Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Report Card Time
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Pages: 1, 2
nephillymike
I was thinking it was a good time to get the temperature of the board on the most important offseason moves.

On a scale of 1-10, with 1 being absolutely horrible, 5 average and 10 absolutely fantastic, rate and discuss the following offseason moves:

Here are mine

Head Coach - Chip Kelly - 8. I wanted Bradley as my first choice as I was concerned how Kelly's offense would translate and concern about him getting enough NFL experience on his staff. I love his attitude, he gets Philly, and he seems humble and seems to be willing to get as many different opinions in the room when he makes decisions. I've gotten more respect as a fan out of him in a few weeks than I have from Reid in years. He gets Philly. He is comfortable in his own skin. It's only preliminary as it will come down to playoff wins in the end, but so far it's refreshing.

OC - Pat Shurmer - 5. As a second fiddle to Kelly, not a great success story in CLE, but he is well respected for what he did in Philly while he was here. Kelly will be the defacto OC, but it is good to have someone with NFL experience.

OL - Jeff Stoutland - 9. As Alabama OL coach, this guy worked with the best in the NCAA, just ask ND!. With that level of OLC experience, he is a welcome fiery addition.

DC - Billy Davis - 2. This guy may talk a good game, but the lack of results are extremely disappointing. He has been fired 11 times in 21 years. Think about that!. I posted previously of how poor his D's were in his four years of DC experience. To me, he has proven he can't do it. It's a critical hire in a position of weakness for Kelly. Not good.

DL - Jerry Azzinaro - 7. I've heard good things about him on the airwaves from those "in the know'. Definitely a fiery guy. Bring the violence!!

QB - Michael Vick - 6. This decision has been getting killed on the airwaves since it was announced. I've warmed up to the idea a little. Here is why. #1 it is open competition. Taking Kelly at his word, if this is the case, then we will either see Vick playing at a high level, or we'll see him on the bench. Kelly has no long ties and will not be shy about sitting him for poor play. #2. Aside from Smith, who I'm not crazy about, there was no real upgrade out there. I'd rather have Vick, Foles and a third stringer (Dixon?), then going with Foles, a washed up guy and then Dixon. #3. The new deal makes him tradeable if need be. If someone desparate offered a 2nd round pick, would you? Having him here gives us an option to trade him or Foles if the price is right.

Now I agree that Vick's play the last two years was inexcusable and rookie like. For as many turnovers as he had, he threw so many up for grabs it could have been much worse. Just in the CLE opener, he could have had three more picks. I also agree that he looks like a concussed fighter in that a tap to the head is a threat to knock him out. some of the injuries he's sustained this year were on weak hits. However, Andy's chuck and duck offense with a line that couldn't block me was the worst thing for Vick. He is not a 35 throw a game QB. He is not good enough. But, could he be an effective 20-25 throw a game QB with a good running game (you know, one that RUNS THE DAMN BALL ANDY!) and one that uses his legs in a structured way, could he move up to a top 12 QB again? When he was playing well in 2010, that was the best QB play we had here ever and he had no TO like McNabb did in 2004. To me, the tease is worth the chance in what can be as short of a commitment to him as we need to make it.

VP Tom Gamble - 9. We said they needed more "football" people in the front office, and they went out and got one of the best. I'm hoping he brings SF toughness to Philly. He's happy to be back home and kudos for Howie and Jeff for making it happen.

There you have it. One guy's opinions.

Time's yours.
Dreagon
I give you guys an A for Kelly. Sometimes you've got to take that chance and bring in the fresh new perspective from the college ranks. It's worked before.
Assistant coach wise, I'm really puzzled by the desire for Cleveland coaches. That's just not the first place I would have looked to find my offensive and defensive coordinators.
The Vick thing is a bit of a head scratcher too, but I'm waiting to see what you guys do in the draft to put that move into perspective. I don't think the Vick signing is a complete move until it can be put into context with how you draft.
GQSmooth



On a scale of 1-10, with 1 being absolutely horrible, 5 average and 10 absolutely fantastic, rate and discuss the following offseason moves:



Head Coach - Chip Kelly - 9. I wanted Bradley as well but the more I read about Chip Kelly, the more I realize he is probably the best thing that could have happened. This guy is at the forefront of changes in offensive football. Someone with the potential and on the way to being mentioned in the same breath as Paul Brown, or Bill Walsh. Think about some of the biggest problems this team has had with Reid. Inability to get play calls in efficiently, inability to execute a hurry up offense, wasted timeouts, inabilty to adjust to what the defense is showing. These were problems derived from the wordiness of the WCO. Remember Gruden's QB show with Cam Newton? Newton couldn't rehash Gruden's play call. Guess what Newton was ahead of the game. It's why Kelly brought Shurmer in. Kelly wants to learn the finer things of the WCO and avoid problems with transitions. Kelly wants the whole playbook to be one or two words telling everyone what the play call is, the shifts, blocking assignments and reads. Kelly will play to a defense's weaknesses. He will utilize statistical analysis to know the best play for a given situation. The best part is Kelly would rather beat you with the running game then passes. He wants to keep defenses off balance, no more teeing off on our QBs.

OC - Pat Shurmer - 6. Has NFL experience, WCO experience, has done well developing quarterbacks in the past. He is here to learn from Kelly and to teach Kelly what he knows about NFL offenses and the WCO.

OL - Jeff Stoutland - 10. Alabama OL coach, need we say more??

QB Coach Lazor- Only mentioning him because I think he is one of the brightest minds in offensive football. Watched him at UVA, wasn't crazy about his QB development but he is one of the best playcallers for a pro style offense and has a strong appreciation for a good running game.

DC - Billy Davis - 4. Experienced, but poor performance in past. Was fired by a defensive head coach!! On the positive side he has awesome recommendations. But what is more important is the staff supporting him. A staff that has a proven ability to develop quality LBs.

DL - Jerry Azzinaro - 8 Lack of NFL experience is a negative but I trust in Chip

QB - Michael Vick - 7. I'm curious what Vick will look like in this offense. Vick will have a legitimate play action. This offense is as good as it gets for Vick and he will not be responsible for line calls and reads as in the past. I also suspect he will have a shorter leash and will have fewer reads in this offense. If Vick is having a bad game Kelly wont make him pass his way out. Kelly will kill defenses for bringing their safeties up and blitzing their lineman without reading for the run game first.


VP Tom Gamble - 9. Howie is smarter than we thought. I'm glad their is now a personnel man in the front office. It is desperately needed.


mcnabbulous
I would agree almost universally with GQ.
D Rock
Me too. But I'm less down on Davis giving him a 5 instead of a 4 and Vick gets a 7? Really? Vick gets a -10 (negative 10) because there is literally ZERO UPSIDE to this move. Still got 7-10 million tied up in the turd. Assuming he starts (you really think an open competition exists between a 7 million dollar guy and a 500k guy???) we get no development from Foles, x, y, or z. I'd rather bring back Bobby Hoying and be sure we get another top 5 draft pick again next year. One more year of vick's schtick? No thanks. His ceiling is .500 ball, and he's more likely simply a loser here on out. I'm willing to give the new regime it's shot. But I simply can't stomach another year of the mv7 show. How many coaches blood does this coach killer need on his hands before the league shit cans him? A 33 year old quarterback who has NEVER digested an offensive system is suppose to get THIS one? Now? Really? Put lipstick on a pig, it's still a fucking PIG.

Fuck You eagles for Sucking 100% of the enthusiasm I've had for this new regime right out of the stadium.
GQSmooth
D Rock, there is no long term commitment with Vick. Vick is simply enabling Kelly to put his system in place. He is a place keeper, he plays like he has in the past he is gone, he plays at his talent and follows Kelly's rules and its the best situation ever. Kelly wants to install his entire system, he can't do that with Foles.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (GQSmooth @ Feb 13 2013, 10:07 PM) *
D Rock, there is no long term commitment with Vick. Vick is simply enabling Kelly to put his system in place. He is a place keeper, he plays like he has in the past he is gone, he plays at his talent and follows Kelly's rules and its the best situation ever. Kelly wants to install his entire system, he can't do that with Foles.


Couldn't agree more. If Kelly wanted Foles running his offense, this wouldn't have happened. Vick was already on the roster and allows us to experiment with the stuff that worked for Kelly at Oregon.
Otherwise, we have an offense with Foles, followed by an entirely new offense with the guy Kelly really wants running his offense. That would make no sense.
D Rock
QUOTE (GQSmooth @ Feb 14 2013, 04:07 AM) *
D Rock, there is no long term commitment with Vick. Vick is simply enabling Kelly to put his system in place. He is a place keeper, he plays like he has in the past he is gone, he plays at his talent and follows Kelly's rules and its the best situation ever. Kelly wants to install his entire system, he can't do that with Foles.

You're trippin. He wants a place holder? Get the dood from Balto's practice squad who was a heisman finalist while under Kelly and have him duel it out with Foles. He'd only cost league minimum.

The fact that they resigned Vick shows that Chip is just as blinded by vick's "gifts" as everybody else. It also show's he's as egotistical as Reid thinking he can be THAT GUY who gets something out of these "gifts." While we're on it . . . half of those "gifts" no longer exist. The turd was being caught from behind by 300lbs guys with regularity.

It's a wasted season ahead with absolutely ZERO upside. Vick's "talents" are dwindling faster than Fiji's coastline. In the career arch of a quarterback . . . 33 year old guys are left with experience, understanding and diagnostic skills that have been developed over 10 years of playing in the league. Vick has NONE of that on which to rely now that his "talents" have rendered him mortal. He's a known comodity. He's a fucking turd. And one who's going to eat up 7-10 mill of cap space to boot.

mcnabbulous
Every coach is arrogant. That's how they get to the top level of one of the most competitive career paths. The idea that Reid was any more arrogant than anyone else was a ridiculous fallacy that too many people bought into.

This season was lost to me before the Vick signing. We aren't going to be under any circumstances.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 14 2013, 04:13 AM) *
Couldn't agree more. If Kelly wanted Foles running his offense, this wouldn't have happened. Vick was already on the roster and allows us to experiment with the stuff that worked for Kelly at Oregon.
Otherwise, we have an offense with Foles, followed by an entirely new offense with the guy Kelly really wants running his offense. That would make no sense.

What makes you think THIS system is the one vick will get? He's a mental midget who's next digested offense will be his first. The guy is a career freelancer with horrible decision making and no ability to read a defense. I'm supposed to expect him to read a defensive end in the "read/option?" Please. The only thing vick does better than other quarterbacks is turn the ball over. He's stellar at that.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 14 2013, 04:18 AM) *
Every coach is arrogant. That's how they get to the top level of one of the most competitive career paths. The idea that Reid was any more arrogant than anyone else was a ridiculous fallacy that too many people bought into.

This season was lost to me before the Vick signing. We aren't going to be under any circumstances.

Nope.

Reid's arrogance is legendary. How many other coaches tried to put so many square pegs into round holes? I know I don't need to list the cases. We're all painfully aware.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 13 2013, 10:18 PM) *
What makes you think THIS system is the one vick will get? He's a mental midget who's next digested offense will be his first. The guy is a career freelancer with horrible decision making and no ability to read a defense. I'm supposed to expect him to read a defensive end in the "read/option?" Please. The only thing vick does better than other quarterbacks is turn the ball over. He's stellar at that.


I don't think Vick will thrive. That's not the point. It allows us to get the system in place for everyone else.

My expectations for next season were in the 4-5 win range with Foles. Now I think we could win 7 or 8. But...as I mentioned in another thread, Vick has thrived when he's caught defenses off guard. College, early career, 2010. Then defenses catch up and he can't adjust.

There is a very slim chance that our new offense catches teams off guard next year and we exceed expectations. Ultimately they will catch up, but it may make things fun and interesting for a bit.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 14 2013, 04:31 AM) *
I don't think Vick will thrive. That's not the point. It allows us to get the system in place for everyone else.

Uh, yeah. You already said that. Your point however, is riddled with fallacies.

If all they wanted was a "place holder" why go with a 7-10 million dollar turd who has never played in the system when they could have gone with a league minimum former heisman finalist who played for years in said system to great success?

You'd have an easier argument to make if you were of the "vick gives us the best chance to win now" frame of mind. You'd be wrong of course, but you'd have a better argument.

This "place holder" nonsense is just that . . . nonsense. Vick is as unfamiliar as everyone else, if not moreso and is 14-20 times more expensive than other available options.
mcnabbulous
Vick does give us the best chance to win. It's still virtually none, but it's better than Foles or Dennis Dixon.
I also didn't say all they wanted was a placeholder. I assume they want to win as quickly as possible.
Zero
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 13 2013, 11:16 PM) *
Uh, yeah. You already said that. Your point however, is riddled with fallacies.

If all they wanted was a "place holder" why go with a 7-10 million dollar turd who has never played in the system when they could have gone with a league minimum former heisman finalist who played for years in said system to great success?

You'd have an easier argument to make if you were of the "vick gives us the best chance to win now" frame of mind. You'd be wrong of course, but you'd have a better argument.

This "place holder" nonsense is just that . . . nonsense. Vick is as unfamiliar as everyone else, if not moreso and is 14-20 times more expensive than other available options.

Two points: Kelly may still have the mentality of a college coach and Vick is easier to trade with the restructured deal.

A college coach will just as soon go with a talented freshman as stick with a yawn of a senior.

Some arrogant coach without a QB somewhere in the NFL may think he can wring some gold out of Vick and his 1 year deal makes it a more acceptable risk.

Two points: Kelly may still have the mentality of a college coach and Vick is easier to trade with the restructured deal.

A college coach will just as soon go with a talented freshman as stick with a yawn of a senior.

Some arrogant coach without a QB somewhere in the NFL may think he can wring some gold out of Vick and his 1 year deal makes it a more acceptable risk.

I'm with GQ too except I'd give the Vick move a 5 for "give it a try, nothing to lose" and Davis a 6 because of all the positive reports he's getting from people who couldn't care less about Philadelphia. I'll also give Shurmer a 6 for his QB history and his ability to teach Kelly about NFL offense.
nephillymike
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 13 2013, 10:02 PM) *
Me too. But I'm less down on Davis giving him a 5 instead of a 4 and Vick gets a 7? Really? Vick gets a -10 (negative 10) because there is literally ZERO UPSIDE to this move. Still got 7-10 million tied up in the turd. Assuming he starts (you really think an open competition exists between a 7 million dollar guy and a 500k guy???) we get no development from Foles, x, y, or z. I'd rather bring back Bobby Hoying and be sure we get another top 5 draft pick again next year. One more year of vick's schtick? No thanks. His ceiling is .500 ball, and he's more likely simply a loser here on out. I'm willing to give the new regime it's shot. But I simply can't stomach another year of the mv7 show. How many coaches blood does this coach killer need on his hands before the league shit cans him? A 33 year old quarterback who has NEVER digested an offensive system is suppose to get THIS one? Now? Really? Put lipstick on a pig, it's still a fucking PIG.

Fuck You eagles for Sucking 100% of the enthusiasm I've had for this new regime right out of the stadium.


Hey D, One could argue that his 2010 season gave Reid another year than he would have had with Kolb or McNabb had they played that year instead of Vick. Not a fan of his, but I think the upside is intriguing.
BirdsWinBaby
D is spot on

he hasnt even mentioned that trying to run a chip kelly offense will mean vick takes more hits than he did BEFORE. you remember 'before' right? those years where vick couldnt stay healthy? ever? now you want a guy who has proven an inability to make quick decisions to stick the ball in the belly of a RB look up and make a quick decision?

there is no upside. kelly is mesmerized by vick like so many before him. vick isnt even that vick anymore.....it seriously compromises any optimism about kelly
BirdsWinBaby
also it should be mentioned....

refs NEVER give vick the benefit of protection after he throws. brady (et. al.) gets a millisecond after he lets the ball go before the refs will throw a flag if you hit him. Vick gets closer to 2 seconds. refs are used to seeing vick on his back every play.

any DC who knows this will simply say, "i dont care if he hands off or not. when Vick runs the option, blast him!" even if Vick hands off and shady runs for a TD, how many TDs will it take before Vick doesnt get up? 2? 3? whether his fragile ribs crack again or he gets another concussion

there is no upside
Zero
QUOTE (BirdsWinBaby @ Feb 14 2013, 08:12 AM) *
D is spot on

he hasnt even mentioned that trying to run a chip kelly offense will mean vick takes more hits than he did BEFORE. you remember 'before' right? those years where vick couldnt stay healthy? ever? now you want a guy who has proven an inability to make quick decisions to stick the ball in the belly of a RB look up and make a quick decision?

there is no upside. kelly is mesmerized by vick like so many before him. vick isnt even that vick anymore.....it seriously compromises any optimism about kelly


OK, I'm an idiot and my name is Zero.

If you're selling a house do you tell everyone how nice it is or how shabby it is? They may not be trying to unload Vick but so far they haven't hurt their chances. If Vick doesn't do what we think Kelly thinks he will do, what have they lost?

Is his cap hit bigger now? Smaller? With his original contract the chances of trading him were pretty much ... zero.
Phits
QUOTE (Zero @ Feb 14 2013, 08:26 AM) *
OK, I'm an idiot and my name is Zero.

If you're selling a house do you tell everyone how nice it is or how shabby it is? They may not be trying to unload Vick but so far they haven't hurt their chances. If Vick doesn't do what we think Kelly thinks he will do, what have they lost?

Is his cap hit bigger now? Smaller? With his original contract the chances of trading him were pretty much ... zero.

My thoughts exactly. If the team was cap strapped, there would be a concern. To me it looks like a stop gap move. No harm no foul, especially for a team that isn't supposed to contend this year.
D Rock
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Feb 14 2013, 11:58 AM) *
Hey D, One could argue that his 2010 season gave Reid another year than he would have had with Kolb or McNabb had they played that year instead of Vick. Not a fan of his, but I think the upside is intriguing.

That's my point, Mikey. His "upside" is a complete myth.
D Rock
QUOTE (Zero @ Feb 14 2013, 01:26 PM) *
OK, I'm an idiot and my name is Zero.

If you're selling a house do you tell everyone how nice it is or how shabby it is? They may not be trying to unload Vick but so far they haven't hurt their chances. If Vick doesn't do what we think Kelly thinks he will do, what have they lost?

Is his cap hit bigger now? Smaller? With his original contract the chances of trading him were pretty much ... zero.

They still are zero, zero.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 14 2013, 04:24 AM) *
I also didn't say all they wanted was a placeholder.

No sir. You didn't "say" it.

But you did say that you "couldn't agree more" with it.

Thus the concept is attributable to you as well as GQ.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 14 2013, 12:04 PM) *
That's my point, Mikey. His "upside" is a complete myth.

With this, we're in 100% agreement. Vick no longer has upside. In fact, his skills are all on the downslope.

I'm just not very high on Foles at this point, especially running the type of offense that Chip apparently wants to implement. Which is why I'm fine with Vick.

It also leads me to believe we'll be targeting a QB very early, which increases my hope that we draft Smith, which is what I really want.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 14 2013, 12:11 PM) *
No sir. You didn't "say" it.

But you did say that you "couldn't agree more" with it.

Thus the concept is attributable to you as well as GQ.

Once again, I'll get into semantics, but no one said "all they want" is a placeholder. They obviously don't think Foles is the guy for the job, so they can have Vick implement the offense with no long-term commitment. Which is fine by me.

Frankly, I'd be fine with seeing Dixon do it too, but I believe Vick gives us a better chance of winning than Dixon.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 14 2013, 04:17 PM) *
With this, we're in 100% agreement. Vick no longer has upside. In fact, his skills are all on the downslope.

I'm just not very high on Foles at this point, especially running the type of offense that Chip apparently wants to implement. Which is why I'm fine with Vick.

It also leads me to believe we'll be targeting a QB very early, which increases my hope that we draft Smith, which is what I really want.

Why then would you give the resigning of Vick a 7 rating out of 10? It's a HORRIBLE move. Didja read GCobb's piece on it? He's spot on. Kelly essentially slammed the door on any "honeymoon period" with the city and fan base.

I like Foles, but agree he doesn't fit here anymore w chips hiring.

I would have brought in Dixon as the place holder. He knows the system better than any other player in the league. He's talented physically. He's dirt fucking cheap. Dixon is more physically gifted than geno smith by a wide margin. If Dixon doesn't get hurt his last year w ducks, he wins heisman (he STILL nearly won it missing 5 games to injury) and been a top 10 pick. Geno isn't even a first rounder in a normal year.

We have way too many holes on this roster to justify reaching for smith at #4. There are too many slam dunk prospects available to us at 4 to justify trading back. I'd rather have 1 sure fire blue chipper that 20 potential upside guys.

We earned this top 5 pick. We were that bad. Don't piss away the singular benefit of a shitty season w a trade dwn to familiar (middle of the pack) territory. And please don't reach on geno smith. If he's there in round 2? Fine.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 14 2013, 04:19 PM) *
but I believe Vick gives us a better chance of winning than Dixon.

Based on what exactly? His diminishing skill set? His penchant for turn overs? His ability to read defenses? His glass ribs, or readily concussed dome? His comparatively ginormous salary? His superior understanding of chips system? Maybe it's that he's such a quality human being? ...oh wait. Forget that last one...
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 14 2013, 12:30 PM) *
Why then would you give the resigning of Vick a 7 rating out of 10? It's a HORRIBLE move. Didja read GCobb's piece on it? He's spot on. Kelly essentially slammed the door on any "honeymoon period" with the city and fan base.

I value my time too much to read GCobb. *says the guy that spends way too much time around here.

What the city of Philadelphia thinks of Chip is irrelevant to me. The city and fan base have proven themselves to be moronic asshats time after time. You seem to forget that I was the last remaining Reid supporter.

QUOTE
I would have brought in Dixon as the place holder. He knows the system better than any other player in the league. He's talented physically. He's dirt fucking cheap. Dixon is more physically gifted than geno smith by a wide margin. If Dixon doesn't get hurt his last year w ducks, he wins heisman (he STILL nearly won it missing 5 games to injury) and been a top 10 pick. Geno isn't even a first rounder in a normal year.


You're crazy regarding Geno. He is a far more polished passer than Dixon. And he's a film junkie to boot.

QUOTE
We have way too many holes on this roster to justify reaching for smith at #4. There are too many slam dunk prospects available to us at 4 to justify trading back. I'd rather have 1 sure fire blue chipper that 20 potential upside guys.

There is no such thing as a slam dunk prospect. Ask Robert Gallery or Aaron Curry.

QUOTE
We earned this top 5 pick. We were that bad. Don't piss away the singular benefit of a shitty season w a trade dwn to familiar (middle of the pack) territory. And please don't reach on geno smith. If he's there in round 2? Fine.

This is one of those seasons where there is no definite #1 overall pick. That's usually a bad sign.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 14 2013, 12:39 PM) *
Based on what exactly? His diminishing skill set? His penchant for turn overs? His ability to read defenses? His glass ribs, or readily concussed dome? His comparatively ginormous salary? His superior understanding of chips system? Maybe it's that he's such a quality human being? ...oh wait. Forget that last one...

Like I said, we are a 4-5 win team with Foles or Dixon at QB. I think we're a 7-8 win team with Vick. And if we catch teams off guard, it could be better.

If all of those bad traits come to a head (as they very well may) than he gets benched and it's no skin off my back. If not, he's still a very good athlete that can make plays with his arm and leg. Not like he used to, but he adds a threat that defenses have to consider. I think his presence on the field will make Shady/Brown more dangerous.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 14 2013, 04:54 PM) *
I think we're a 7-8 win team with Vick.

Again...

Based on what? The mountain of evidence would suggest you're tripping.

"IF" his bad habits return?

Dood is 33. Those habits are the rule. 2010 was the exception. C'mon man. You know this makes no sense, and your defense of it is completely illogical.

I enjoy a good rhetorical go'round, but I think your just going dwn this path for entertainments sake.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 14 2013, 01:03 PM) *
Again...

Based on what? The mountain of evidence would suggest you're tripping.

"IF" his bad habits return?

Dood is 33. Those habits are the rule. 2010 was the exception. C'mon man. You know this makes no sense, and your defense of it is completely illogical.

I enjoy a good rhetorical go'round, but I think your just going dwn this path for entertainments sake.

The evidence suggests that Vick excels when defenses don't know what to expect from him. Right now, none of us have any idea what the Eagles offense is going to look like. That includes defensive coordinators around football.

Ultimately they will catch up, as they always do. But he could make it fun/interesting for a bit.

The general unknown is what excites me about it. But that is coming from a perspective where I have zero expectations for this team.
HOUSEoPAIN
On a scale of 1-10, with 1 being absolutely horrible, 5 average and 10 absolutely fantastic, rate and discuss the following offseason moves:

Head Coach - Chip Kelly - 6. I was excited as hell for Gus Bradley, and really thought we were going to get him. urious as to what he can do and excited that we'll have something new to look at next year, but I'm simply not sold on bringing him to the NFL. He did the right thing his first couple weeks here, going on WIP, the Wing Bowl, he appears very personable and passionate, which is good. I'm not going to bury the guy for bringing Vick back, but I also see Toastamugha still wearing an Eagles uniform, and I start to wonder.....I don't htink I've seen him make one single play in his time here.

OC - Pat Shurmer - 5. He gets a 5 out of pure indifference. This is Kelly's show, and Shurmur is here more or less as the equivalent to Happy Gilmore's caddy in his first golf tournament. "Just tell me when I'm doing something stupid, okay?" - "Where were you on that one dipshit?"

DC - Billy Davis - 2. He gets a 2 for the simple fact that we're running a 3-4, and he has experience in the 3-4. Then again, I ran a 3-4 with the Eagles in Madden '02 and '03, and won a ring each time. I'm still in shock that our coordinators are both from the Browns, and I have no idea where this hire comes from. If I was interviewing someone for a job, and saw that he's been with 11 companies in just over 20 years, I would inquire as to why.

QB - Michael Vick - 5. Again, I imagine most coaches wouldn't pass on a guy like Vick, and at least give him a chance to see how he works in their system. As long as Kelly is being honest, and there's an open competition for the job, I have no problem with it. If Foles plays better than Vick in the preseason and Vick still starts, then we will have a problem. If neither works out, draft a QB next year, try again.

VP Tom Gamble - 10.

Overall, it should be an interesting draft and preseason, which is more than we could say for the last few years. I think it's possible to have success assuming we have a goods draft and Kelly's systems work out. There are going to be a shit-ton of changes here, and my only worry is that if this guy completely bombs out, we're going to be fucked for years.


nephillymike
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 14 2013, 11:04 AM) *
That's my point, Mikey. His "upside" is a complete myth.



If you rank QB's based on QB rating or based on total yards from scrimmage (pass and run) or yards from scrimmage per game, out of 32 QB's next year, assuming Vick is the starter, where do you expect him to rank in those categories to be the failure you say he will be? Where would he need to rank in those categories for him to have achieved the upside you say isn't possible?

I ask because I think there is an upside. Define your upside by performance.

Now, I think there is an upside, but I am not confident that he will reach it. However, I think it's enough of a possibility (not probability) that it is worth a try. If I take Chip at his word, if vick doesn't do well, he'll be on the bench and Foles or someone else will be in.

One other thing for all, why the Dixon love? He's a Practice Squad QB. On my team, a PS QB is third string, if that. But if he is familair with Kelly's system, I'd sign him as thrid string, nothing else.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 14 2013, 05:23 PM) *
The evidence suggests that Vick excels when defenses don't know what to expect from him. Right now, none of us have any idea what the Eagles offense is going to look like. That includes defensive coordinators around football.

Oi - ***smacks forehead.

The same can be said of every offense and every quarterback. If the defense has no film on it or he . . . it's a disadvantage for them. This very simple truth falls short of vindicating the expendature of 7-10 million on a known turd of a 33 year old quarterback with no upside.

Defenses also wouldn't know what to expect from Dixon. But unlike Vick, Dixon actually knows the offense, has had SUCCESS in it . . . and comes at a mere fraction of the cost, bagage, and me first bullshit.

Bottom line . . . no matter what offense vick is attempting to run, there are two knowns.

1) He's gonna freelance because he can't read the defensive cues. He's just not as good at it now that he's the NFL equivalent of 300 years old.

and

2) Blitz the hell out of him and he'll shit the bed and hand you the ball.
D Rock
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Feb 14 2013, 06:32 PM) *
Define your upside by performance.

Wins vs. Losses. (period)

I don't care how many yards you get. If you turn the ball over at the end of 50% of your drives, I see nothing but downside.

Re: Dixon. I liked him when I saw him play for Pittsburgh. The guy had a stretch of bad luck his senior year with a season ending injury. He was a heisman finalist in Kelly's system and nearly won the dam thing despite missing 5 games to injury.

If we're looking for a short term solution with legitimate upside, it'd be Dixon. At the very least, we'd have a quarterback in place that knows the system inside and out, has succeeded in it and can help teach it to the rest of the offense.

Vick learning a new offense at 33 and costing 7-10 million when we could use that money on building an NFL quality defense makes absolutely zero sense to me.

Ok, let's pretend that Vick actually succeeds in this system. Aint gonna happen, but lets pretend for just a moment. Then what? Give him another super contract at 34 to a guy who has never been able to stay on the field? Either way, we're gonna need a new quarterback next year.

At least with Dixon, you've got a guy on the right side of 30 who you know is already a capable practitioner of this system. If he goes bust, we get another QB next year. If he succeeds in line with his track record . . . then you have a 27 year old who's primed for a run of a few years.

The worst case scenario is pretty much the same in each scenario. The best case scenario however is much rosier with Dixon. And you're spending 500k -ish vs. 7-10 mil.

Personnel matters in the NFL are all about risk vs. reward. There is more risk and less reward with Vick. That's obvious.
Eyrie
Kelly 9. He was the best candidate out there, and the Eagles got him. He may turn out to be a bust in the pros, but he has a massive upside as well which answers my one concern about firing Reid ("Can we do better than very good?").

Shurmur 7. He's been a head coach before, which adds value to having him as the OC.

Davis 5. I'm in "show me" mode here.

Vick -10. DRock has saved me a lot of typing, but I was tempted to mark Kelly down for this stupidity.

Gamble 10. Very respected and experienced - what's not to like?
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 14 2013, 02:51 PM) *
and comes at a mere fraction of the cost, bagage, and me first bullshit.

You keep harping on this, but Vick's roster presence is not going to impact our ability to sign anyone. And I don't pay the bills. So I don't give a shit what they pay him.

And the same can't be said about every QB and every system. Vick specifically has excelled when teams were unable to scheme for him. That's why he was so special in 2010. Once the Giants figured him out, the rest of the league used it as a blueprint.

We might get to see a little bit of that this year.

As for blitzing, I agree. But our system this year may be better equipped to handle that and put less responsibility on Vick. That obviously hasn't been the case for the past 2 years.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 14 2013, 07:00 PM) *
You keep harping on this, but Vick's roster presence is not going to impact our ability to sign anyone. And I don't pay the bills. So I don't give a shit what they pay him.

And the same can't be said about every QB and every system. Vick specifically has excelled when teams were unable to scheme for him. That's why he was so special in 2010. Once the Giants figured him out, the rest of the league used it as a blueprint.

We might get to see a little bit of that this year.

As for blitzing, I agree. But our system this year may be better equipped to handle that and put less responsibility on Vick. That obviously hasn't been the case for the past 2 years.

You're plumb wrong here, friend.

Vick has never excelled. So he had a few highlites sprinkled here and there throughout his .500 ball career. How many playoff games has he won?

And for the record, it was the vikings that "figured him out" and gave the league the blueprint.
D Rock
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Feb 14 2013, 06:58 PM) *
Vick -10. DRock has saved me a lot of typing, but I was tempted to mark Kelly down for this stupidity.

cheers.gif
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 14 2013, 03:11 PM) *
You're plumb wrong here, friend.

Vick has never excelled. So he had a few highlites sprinkled here and there throughout his .500 ball career. How many playoff games has he won?

He excelled for that 10 game stretch in 2010. He excelled as a freshman at VT. He was very dangerous and moderately successful his second year in the league. And he won 2 playoff games, including a relatively historic game at Lambeau field.

Don't confuse my points with suggesting he is a good QB. He's not and never has been. But at times, he has been dangerous to opposing defenses.

QUOTE
And for the record, it was the vikings that "figured him out" and gave the league the blueprint.

The blueprint was created in the first 3 quarters of the Giants game. Safeties deep and blitz the hell out of Vick.

The Vikings used it the following week.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 14 2013, 03:59 PM) *
jumpclap.gif

Gotta link? I'm not finding it.

It's all over Twitter. I'll add a link when I find one. 2 year deal.

http://www.phillymag.com/eagles/2013/02/14...-agree-to-deal/
mcnabbulous
Alright, D. Unlike these other schmucks around here that don't own up to being full of shit, what can we use as a reference point as to what would make the Vick signing a success?

What would Vick have to accomplish for you to think this was the right move?
nephillymike
FWIW, I would define "upside" as top 12 in rating, total yards from scrimmage or total yards from scrimmage per game. I would assume he's out injusred for two of the sixteen games.

If that happens, we get a QB who has performed at an above average to good level and the entire offense can be installed for the others to learn.

As far as wins go, with that D and that DC, I'm not expecting much support. A top eight offense still only gets us 6 wins IMO with what I'm expecting to be a bottom 6 Def

If nothing else it will be interesting.
D Rock
again...

There is no upside with vick. None whatsoever. Even if you get what you've defined.... then what? Are you going to sign a 34 year old quarterback prone to injuries to a mega deal? No. You're STILL looking for a new QB regardless of what he achieves in 2013. So unless he gets to and wins the superbowl, it's a throw away season with vick under center. And we all know the turd is never hoisting a lombardi.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 15 2013, 10:55 AM) *
And we all know the turd is never hoisting a lombardi.


He has a better chance than Reid - and since you were an unapologetic Reid groupie for so long, why not wait to see what happens?
D Rock
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Feb 15 2013, 04:06 PM) *
He has a better chance than Reid - and since you were an unapologetic Reid groupie for so long, why not wait to see what happens?

Oh look. Our resident moron has poked his useless head into the conversation. Go cuddle with your precious guns, numbnutz. The grownups are talking.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Feb 15 2013, 12:06 PM) *
He has a better chance than Reid


You've said lots of dumb stuff, but this takes the cake.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 15 2013, 11:13 AM) *
Oh look. Our resident moron has poked his useless head into the conversation. Go cuddle with your precious guns, numbnutz. The grownups are talking.


I'm just saying, you've shown no ability to analyze the QB position (McNabb not a top-30 QB?), or really anything else related to football or life in general. While I'm not a huge fan of bringing Vick back, he still has a great record when McCoy is utilized properly, taking some heat off him. And since you were a Reid-slurper, at least see how he plays in the new system instead of getting your panties in a bunch 2 weeks after the Super Bowl ended. Or do we have to hear your whining for the next 6 months before pre-season starts?
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 15 2013, 11:14 AM) *
You've said lots of dumb stuff, but this takes the cake.


Vick's odds of winning a Super Bowl are miniscule, 10,000,000 to 1, at best. Reid's odds cannot be expressed in simple numbers, and cannot be calculated without the help of a supercomputer.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Feb 15 2013, 01:01 PM) *
I'm just saying, you've shown no ability to analyze the QB position (McNabb not a top-30 QB?), or really anything else related to football or life in general. While I'm not a huge fan of bringing Vick back, he still has a great record when McCoy is utilized properly, taking some heat off him. And since you were a Reid-slurper, at least see how he plays in the new system instead of getting your panties in a bunch 2 weeks after the Super Bowl ended. Or do we have to hear your whining for the next 6 months before pre-season starts?


2011 McCoy was second in football in rushing and we finished 8-8. How is that a great record?
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.