tie breaker over the Giants.

So the question isn't just whether 8-8 is good enough. The real question is whether with this years schedule a 9-7 or 10-6 divisional championship is good enough.
Eyrie
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 13 2012, 04:37 PM) *
The only argument I can make against this is the current state of the NFC. We are capable of beating every team, no question. While SF looks the best at this time, I don't know that anyone fully trusts their offense. I'm not willing to give up on this team, if only because we've beaten some of the better teams in football, while still not playing our best ball yet. Time will tell.

One thing that we can agree on, and it will take both players and coaches bringing their "A" game to make it happen.

QUOTE (Dreagon @ Oct 13 2012, 08:15 PM) *
So the question isn't just whether 8-8 is good enough. The real question is whether with this years schedule a 9-7 or 10-6 divisional championship is good enough.

I'm not sure that our regular season record is as important as how we fare in the post-season, should we get there. Reid is probably gone if we miss out or crash and burn, but he's likely to stay if we win the wild card round and then have a narrow loss in the divisional round.

I'd set the bar a bit higher, but that is my feeling on how Lurie will judge him. I don't think Lurie wants to make the change but has recognised that there is a need to make one unless Reid is producing each year.
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.