Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: What amazes me about Reid
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
xsv
.. is that you would think that in 14 years he would have at least *tried* to have a run oriented game at least once or twice.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (xsv @ Nov 19 2012, 12:23 PM) *
.. is that you would think that in 14 years he would have at least *tried* to have a run oriented game at least once or twice.


The funny thing is, whenever McNabb would get injured, the backup tended to have a much more balanced attack, and our backups were overall pretty successful. Then McNabb would come back, and get the ole 50 per game deal - he would still win games obviously, but it was more of a struggle than with obviously inferior QBs.

Reid has certainly ran the ball enough at times for us to have a sample size of results when he does and when he doesn't - that's the most infuriating thing. Besides the mentioned 10-1 record with McCoy running 20 times, we used to have some insane stat with Westbrook too, I forget what but it was similar except over a longer period of time. I'll look it up when I'm bored one day (during the next Eagles game).
Dr. Claw
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Nov 19 2012, 12:39 PM) *
The funny thing is, whenever McNabb would get injured, the backup tended to have a much more balanced attack, and our backups were overall pretty successful. Then McNabb would come back, and get the ole 50 per game deal - he would still win games obviously, but it was more of a struggle than with obviously inferior QBs.

Reid has certainly ran the ball enough at times for us to have a sample size of results when he does and when he doesn't - that's the most infuriating thing. Besides the mentioned 10-1 record with McCoy running 20 times, we used to have some insane stat with Westbrook too, I forget what but it was similar except over a longer period of time. I'll look it up when I'm bored one day (during the next Eagles game).


Foles screwed up throwing that long ball in the game prior... second Andy and Marty saw that, you knew what was going to happen.

mcnabbulous
So, lets just say hypothetically, Lesean carried the ball at least 20 times a game. That would mean he would have a minimum of 320 carries during the season. But inevitably more, since a few times he would have more than 20.

So lets just say, he has 335 carries for the season. Last year, that would have ranked second behind MJD. He has a whopping 86 carries this year.

Of course, we'd also be undefeated (according to HoP logic) so we'd be in the playoffs. Now we'd have 3 more games of 20+ carries. So at the end of the season, he'd be pushing 400 carries.

Of course, that doesn't consider the fact that McCoy caught 78 balls last year. But those touches have no impact on his body, so I don't know why I'd even be talking about them.

Now, consider that McCoy is a lean 208 pounds.

Yeah, lets just keep pounding the ball to him. That is a good policy.
Phits
So the logic is "don't use him that much in hopes that we limit his carries so they don't add up? Even though he probably only has 2-3 years remaining at an elite level of play? Perhaps we should cut the crusts on his toast as well. I wonder who holds his purse during the games.


QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 19 2012, 02:27 PM) *
So, lets just say hypothetically, Lesean carried the ball at least 20 times a game. That would mean he would have a minimum of 320 carries during the season. But inevitably more, since a few times he would have more than 20.

So lets just say, he has 335 carries for the season. Last year, that would have ranked second behind MJD. He has a whopping 86 carries this year.

Of course, we'd also be undefeated (according to HoP logic) so we'd be in the playoffs. Now we'd have 3 more games of 20+ carries. So at the end of the season, he'd be pushing 400 carries.

Of course, that doesn't consider the fact that McCoy caught 78 balls last year. But those touches have no impact on his body, so I don't know why I'd even be talking about them.

Now, consider that McCoy is a lean 208 pounds.

Yeah, lets just keep pounding the ball to him. That is a good policy.

mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 19 2012, 03:41 PM) *
So the logic is "don't use him that much in hopes that we limit his carries so they don't add up? Even though he probably only has 2-3 years remaining at an elite level of play? Perhaps we should cut the crusts on his toast as well. I wonder who holds his purse during the games.

Not if he's used appropriately.

Your logic is to overuse McCoy to compensate for the rest of our shitty team? As if a couple McCoy carries are the only thing holding us back from being a true contender.

One of the reasons he is elite is because he's such a threat is because he's a duel threat. Having him run the ball into the heart of monsters is unnecessary.

Did you know that during Marshall Faulk's three best seasons, he rushed the ball 253, 253, and 260 times? Do you think he was underused?

I mean, Lesean carried it 273 times last year...and he was.

Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 19 2012, 02:53 PM) *
Not if he's used appropriately.

Your logic is to overuse McCoy to compensate for the rest of our shitty team? As if a couple McCoy carries are the only thing holding us back from being a true contender.

One of the reasons he is elite is because he's such a threat is because he's a duel threat. Having him run the ball into the heart of monsters is unnecessary.

Did you know that during Marshall Faulk's three best seasons, he rushed the ball 253, 253, and 260 times? Do you think he was underused?

I mean, Lesean carried it 273 times last year...and he was.

My logic is that football players (RB's especially) have a limited shelf life. You should take advantage of their "elite" years.

You used Marshall Faulk as a comparison, his last productive year as an elite back was at age 28. He never rushed for 1000 yards after that and retired 4 seasons later. Another comparison would have been to our own Brian Westbrook, he peaked at 28 signed a nice contract and went downhill from there.

The window is small and the talent is elite...let him play and do his thing. We aren't contenders so what harm is there to allowing one of our hardest working players to reach their full potential.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 19 2012, 04:31 PM) *
You used Marshall Faulk as a comparison, his last productive year as an elite back was at age 28. He never rushed for 1000 yards after that and retired 4 seasons later. Another comparison would have been to our own Brian Westbrook, he peaked at 28 signed a nice contract and went downhill from there.


Also, while Faulk had many games with 20, 25, even 30 carries, he was part of the 'greatest show on turf,' one of the best offenses ever. He was one of 5 elite weapons on that team, and since they balanced the run and pass so well, they were almost impossible to stop. So yes, there were many games when they would be up by 20-30 points late and sit Faulk, eating at the amount of carries he might have*.....or, they would score so fast that would do the same.

*Vermeil and Martz presumably understood why you don't have your #1 player out there when up or down by a lot with little time left, especially when it's just to pad his carries
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 19 2012, 05:31 PM) *
My logic is that football players (RB's especially) have a limited shelf life. You should take advantage of their "elite" years.

You used Marshall Faulk as a comparison, his last productive year as an elite back was at age 28. He never rushed for 1000 yards after that and retired 4 seasons later. Another comparison would have been to our own Brian Westbrook, he peaked at 28 signed a nice contract and went downhill from there.


McCoy is currently 24. He should have about 4 more elite years. Why shorten that by running him into the ground for some shitty team? How'd that work out for Chris Johnson?

QUOTE
The window is small and the talent is elite...let him play and do his thing. We aren't contenders so what harm is there to allowing one of our hardest working players to reach their full potential.

The harm is wearing him down more than needs to be done. He is one of the hardest working players in the league, as evidenced by being 4th in touches. He's not underused.

QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Nov 19 2012, 05:38 PM) *
He was one of 5 elite weapons on that team, and since they balanced the run and pass so well, they were almost impossible to stop.

But they didn't. That's the point. We run the ball as much as them. McCoy carries the ball more than Faulk did. They were impossible to stop because Kurt Warner was giving them all-time great QB play. We haven't had anything that sniffed that

We are not a good team. Running McCoy into the ground wouldn't change that. Yesterday, Brown was much more effective running the ball anyways. They combined for 20 carries. It didn't matter.

Our team is shit. 20 carries doesn't mean shit. Having an effective, ball control running attack only works if you have a defense that can stop someone. We don't.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 19 2012, 04:58 PM) *
McCoy is currently 24. He should have about 4 more elite years. Why shorten that by running him into the ground for some shitty team? How'd that work out for Chris Johnson?

How did it work out for Adrian Peterson? As for Chris Johnson, he is currently ranked 5th in the NFL in rushing yards @ 5.1 per attempt. How about Arian Foster?

QUOTE
The harm is wearing him down more than needs to be done. He is one of the hardest working players in the league, as evidenced by being 4th in touches. He's not underused.

Statistically that will happen any way. You want to circumvent the inevitable.

QUOTE
We are not a good team. Running McCoy into the ground wouldn't change that.

Using that logic, why did Big Red give the green light to run McCoy late in the 4th, down by 25? Reid said: "McCoy was in the game because the Eagles were trying to catch up and win." I guess he was planning to use that patented 25 point concussion play. Too bad it didn't work. It is ironic that he "chose" to run the ball instead of pass down by that much
D Rock
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 19 2012, 11:55 PM) *
Using that logic, why did Big Red give the green light to run McCoy late in the 4th

Hang him when he doesn't run. Hang him when he does. It's time for him to go, obviously . . . but this is more than a bit dumb.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 19 2012, 06:55 PM) *
How did it work out for Adrian Peterson? As for Chris Johnson, he is currently ranked 5th in the NFL in rushing yards @ 5.1 per attempt. How about Arian Foster?

Peterson is truly a freak of nature, and built to take a bigger pounding than McCoy, but even he had a pretty significant dropoff after his heavy load year.

Johnson? He was absolutely awful his 2 years after his big season. His ypc dropped by a full 1.5 yards.

Foster? Since his big year, he has lost a full yard on his ypc in the two subsequent seasons.

And that's just it. Basically it takes two years away from these guys at an elite level when you pound them into the ground. We're in year one for MJD.

Do you think it's worth having 2 down years for Shady, to salvage this suck ass team? I could see if we were close, but this team is awful.

QUOTE
Statistically that will happen any way. You want to circumvent the inevitable.

Yes, it will. But it can be delayed. Why you're in a rush to wear him out is beyond me.

QUOTE
Using that logic, why did Big Red give the green light to run McCoy late in the 4th, down by 25? Reid said: "McCoy was in the game because the Eagles were trying to catch up and win." I guess he was planning to use that patented 25 point concussion play. Too bad it didn't work. It is ironic that he "chose" to run the ball instead of pass down by that much

I'm not defending the decision to use McCoy late in the game. It was stupid. With that said, I don't believe Reid really believes they had a chance to win the game. Nor do I think he really blames himself after every loss. It's coach speak.
TGryn
QUOTE (xsv @ Nov 19 2012, 10:23 AM) *
.. is that you would think that in 14 years he would have at least *tried* to have a run oriented game at least once or twice.

2003. Three-headed monster: Duce, Buckhalter, Westbrook. 9th in total rushing yards.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/phi/2003.htm
Phits
QUOTE (D Rock @ Nov 19 2012, 07:48 PM) *
Hang him when he doesn't run. Hang him when he does. It's time for him to go, obviously . . . but this is more than a bit dumb.

so with 2minutes to go....down by 25 points you think it is logically to use your starting rb to poound it in? and then provide the excuse that you were trying to win the game.

i have heard the walrus say dumb things in the past, but this makes him soound even dimmer than.....
Zero
I know I don't measure up to some of the football junkies here, but isn't the whole point to use a run first offense vs a pass first offense? It seems to me that Reid has designed his plays, play calling and game plan based on passing and not on running the ball. Reid has been quoted as saying he uses the pass to set up the run. It's his philosophy.

I don't think it's as much about how often Shady carries the ball as it is about what kind of players are here, how the players are coached, how they practice and the rythm of the play calling. Remember BMitch saying that they didn't even practice the run?

A new coach with a run oriented offense has the RBs here to make it work. He may need a couple of changes to the OL and a blocking TE, and a change in philosophy would make it easier for Foles to have success.
nephillymike
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 19 2012, 02:27 PM) *
So, lets just say hypothetically, Lesean carried the ball at least 20 times a game. That would mean he would have a minimum of 320 carries during the season. But inevitably more, since a few times he would have more than 20.

So lets just say, he has 335 carries for the season. Last year, that would have ranked second behind MJD. He has a whopping 86 carries this year.

Of course, we'd also be undefeated (according to HoP logic) so we'd be in the playoffs. Now we'd have 3 more games of 20+ carries. So at the end of the season, he'd be pushing 400 carries.

Of course, that doesn't consider the fact that McCoy caught 78 balls last year. But those touches have no impact on his body, so I don't know why I'd even be talking about them.

Now, consider that McCoy is a lean 208 pounds.

Yeah, lets just keep pounding the ball to him. That is a good policy.



Vick is 200 lbs. Let's keep playing chuck and duck, with an O-line that can't block anyone. That's a good policy.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Nov 20 2012, 12:01 AM) *
Vick is 200 lbs. Let's keep playing chuck and duck, with an O-line that can't block anyone. That's a good policy.


What's the alternative? I'd rather have Vick die on the field than Shady.
If Vick could identify a hot read, he could solve many of his own problems.
MistahNickells
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 19 2012, 11:24 PM) *
What's the alternative? I'd rather have Vick die on the field than Shady.
If Vick could identify a hot read, he could solve many of his own problems.

are you serious?
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (MistahNickells @ Nov 20 2012, 12:26 AM) *
are you serious?


About which part?
Phits
QUOTE (MistahNickells @ Nov 19 2012, 11:26 PM) *
are you serious?

He's an Andy head....nothing can be Andy's fault. So "logically" he blames everybody but Andy. Even though he is the captain of the ship...it's not really his fault.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 20 2012, 12:33 AM) *
He's an Andy head....nothing can be Andy's fault. So "logically" he blames everybody but Andy. Even though he is the captain of the ship...it's not really his fault.


Our roster is shit, which is largely Andy's fault. For that I blame him.
Our play calling isn't the problem.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 19 2012, 11:35 PM) *
Our roster is shit, which is largely Andy's fault. For that I blame him.
Our play calling isn't the problem.

Don't forget the coordinators they suck too. As for the play calling, that's up to interpretation.....however, you have repeatedly stated that AR doesn't call the plays.
Dr. Claw
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 19 2012, 11:24 PM) *
What's the alternative? I'd rather have Vick die on the field than Shady.
If Vick could identify a hot read, he could solve many of his own problems.


Yeah, only the Eagles under Andy have never really used hot routes instead of changing protections/blocking assignments at the line (Vick has done this a number of times -- O-Line just blows now, particularly Dennis "Under The Bus" Kelly).

Where Vick has sucked is when he has played "Favre" ball (throwing into multiple coverage, trying to thread the needle) or just plain ol inaccuracy (Lions game INTs). The Blitz/quick pass BS was blown up for the most part after the AZ game.

It's the offense. And sometimes, it is the playcalling. It isn't so much Shady gets touches, but I think Zero said it best. This is a pass-to-set-up-the-run offense. It's been more successful when it's the other way around in recent years. The Cowboys game last season was a great example.



mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 20 2012, 01:54 AM) *
Don't forget the coordinators they suck too. As for the play calling, that's up to interpretation.....however, you have repeatedly stated that AR doesn't call the plays.

I think our coordinators would be fine if we were more talented. Especially on defense. Our guys were consistently in position to make plays. We just don't have enough guys who are willing to do so.

And you're right about playcalling. As I've also said, it comes down to execution. And we don't.
xsv
QUOTE (Dr. Claw @ Nov 20 2012, 07:31 AM) *
Yeah, only the Eagles under Andy have never really used hot routes instead of changing protections/blocking assignments at the line (Vick has done this a number of times -- O-Line just blows now, particularly Dennis "Under The Bus" Kelly).

They've used both hot routes and changing protections/blocking assignments at the line to combat various blitzes and defensive schemes.

QUOTE
Where Vick has sucked is when he has played "Favre" ball (throwing into multiple coverage, trying to thread the needle) or just plain ol inaccuracy (Lions game INTs).

I agree with this.

QUOTE
The Blitz/quick pass BS was blown up for the most part after the AZ game.

Disagree with this. Vick was better at picking up the blitz in the AZ game, but he still sucked at it this year, all of last year, and that last 6 games the year before that. He used to be able to beat the blitz with blazing speed and amazing athletic ability. He blazing speed is gone now, and his athletic ability is less than amazing anymore.

QUOTE
It's the offense. And sometimes, it is the playcalling. It isn't so much Shady gets touches, but I think Zero said it best. This is a pass-to-set-up-the-run offense. It's been more successful when it's the other way around in recent years. The Cowboys game last season was a great example.

It's the offense. Sometimes it's the playcalling. Sometimes it's the execution. Sometimes it's the talent level. Sometimes it's the scheme. Plenty of blame to go around.


footballinsider22
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 19 2012, 02:41 PM) *
So the logic is "don't use him that much in hopes that we limit his carries so they don't add up? Even though he probably only has 2-3 years remaining at an elite level of play? Perhaps we should cut the crusts on his toast as well. I wonder who holds his purse during the games.



HAHA this made me laugh. I agree football is a mans game and you cant always play with reckless abandon at every position, you have to be smart. We shouldnt be thinking about injuries but we should plan accordingly so they dont happen. Our team has the talent to go deep in the playoffs but obviously we wont be attaining that goal this year. I think Reid has to go- just to start a new era of eagles football. It would make sense Vick goes with him (im not entirely blaming him for this season), it remains that Vick is the leader of a sinking ship. You have to take responsibility for the men you lead.

The question is...who will be the new quarterback/coach combo? Thoughts??
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (footballinsider22 @ Nov 20 2012, 02:55 PM) *
The question is...who will be the new quarterback/coach combo? Thoughts??


Foles or a new draft pick.

Only decent free agent is Flacco, unless you want to give Jason Campbell a shot..... wacko.gif
footballinsider22
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Nov 20 2012, 02:58 PM) *
Foles or a new draft pick.

Only decent free agent is Flacco, unless you want to give Jason Campbell a shot..... wacko.gif


From what Iv seen from Foles im unimpressed. The odds of us getting/wanting Flacco are slim and if Jason Campbell starts as as eagle- im turning off my TV

Hope we land a promising rookie QB
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE
From what Iv seen from Foles im unimpressed.


Same here, but let's give him 6 more losses out of fairness before we write him off

QUOTE
The odds of us getting/wanting Flacco are slim


I know, I was just pointing out how slim the free agent QB pool was. Baltimore will make him their franchise.

QUOTE
if Jason Campbell starts as as eagle- im turning off my TV


No you won't, you'll watch every game like us. And feel like hanging yourself.

QUOTE
Hope we land a promising rookie QB


It's happened twice in the last 40 years, us drafting a good QB - we can only hope
TGryn
Before we start hanging Foles in effigy, note that it was his first start. For comparison:
Foles first start (2012): 21-46, 204 yds, 0 TDs, 2 INTs
Randall's first start (1985): 14-34, 211 yds, 0 TDs, 4 INTs
McNabb's first start (1999): 8-21, 60 yds
and on the opposite side,
Hoying's first start (1997): 26-38, 276 yds
TGryn
Hard to believe, but a few months ago the biggest complaint among the media was that Andy was too short with them. I note that as promised he's much more open with them than in the past in his press conferences. Doesn't seem to be making much of a difference, does it?

The media can't hurt you if you're winning, and can't save you if you're losing. The next coach had better learn that quickly.
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.