Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: How many more?
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
HOUSEoPAIN
McCoy suffered a concussion with 1:45 left, down by an insurmountable lead. The Walrus said in the press conference 'we were trying to catch up and win the game.' Twice. On the bright side, at least the fat fuck realized we have a 2,000 yard back to use.....
mcnabbulous
My god, you're whole schtick is such a joke. McCoy is like 4th or 5th in football in touches. He risks injury every time he touches the ball. It's precisely the reason Andy doesn't run him into the ground each week.

What would he have to rank in touches to be used enough for you? Is anything less than 1st underused?
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 18 2012, 08:48 PM) *
My god, you're whole schtick is such a joke. McCoy is like 4th or 5th in football in touches. He risks injury every time he touches the ball. It's precisely the reason Andy doesn't run him into the ground each week.

What would he have to rank in touches to be used enough for you? Is anything less than 1st underused?


You know how I always point out our record when he gets 20 carries or more, as opposed to when he doesn't? Today during the game, Brian Billick took a page out of my book and said the exact same thing, albeit only this season and not others combined with it.

When he carries 20 times, we are 3-0.

When he doesn't, we're 0-7.

This is not a coincedence. I could give a fuck less about how many touches he has,m as the majority of those extra touches are checkdowns. We don't run the ball, and everyone in the stadium knows what's coming - when we do run it, half the time it's some cutesy bullshit toss or trick run. And when we're down by 20+ points with 1:45 left, then is NOT the time to start running up the gut. I hope he stays on ice until next year before Reid wrecks the career of one of the most promising RBs in the last decade.
mcnabbulous
Do you think 5 more carries by McCoy would have resulted in victory today?
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 18 2012, 11:55 PM) *
Do you think 5 more carries by McCoy would have resulted in victory today?


Based on statistical history, there's a 91% chance we would've (10-1 when we run him 20 times).

Before I forget, we are now 21-26 when he doesn't carry 20 times.

You would think even out of pure desire to keep his job the Walrus would at least try to take a look at these stats and adjust accordingly.

Look, we have a rookie making his first start. We have him in our predictable offense, having to carry the whole team on his back, while once again our 2,000 yard back sits around holding his dick. I don't know for sure if we would've won today if McCoy carried 20 times, but I'm pretty damn sure it would've been a lot closer, and maybe Foles would've found some more breathing room with a defense having to respect McCoy. I can't believe we're still having this argument.

3-0.

0-7.

10-1.

21-26.

Nah, nothing to see here.
mcnabbulous
Yeah, it probably didn't have anything to do with the opposing QB going 14-15. It was McCoy not getting another 5 carries (which based on averages and the way our team was run blocking, would have accounted for about 15-20 yards.)

If you think McCoy is a 2,000 back behind this line, you're dumber than I had previously given you credit for. Ya know, since his previous career high is 1300 on a 4.8 average. That, while running behind the best LT in football. That ypc would be, by far, the worst average of any 2000 yard rusher in history.

But yeah, he's a 2000 yard back. If you say so.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE
If you think McCoy is a 2,000 back behind this line, you're dumber than I had previously given you credit for

But yeah, he's a 2000 yard back. If you say so.


I'm trying to help you recognize indisputable facts, but your twisted Reid-apologist mind is rejecting them. You're all over the place trying to find a leg to stand on, and frankly it's pathetic. He IS a 2,000 yard back, all you have to do is check last year's stats. Who knows how many yards he could get behind this line? Not you or I, because we don't use him. What I DO know is, as always, when we run him, we win. Regardless of whether or not he gets 500 yards, 1,000 or 1,500, anyone who isn't a Reid shill knows that we're more likely to have success leaning on him than on our rookie making his first start, or with Vick.

3-0.

0-7.

Keep at it tiger, without you this board would be boring, as everyone would be in agreement on basic, obvious football knowledge.
Dr. Claw
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Nov 18 2012, 08:03 PM) *
McCoy suffered a concussion with 1:45 left, down by an insurmountable lead. The Walrus said in the press conference 'we were trying to catch up and win the game.' Twice. On the bright side, at least the fat fuck realized we have a 2,000 yard back to use.....


Now see, the fact that Andy started running the ball with his STARTING RB that late in the game, down multiple TDs?
AND he got concussed?

Possibly the most indefensible move Andy Reid has ever done as coach. When the game is effectively over, take your starters out.

Yesterday was the perfect storm.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Nov 19 2012, 07:03 AM) *
He IS a 2,000 yard back, all you have to do is check last year's stats. Who knows how many yards he could get behind this line?

My god, you couldn't be more full of shit if you tried. On one hand, you say this...

QUOTE
I could give a fuck less about how many touches he has,m as the majority of those extra touches are checkdowns.


Which indicates that his catches don't count to you. They're not real touches.

Then you claim he's a 2,000 yard back because 35% of those yards are a product of those very catches.

Like I said, Shady is like 4th or 5th in football in touches. But yeah, he's underused. If you say so.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Dr. Claw @ Nov 19 2012, 07:25 AM) *
Possibly the most indefensible move Andy Reid has ever done as coach. When the game is effectively over, take your starters out.


What makes it even worse is two things:

1) At the press conference, when asked about it, he said 'we were trying to catch up and win the game' - this will immediately go down in history as the equivalent of Watters going 'for who, for what' or Iverson's 'practice' press conference.

2) Why would he do such a thing? Honestly, what possible logical reason is there for feeding Shady the ball at that point. Obviously the game was over, but assuming the moron actually believed they could catch up, is establishing a running game after the 2 minute warning down 25 points the right way to go about it?

Oh, but there IS a logical reason. The last remaining Reid apologist on this board just made the typical Marty-Reid-politburo-approved strawman argument, that McCoy is 4th or 5th in the league in touches. Now anyone with any sense at all knows McCoy is completely underutilized and we have no running game to speak of, and of course the whole ship is sinking around us - could Reid/Marty have been trying to feed McCoy a couple absolutely useless carries in order to point to the final stat sheet? He had 15 carries, were they trying to push him up near 20 to deflect the eventual criticism that their gameplan is predictable and pathetic?

Until someone gives me a better answer, I'm going with that.
HobbEs
That was a brilliant display of personnel use by Andy. As someone else already stated that if you're down by that much you take your starters out. Down 31-6 and he's still trying to win the game? Lol, you got to hand it to him.

Lost in the fiasco was the way he handled the end of the first half. First off, why the hell did he call a timeout when Washington was looking confused about punting or going for it? Why not just let the clock run out? Okay then, after a timeout, if you're going to just kill the clock why not call a QB kneeldown. It's the SAFEST play in that situation. But not our Andy...he calls a run and of course we turn it over leading to points for DC.
Eyrie
Couple of points.

Firstly, if that stat is so reliable then let's run McCoy on each of the first 20 plays.

Secondly, only our supergenius HC would run McCoy rather than giving Brown or even Lewis some carries at that stage in a blow out defeat.
SLOiggles
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Nov 19 2012, 04:03 AM) *
I'm trying to help you recognize indisputable facts, but your twisted Reid-apologist mind is rejecting them. You're all over the place trying to find a leg to stand on, and frankly it's pathetic. He IS a 2,000 yard back, all you have to do is check last year's stats. Who knows how many yards he could get behind this line?


McCoy has never surpassed 1,700 yards from scrimmage in a single season.
Rick
The whole point isn't whether he gets 20 carries or not, the point is the Eagles do not run the ball enough. A run is much different than a screen or a checkdown (where most of McCoy's, "touches," have come from this season). They do not punish the defense and make them work. They do not get the defense thinking about a run when there's a play action fake. It doesn't do a LOT of things a run does.

Whether this line sucks or not, you still need to establish a running game to help your passing game...ESPECIALLY when your O line is struggling. The defense doesn't have to respect the run when you hardly ever run.

I'm sorry but, if anyone says they run the ball enough this season, they need their head checked. Would they have a better record if they ran the ball more? I don't know for sure but I believe they'd have more wins than they have now.

But, keeping him in at that point in the game and pounding him away was just plain stupid no matter how you look at it.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Rick @ Nov 20 2012, 07:53 AM) *
The whole point isn't whether he gets 20 carries or not, the point is the Eagles do not run the ball enough.

Probably more than you think, just by going with your gut. Additionally, it's not as though our Oline has been very good at it. For as bad as we've been pass blocking, we've actually been worse run blocking.

QUOTE
A run is much different than a screen or a checkdown (where most of McCoy's, "touches," have come from this season).

18% constitutes "most" these days?

QUOTE
They do not punish the defense and make them work. They do not get the defense thinking about a run when there's a play action fake. It doesn't do a LOT of things a run does.

It doesn't punish our 208lb. running back either.

QUOTE
Whether this line sucks or not, you still need to establish a running game to help your passing game...ESPECIALLY when your O line is struggling. The defense doesn't have to respect the run when you hardly ever run.

You do realize that last year's SB consisted of the 17th and 22nd ranked teams in rushing attempts, right? Not even the top half.

QUOTE
But, keeping him in at that point in the game and pounding him away was just plain stupid no matter how you look at it.

Was he really 'pounding him away?' McCoy had 4 carries in the 4th quarter. How is McCoy running the ball any different than Tom Brady throwing the ball when his team is up by 28 points late in a game? Or Gronk breaking his arm on extra point protection?

It's football, injuries happen. Which is exactly why thinking that McCoy needs to be getting more touches is foolish.
Rick
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 20 2012, 09:14 AM) *
Probably more than you think, just by going with your gut. Additionally, it's not as though our Oline has been very good at it. For as bad as we've been pass blocking, we've actually been worse run blocking.

Funny thing is, you seem to be the ONLY person who seems to think this team runs enough. Not just around here, talking about the analysts...you know, the people who get paid to look at this thing all day...

I supposed you're right and everyone else is wrong....

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 20 2012, 09:14 AM) *
It doesn't punish our 208lb. running back either.

This is football isn't it? He's done it his whole football career as a RB so why should now be any different? So should we just protect him and make him retire now? You make no sense...none.

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 20 2012, 09:14 AM) *
You do realize that last year's SB consisted of the 17th and 22nd ranked teams in rushing attempts, right? Not even the top half.

Ok, what's it been like historically? I don't know but I'm guessing that's not the norm. Could be wrong though.


See, I remember a guy who played in Detroit a number of years ago, Barry Sanders--you may have heard of him. He played behind one of the worst O lines in the history of the game. They would run him and he'd get no gain or lose yards over and over. Then, usually in the 2nd half, he'd start breaking longer runs. Why is this? Because they (the team) wore down the defense and his ability to avoid being tackled was legendary. They didn't give up the run even though their O line sucked.

I bring him up because McCoy is a similar back to him. Similar build and same type of runner. Yet we give up on the run at the first sign of not getting positive yardage. Again, I'm far from the only one saying it and many people who know much more than I do say it as well.

But, again, I guess everyone else is wrong and you're right...
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Rick @ Nov 20 2012, 02:21 PM) *
Funny thing is, you seem to be the ONLY person who seems to think this team runs enough. Not just around here, talking about the analysts...you know, the people who get paid to look at this thing all day...

I supposed you're right and everyone else is wrong....

Do the 20 teams who run the ball less than us not run enough either?

QUOTE
This is football isn't it? He's done it his whole football career as a RB so why should now be any different? So should we just protect him and make him retire now? You make no sense...none.

Do you think we're a good team if we run the ball a little more? Than why burn out Shady this year?

QUOTE
Ok, what's it been like historically? I don't know but I'm guessing that's not the norm. Could be wrong though.

Historically, as in over the history of the NFL? Sure. But the NFL has changed dramatically. You have to be able to throw the ball to win games/championships. We can't, which is why we suck.

QUOTE
See, I remember a guy who played in Detroit a number of years ago, Barry Sanders--you may have heard of him. He played behind one of the worst O lines in the history of the game. They would run him and he'd get no gain or lose yards over and over. Then, usually in the 2nd half, he'd start breaking longer runs. Why is this? Because they (the team) wore down the defense and his ability to avoid being tackled was legendary. They didn't give up the run even though their O line sucked.

I bring him up because McCoy is a similar back to him. Similar build and same type of runner. Yet we give up on the run at the first sign of not getting positive yardage. Again, I'm far from the only one saying it and many people who know much more than I do say it as well.

No, they're not. No one was like Barry Sanders. Not to mention how much the game has changed since Barry was in the league.

QUOTE
But, again, I guess everyone else is wrong and you're right...

What am I wrong about? That McCoy isn't underused? If you want to burn him out during a hopeless season, that's your prerogative. As I pointed out, the few running backs that have been used significantly more than him in recent years have had significant setbacks in following seasons.

He's 4th in football in touches. 7th in carries. That's more than enough, given his body type and the hopelessness of the season.

Could we use a second running back more? Sure, and it seems that they're trying to get Brown more involved. But he's a rookie that has virtually no experience given his unique college experience. He also isn't a good pass blocker, which isn't a great quality, given the current state of our OL.

But that gets back to the state of our roster, which is terrible. Which is the bigger problem. Not our lack of running the football.

HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 20 2012, 01:36 PM) *
Do the 20 teams who run the ball less than us not run enough either?


Ok, we've already gone through this. Take out Vick running for his life, and we're 24th or 25th in rushing attempts per game. Maybe even lower, since I corrected you on this a few weeks ago.

If you're going to deny all indisputable logic and facts, at least have an intellectually sound argument. Vick running from 3 gorillas after a failed deep route is not establishing a running game.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Nov 20 2012, 04:02 PM) *
Ok, we've already gone through this. Take out Vick running for his life, and we're 24th or 25th in rushing attempts per game. Maybe even lower, since I corrected you on this a few weeks ago.

If you're going to deny all indisputable logic and facts, at least have an intellectually sound argument. Vick running from 3 gorillas after a failed deep route is not establishing a running game.

Well, like I said, Shady is top-10. We don't really have much of a backup, because our guy is a rookie with almost no experience. They've been trying to work him into the game a bit, but still lack trust in him.

Yes, many of Vick's runs are on designed pass plays. But part of those designed pass plays consider him running with the ball. You don't have Michael Vick as your QB and expect him to be Tom Brady. Additionally, there are a lot of designed runs with Vick.

But then we get into the crux of things...which is the fact that we're bad. With the exception of NO (who is terrible defensively,) all of the teams who run the ball least are bad. And they throw the ball because they're often trailing.

How many times have we actually led games decisively this year?

Jesus christ, guys. We're fucking terrible. What don't you understand about that? Running the ball wouldn't change things.
Rick
:::groan:::

You just don't get it. The team as a whole has been criticized, not just by a bum like myself and others around here, but by the people who get paid to look at this sort of thing. Does it make us a better team? Well, it doesn't change the dynamic of the team so no. However, it does open up the passing game you keep talking about sucks to badly a bit. A defense has nothing to fear about our running game because we just aren't trying after we've been stopped. Vick (or Foles) running for their lives doesn't count as a traditional rush as far as what I'm talking about here.

Yes, the team basically sucks right now. But, if they were to make a little more of a commitment to the run, they may actually find they suck a little less.

And sorry, you're wrong, Shady is a similar TYPE of back as Sanders was. Obviously, he's not Sanders, but he has a similar style and body type. But I guess you missed that part of what I was saying...
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Rick @ Nov 20 2012, 05:54 PM) *
:::groan:::

Don't hurt yourself.

QUOTE
You just don't get it. The team as a whole has been criticized, not just by a bum like myself and others around here, but by the people who get paid to look at this sort of thing.

And someone that coaches the football team, who gets paid lots of money to do it, and sees the team everyday in practice...who has a sense of what they can and can't do, has decided they stand a better chance of succeeding otherwise. I don't know what to tell you.

QUOTE
Does it make us a better team? Well, it doesn't change the dynamic of the team so no. However, it does open up the passing game you keep talking about sucks to badly a bit.

It is pure speculation that us running the ball a few more times a game would impact our passing game.

QUOTE
A defense has nothing to fear about our running game because we just aren't trying after we've been stopped. Vick (or Foles) running for their lives doesn't count as a traditional rush as far as what I'm talking about here.

They have nothing to fear about our running game because the most valuable person to our running game tore his achilles before the season started.

QUOTE
Yes, the team basically sucks right now. But, if they were to make a little more of a commitment to the run, they may actually find they suck a little less.

Right, they may suck less. And was does that get us? A more worn down Shady. A guy who isn't 4th in the league in touches, but 1st.

That's been my entire point. Yes, we could run more. But what would that get us? Slightly less shitty, but our best player offensive weapon would be unnecessarily overused.

As I said, we're starting to use Brown more, but the coaches likely didn't have too much confidence in a guy that has had about 7 carries in the past 3 years.

QUOTE
And sorry, you're wrong, Shady is a similar TYPE of back as Sanders was. Obviously, he's not Sanders, but he has a similar style and body type. But I guess you missed that part of what I was saying...

No, I'm not wrong. Their body types aren't similar at all. Sanders was short and compact. He had thighs like tree trunks. McCoy is lean. They're similar in the sense that they play the same position and they're both good at it. McCoy is a slasher, like Gale Sayers.

Additionally, McCoy is playing against competition that is bigger, faster, and stronger than the majority of the competition Sanders was facing. The hits are more devastating.

There is no value in him getting more carries than he's currently getting.

Rick
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 20 2012, 07:42 PM) *
And someone that coaches the football team, who gets paid lots of money to do it, and sees the team everyday in practice...who has a sense of what they can and can't do, has decided they stand a better chance of succeeding otherwise. I don't know what to tell you.

Right, someone who coaches a football team--badly--thinks it makes sense. It's working out so well for that coach right now isn't it?

Oh, and, everyone else in the NFL seems to think otherwise. Like you I guess he's right and everyone else is wrong...

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 20 2012, 07:42 PM) *
It is pure speculation that us running the ball a few more times a game would impact our passing game.

As it is pure speculation on your part it won't. However, history tells us running the ball more will impact the passing game. I'll go with history on this one.

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 20 2012, 07:42 PM) *
They have nothing to fear about our running game because the most valuable person to our running game tore his achilles before the season started.

Yet again you amaze me. I didn't say they have to put up 200 yards per game on the ground. Even if you get little bits of yardage, they still have to respect the run game which slows the pass rush down. Oh, and, they have a back they feature who can break a play or two.

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 20 2012, 07:42 PM) *
Right, they may suck less. And was does that get us? A more worn down Shady. A guy who isn't 4th in the league in touches, but 1st.

That's been my entire point. Yes, we could run more. But what would that get us? Slightly less shitty, but our best player offensive weapon would be unnecessarily overused.

What's it getting us now? TWO QBs being killed. Any running back is going to get worn down throughout a season regardless of how good/bad their line is. Again, it's their JOB. It is not, however, a QB's job to constantly get run over by 4 guys on every play. Starting a running game will slow that down and help protect everyone.

I'm talking about a general running game. Doesn't really matter who runs the ball as long as they keep the defense honest.


QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 20 2012, 07:42 PM) *
As I said, we're starting to use Brown more, but the coaches likely didn't have too much confidence in a guy that has had about 7 carries in the past 3 years.

Well, looks like he's going to get a few more carries now isn't he?

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 20 2012, 07:42 PM) *
No, I'm not wrong. Their body types aren't similar at all. Sanders was short and compact. He had thighs like tree trunks. McCoy is lean. They're similar in the sense that they play the same position and they're both good at it. McCoy is a slasher, like Gale Sayers.

Additionally, McCoy is playing against competition that is bigger, faster, and stronger than the majority of the competition Sanders was facing. The hits are more devastating.


LOL! You can say all of the players now are playing against guys bigger/stronger/etc. So that's a wash.

And, not sure how old you are (really, I have no idea) but I am old enough to have watched Sanders. McCoy is almost exactly the same type of runner he was (although not as good). He makes lots of quick cuts. That's what Sanders was known for. In fact, many people last season were comparing his moves to Sanders.

Obviously, Sanders is/was better. However, their styles are similar.

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 20 2012, 07:42 PM) *
There is no value in him getting more carries than he's currently getting.


But there is a value to having the team overall run the ball (traditionally) more often. Again, history says this.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Rick @ Nov 21 2012, 07:30 AM) *
Right, someone who coaches a football team--badly--thinks it makes sense. It's working out so well for that coach right now isn't it?

Oh, and, everyone else in the NFL seems to think otherwise. Like you I guess he's right and everyone else is wrong...
The people you're referring to are announcers and writers. Andy Reid makes more money and has more wins than all of them.
They're a bad team. That's a bigger issue than being coached badly. When Andy Reid had good teams, he was a good coach. That's how it works.
QUOTE
As it is pure speculation on your part it won't. However, history tells us running the ball more will impact the passing game. I'll go with history on this one.
History also tells us the worst running team in football won the SB last year. Because the game has changed.

QUOTE
Yet again you amaze me. I didn't say they have to put up 200 yards per game on the ground. Even if you get little bits of yardage, they still have to respect the run game which slows the pass rush down. Oh, and, they have a back they feature who can break a play or two.
They do get a little bit of yardage. Every game. McCoy averages like 18 carries a game. You're implying that a handful more would make a big difference or that we never, ever run. It's simply not true.

QUOTE
What's it getting us now? TWO QBs being killed. Any running back is going to get worn down throughout a season regardless of how good/bad their line is. Again, it's their JOB. It is not, however, a QB's job to constantly get run over by 4 guys on every play. Starting a running game will slow that down and help protect everyone.
You are seriously oblivious. I recognize that Shady is a running back and his job involves getting hit a lot. But there is empirical evidence that getting more carries than he is getting now will have a significant negative impact on upcoming seasons. So I'll ask again. Do you think it's worth having a shittier McCoy over the next few seasons to marginally improve this season.
QUOTE
I'm talking about a general running game. Doesn't really matter who runs the ball as long as they keep the defense honest.

And I'm telling you that we haven't really had a viable backup, because our guy had carried the ball 7 times in the past few years, didn't know the system, and wasn't trusted. Because our roster (see: team) is shit.

QUOTE
Well, looks like he's going to get a few more carries now isn't he?

Wait, your sarcastic way to prove that we should run Shady more is to point out that he got hurt?
QUOTE
LOL! You can say all of the players now are playing against guys bigger/stronger/etc. So that's a wash.
Huh? The point is that McCoy can't carry the ball as much as guys did historically for this reason. It's why almost no one in the league does. And when they do, it has negative repercussions on future seasons. I've pointed out like 5 examples of that being the case.

QUOTE
And, not sure how old you are (really, I have no idea) but I am old enough to have watched Sanders. McCoy is almost exactly the same type of runner he was (although not as good). He makes lots of quick cuts. That's what Sanders was known for. In fact, many people last season were comparing his moves to Sanders.

Obviously, Sanders is/was better. However, their styles are similar.

Just because you say the same thing over and over doesn't make it true. Barry Sanders was not like McCoy. I see you've already backed away from saying they are built similarly, because that isn't true.

You obviously forget what watching Sanders was like. A lot of guys make quick cuts. That doesn't mean they are like Sanders. Sanders had an ability to move laterally unlike anyone who has ever played the game. Because of those tree trunk legs I mentioned before. Shady has excellent moves and vision, but he isn't like Samders.
Frankly, I'm not sure what it has to do with this conversation anyways.

QUOTE
But there is a value to having the team overall run the ball (traditionally) more often. Again, history says this.

Recent history is proving that its far less important than having a great passing game. Again, recent history says this. And when you have a solid passing game, it gives you more opportunities to run. Like not always being I'm 2nd and 3rd and longs.
CT_Eagle
This argument about the number of carries by a running back and it's correlation to victories has been around since I started watching football in the 70s. It is, for the most part, a stat with very little value. When a team gets a comfortable lead in the 3rd quarter, they typically start to run the ball more in order to eat the clock and protect the lead. This leads to a higher number of carries and of course the win. If you simply look at the stats it is easy to come to the conclusion that more carries equals more victories. That is not necessarily the case. You have to really look at the game and see if it was the rushing attack that led to the lead. Face it, you could have a 60-40 pass run ratio, build up a big lead then run the ball for the last 1.5 quarters and end up with a 50-50 pass run ratio.

I write this as a big believer that you have to have a legitimate run game to be successful. Especially playing outdoors late in the season.
Phits
Rick you aren't going to get anywhere with this discussion. McNabbulous is an Andy-head. In his world AR is without fault and the state of this team is not Andy's fault. The fact that they are ill prepared and continue to make the same mistakes has no bearing on the coach. He feels that we should save Shady's 'body' so that at some point down the road he will be productive. Except his hero forgot what he was doing and put McCoy in a situation (at the end of the game in a blowout) where he got injured. The "winningest" HC in Eagles history was trying for another one with 2 mins to go down by 25, with that old patented 'concuss the RB' play.

Good job Coach.

QUOTE (Rick @ Nov 21 2012, 06:30 AM) *
Right, someone who coaches a football team--badly--thinks it makes sense. It's working out so well for that coach right now isn't it?

Oh, and, everyone else in the NFL seems to think otherwise. Like you I guess he's right and everyone else is wrong...


As it is pure speculation on your part it won't. However, history tells us running the ball more will impact the passing game. I'll go with history on this one.


Yet again you amaze me. I didn't say they have to put up 200 yards per game on the ground. Even if you get little bits of yardage, they still have to respect the run game which slows the pass rush down. Oh, and, they have a back they feature who can break a play or two.


What's it getting us now? TWO QBs being killed. Any running back is going to get worn down throughout a season regardless of how good/bad their line is. Again, it's their JOB. It is not, however, a QB's job to constantly get run over by 4 guys on every play. Starting a running game will slow that down and help protect everyone.

I'm talking about a general running game. Doesn't really matter who runs the ball as long as they keep the defense honest.



Well, looks like he's going to get a few more carries now isn't he?



LOL! You can say all of the players now are playing against guys bigger/stronger/etc. So that's a wash.

And, not sure how old you are (really, I have no idea) but I am old enough to have watched Sanders. McCoy is almost exactly the same type of runner he was (although not as good). He makes lots of quick cuts. That's what Sanders was known for. In fact, many people last season were comparing his moves to Sanders.

Obviously, Sanders is/was better. However, their styles are similar.



But there is a value to having the team overall run the ball (traditionally) more often. Again, history says this.

mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 21 2012, 01:45 PM) *
Rick you aren't going to get anywhere with this discussion. McNabbulous is an Andy-head. In his world AR is without fault and the state of this team is not Andy's fault.

You're very wrong. I blame Andy for building this roster and coaching staff. He has, quite clearly, made several tremendous mistakes. He's obviously never recovered from the loss of JJ either.

With that said, you guys are trying to put lipstick on a pig. We are terrible. A few extra running plays won't help that.

QUOTE
The fact that they are ill prepared and continue to make the same mistakes has no bearing on the coach.

Coaches can only do so much. Andy has proven to be able to prepare teams. This team is clearly incapable of performing, with the exception of a handful of players. There is another thread where almost everyone agrees that the vast majority of these guys aren't worth keeping around.

QUOTE
He feels that we should save Shady's 'body' so that at some point down the road he will be productive.

He is productive. I think we should use him appropriately so we can maximize the time that he is productive. You want to run him into the ground to make a shitty team slightly less shitty. That makes no sense.

I'd rather have a fully productive Shady in 2 years, when we have the possibility of a better team, rather than getting some magical number of carries that you think will make our team good.

QUOTE
Except his hero forgot what he was doing and put McCoy in a situation (at the end of the game in a blowout) where he got injured.

The "winningest" HC in Eagles history was trying for another one with 2 mins to go down by 25, with that old patented 'concuss the RB' play.

Good job Coach.

Every coach plays guys at the ends of blowout games. Like I pointed out earlier, Brady was throwing passes with his team up 28 late in the 4th. Gronk broke his arm in the same situation.

Shady had 4 carries in the 4th. It's not like he was pounding him.

With that said, I likely wouldn't have been playing him.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 21 2012, 03:00 PM) *
You're very wrong. I blame Andy for building this roster and coaching staff. He has, quite clearly, made several tremendous mistakes. He's obviously never recovered from the loss of JJ either.

With that said, you guys are trying to put lipstick on a pig. We are terrible. A few extra running plays won't help that.

Coaches can only do so much. Andy has proven to be able to prepare teams. This team is clearly incapable of performing, with the exception of a handful of players. There is another thread where almost everyone agrees that the vast majority of these guys aren't worth keeping around.

We are terrible because our coaches can't coach. We clearly don't have top tier players, but the parts aren't bad....we should be better than the 3 wins we have. Andy used to be a very good coach. You can't seem to grasp the concept that the game may have passed him by. He used to be cutting edge. The reality is, you're only as good as your last game.


QUOTE
Every coach plays guys at the ends of blowout games. Like I pointed out earlier, Brady was throwing passes with his team up 28 late in the 4th. Gronk broke his arm in the same situation.

We aren't them. they are in the playoff hunt. They haven't had a losing season since 2000. They have been to 5 Super Bowl games, in the last decade, and have 3 championships to show for it.

Our coach said they were trying to win the game, down by 25 with less than 2 minutes left. I could give a rats ass whether that was coaches speak or not. It's insulting to listen to, because he obviously thinks we are all a bunch of fools. 3-7. what a disgrace.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 21 2012, 03:00 PM) *
Every coach plays guys at the ends of blowout games. Like I pointed out earlier, Brady was throwing passes with his team up 28 late in the 4th. Gronk broke his arm in the same situation.


Belichick throws Brady when he's up by 28 in the 4th because he's a complete fucking asshole, and likes running up the score on people, or trying out new plays, or whatever.

What Reid did with Shady was inexcusable - his response to the question asked of him in the press conference regarding it made it 10 times worse with his dismissive arrogance. And he wonders why the Philly press is happily going to dump on him his last 6 weeks here.....
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 21 2012, 04:43 PM) *
We are terrible because our coaches can't coach. We clearly don't have top tier players, but the parts aren't bad....we should be better than the 3 wins we have. Andy used to be a very good coach. You can't seem to grasp the concept that the game may have passed him by. He used to be cutting edge. The reality is, you're only as good as your last game.

The game probably passed Dick Vermeil by too, right? Then he took a 15 year break...that certainly didn't help. Then it was still passing him by for 2 years in St. Louis.

Then it magically stopped passing him by when he stumbled upon a great QB. Funny how that works.

QUOTE
We aren't them. they are in the playoff hunt. They haven't had a losing season since 2000. They have been to 5 Super Bowl games, in the last decade, and have 3 championships to show for it.

No, we're no them. They have Brady. We don't. As if their record has any relevance to the fact that they, like us, were using stars players at the end of a blowout. Much like the Packers were doing earlier in the season with Rodgers. Or all teams do, for that matter.

QUOTE
Our coach said they were trying to win the game, down by 25 with less than 2 minutes left. I could give a rats ass whether that was coaches speak or not. It's insulting to listen to, because he obviously thinks we are all a bunch of fools. 3-7. what a disgrace.

Then don't listen to him. He hates doing press conferences, so he says a bunch of bullshit during them. He's been doing it for years. He lies quite often during them.

I believe you have the luxury of not watching them or reading about them. Ignorance is bliss. I would suspect you would know that though.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Nov 21 2012, 05:04 PM) *
Belichick throws Brady when he's up by 28 in the 4th because he's a complete fucking asshole, and likes running up the score on people, or trying out new plays, or whatever.

What Reid did with Shady was inexcusable - his response to the question asked of him in the press conference regarding it made it 10 times worse with his dismissive arrogance. And he wonders why the Philly press is happily going to dump on him his last 6 weeks here.....

I used the Patriots as an example because their star TE just got injured during the final minutes of a blowout. But you can find examples across the league of teams using star players at the end of blowouts.

Probably even more so when their teams are trailing.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 21 2012, 04:17 PM) *
Probably even more so when their teams are trailing.


Yes, which brings us back to the original point - why establish the running game when down by 25 with 1:45 left?
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Nov 21 2012, 05:40 PM) *
Yes, which brings us back to the original point - why establish the running game when down by 25 with 1:45 left?

He ran it 4 times in the 4th quarter. How is that "establishing the running game?"

That's literally the same rate as the other 4 quarters, which you have declared as a complete disregard for the running game.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 21 2012, 04:46 PM) *
He ran it 4 times in the 4th quarter. How is that "establishing the running game?"

That's literally the same rate as the other 4 quarters, which you have declared as a complete disregard for the running game.


Oh please man, just c'mon already. I have no problem with saving face by continuing to 'try' but when you're down 25 with less than 2 minutes to play, there's only one play you should call: PASS. He had 58 minutes to run the ball before that.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Nov 21 2012, 06:02 PM) *
Oh please man, just c'mon already. I have no problem with saving face by continuing to 'try' but when you're down 25 with less than 2 minutes to play, there's only one play you should call: PASS. He had 58 minutes to run the ball before that.

He can't do anything right by you. So what does it matter. If he had thrown 4 more times instead of those runs, you would bitch that Foles had 50 pass attempts.

The bottom line is that our roster is shit. Andy is largely responsible for that. I've been one of the few people around here that saw it coming. I've complained about our personnel decisions and drafting since I've been on this board. When everyone else was saying that Andy should be removed as head coach, but given GM responsibilities, I protested.

No coach would succeed with this roster. And the biggest problem with this team...they think they're good. They still seem to believe it. Unlike our early 2000 teams that were always seemingly trying to prove themselves, these fucks act like they've been there.

We have less than 10 guys on a roster of 50+ who deserve to stick around, yet you are treating this team like they should be contenders. They shouldn't, regardless of any additional insignificant carries that Shady may get at 4.1 yards per.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE
We have less than 10 guys on a roster of 50+ who deserve to stick around yet you are treating this team like they should be contenders.


Yes and no. I agree there's not many who we should keep, but I recall a bunch of guys saying they would win the SB this year here. I, the pessimist, predicted 10-6. Obviously they should be better than 3-7. While we aren't contenders, we should certainly be better than 2nd worst in the NFc - the team that's going to beat5 us next Monday night.

I understand your points and where you're coming from, I'm just saying with better coaching we should be a .500 team. Whatever, it's a moot point by now.




mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Nov 21 2012, 05:35 PM) *
I understand your points and where you're coming from

cheers.gif:
QUOTE
I'm just saying with better coaching we should be a .500 team. Whatever, it's a moot point by now.

I agree that we could definitely be a little bit better right now, but not significantly. I think the reason people consider us a SB contender is largely based on the respect Andy garners around football. I tend not to listen to any of the national talking heads regarding the Eagles. Some of the beat guys are decent, though.

Either way, we are soft. I wish Andy had been stripped of any personnel decisions years ago...and a real GM brought in. Despite what this thread may imply, I don't hate the running game. I'm a PSU fan, as has been well established. I grew up on the running game. I just don't think abusing McCoy would make this team any better. I hope our next staff can use McCoy and Brown as a nice little one-two punch.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 21 2012, 05:48 PM) *
cheers.gif:

I agree that we could definitely be a little bit better right now, but not significantly. I think the reason people consider us a SB contender is largely based on the respect Andy garners around football. I tend not to listen to any of the national talking heads regarding the Eagles. Some of the beat guys are decent, though.

Either way, we are soft. I wish Andy had been stripped of any personnel decisions years ago...and a real GM brought in. Despite what this thread may imply, I don't hate the running game. I'm a PSU fan, as has been well established. I grew up on the running game. I just don't think abusing McCoy would make this team any better. I hope our next staff can use McCoy and Brown as a nice little one-two punch.


Fair enough - have a good turkey day biggrin.gif
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Nov 21 2012, 07:02 PM) *
Fair enough - have a good turkey day biggrin.gif

You too.
Rick
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 21 2012, 12:45 PM) *
Rick you aren't going to get anywhere with this discussion. McNabbulous is an Andy-head. In his world AR is without fault and the state of this team is not Andy's fault. The fact that they are ill prepared and continue to make the same mistakes has no bearing on the coach. He feels that we should save Shady's 'body' so that at some point down the road he will be productive. Except his hero forgot what he was doing and put McCoy in a situation (at the end of the game in a blowout) where he got injured. The "winningest" HC in Eagles history was trying for another one with 2 mins to go down by 25, with that old patented 'concuss the RB' play.

Good job Coach.

Yes, I'm not sure what I was thinking--trying to talk sense into someone who obviously just doesn't get it.

I'm not even saying McCoy should get all of the carries, my whole point is the team needs to run the ball more OVERALL to help set up the passing game. Just because the team who won the SB last year wasn't a rushing team doesn't change history showing teams who are successful, typically, try to run the ball which helps open up the passing game--whether they lead the league in rushing or not is irrelevant. Just keeping the defense honest is the point. I guess he missed that concept in Football 101.

But I also agree with you that McCoy should not have been put in the situation where he got hurt in the last game. It was stupid at that point in that situation.
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.