Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: He's fucking hurt already.
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Pages: 1, 2
xsv
No way he makes it to week 6 as the starter.

I doubt he makes week 3.
xsv
33 years old, never learned how to do nything but give it all he's got every play.

I admire the courage, but that's not exactly a characteristic I want to have in a glass cannon QB in the season opener.
mcnabbulous
You take the good with the bad with Vick. Tonight he gave us more good.

He's clearly the right QB for this team (on the current roster.)
xsv
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 9 2013, 10:35 PM) *
You take the good with the bad with Vick. Tonight he gave us more good.

He's clearly the right QB for this team (on the current roster.)


Barely. He doesn't do any good on the bench. And he's destined to be there sooner rather than later.
mcnabbulous
What's your suggestion? Play half speed? Change the offense? It is what it is.
JeeQ
Plays a mistake free game, never turns the ball over, wins the game...

still finds the negative...

Never let it be said you aren't good at your jobs

Fly Eagles Fly!
xsv
I don't have a suggestion, to be honest. I think we're fucked with this guy. He's good enough to make us think we've got something, but he's going to be out for the year by week 6.

I think he played a great game, and I loved that the play calling kept him from fucking up too many times.

If he had made ONE mistake this game, it's anyone's game. He didn't this time. That's more than I expected.

But a groin injury, like the one he has, is a year long nagging injury that will fuck with his accuracy. I'll be surprised if he starts 7 games this year.

ALL OF THAT SAID, this was a good win. Probalby one of only 6 or 7 this year, so I'm going to enjoy it.

MistahNickells
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Sep 9 2013, 10:44 PM) *
Plays a mistake free game, never turns the ball over, wins the game...

still finds the negative...

Never let it be said you aren't good at your jobs

Fly Eagles Fly!

I'm shocked to say the least I thought vick played a great game no turnovers, I mean is this the new expectation? At first it was dont turn the ball over now its something else. I guess it is what it is
koolaidluke
I thought the Eagles played really well.

I was more impressed with the Eagles defense than the offense. The Redskins defense is a sieve so it is hard to judge the offense but the Eagles D shut the Skins down until the game was over. Sure, some of that was cause RGKnee was off his game, but the Eagles were getting pressure, stuffing the run and blanketing the receivers.

After next week we'll have a better idea of how good this team is or isn't.
mcnabbulous
I think Vick can and will play much better. He was relatively mistake free, but left some points on the field in the first quarter.

The fact that we dominated so hard in the first half with him playing less than exceptional is pretty exciting.
Birdwatcher
QUOTE (xsv @ Sep 9 2013, 10:49 PM) *
I don't have a suggestion, to be honest. I think we're fucked with this guy. He's good enough to make us think we've got something, but he's going to be out for the year by week 6.

I think he played a great game, and I loved that the play calling kept him from fucking up too many times.

If he had made ONE mistake this game, it's anyone's game. He didn't this time. That's more than I expected.

But a groin injury, like the one he has, is a year long nagging injury that will fuck with his accuracy. I'll be surprised if he starts 7 games this year.

ALL OF THAT SAID, this was a good win. Probalby one of only 6 or 7 this year, so I'm going to enjoy it.



Lighten up man, Chip has not found HIS guy yet, Vick is the best option he has for now.
xsv
QUOTE (Birdwatcher @ Sep 9 2013, 11:10 PM) *
Lighten up man, Chip has not found HIS guy yet, Vick is the best option he has for now.


That's a really good point. Thanks.
Jax
Stephen A Smith is arguing that the Eagles can't continue after Vick inevitably goes out with injury. I think Foles can do well in the offense also. He may not have any 50 yard runs like Vick did last night and the playbook may be a bit smaller but I don't think he changes our offense as much as others think.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Jax @ Sep 10 2013, 09:35 AM) *
Stephen A Smith is arguing that the Eagles can't continue after Vick inevitably goes out with injury. I think Foles can do well in the offense also. He may not have any 50 yard runs like Vick did last night and the playbook may be a bit smaller but I don't think he changes our offense as much as others think.

They didn't use it very often (as I think most of the runs weren't really read options) - but the threat of Vick really keeping the ball dramatically changes this offense. Especially as we saw on that Vick TD run.

I'm actually more and more convinced that Vick is much better suited to run this offense after last night's game.

D Rock
Stephen A. Smith

The "A" is for "asshat".
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 10 2013, 02:54 PM) *
They didn't use it very often

Geezus, man. What game were you watching? Half the PASSING attempts were read option.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 10 2013, 09:56 AM) *
Geezus, man. What game were you watching? Half the PASSING attempts were read option.

I was talking about the running attempts. I don't think most were intended for Vick to really keep the ball. In fact, I'm almost sure of it.

I think they were designed to give Shady the ball and use Vick as a decoy, but there were a number of times where the correct read would have been for Vick to keep the ball. It seemed like when that was really an option, he did so with great success.
koolaidluke
A passing attempt can't be read-option. The read option is by definition a running play. A pass version of the read option is just a play action pass.
nephillymike
Vick played really well

I'd give him an A.

He had a passer rating of 112 for crying out loud.

He only had one ill advised pass while in the grasp.

But IMO uncharacteristically, he missed a few wide open targets early in the game that left about 10 points on the field. He is normally accurate while throwing to open guys, so he'll get them next time.

UNfortunately, my concern about him getting hurt is more that it was before this game. What was he a pulling guard on some of those runs? And him being downfield 20 yards blocking down field? There are DC's just looking for that opportunity to crush him down field. They will likely tell their guys to get Vick rather than the ball carrier. It is perfectly legal to crush him down field. He's got to stop doing that!!
make_it_rain

Also, one thing they were talking about last night was when the foreskins brought pressure a few times they ended up with unblocked guys getting a beeline right towards Vick, who was either sacked or hit on each one of those plays.

I'm not sure if it was a breakdown in protection, or if there was a hot read that Vick was simply missing or freezing up on. Either way, no QB (let alone someone like Vick) will last very long getting drilled like that a few times a game.

Whether its a breakdown on the line, or trademark Vick going deer-in-headlights mode when someone gets in his face, it should be correctable.

Big difference between identifying coachable/correctable mistakes and actually correcting them though.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (xsv @ Sep 9 2013, 10:19 PM) *
No way he makes it to week 6 as the starter.

I doubt he makes week 3.


He'll get hurt, but after last night, I can honestly say I'm confident Kelly will be able to adjust and run a solid offense through Foles or Barkley as well.
Jax
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 10 2013, 10:55 AM) *
Stephen A. Smith

The "A" is for "asshat".

Yes he is a dork.
iggleslover49
QUOTE (make_it_rain @ Sep 10 2013, 11:44 AM) *
Also, one thing they were talking about last night was when the foreskins brought pressure a few times they ended up with unblocked guys getting a beeline right towards Vick, who was either sacked or hit on each one of those plays.

I'm not sure if it was a breakdown in protection, or if there was a hot read that Vick was simply missing or freezing up on. Either way, no QB (let alone someone like Vick) will last very long getting drilled like that a few times a game.

Whether its a breakdown on the line, or trademark Vick going deer-in-headlights mode when someone gets in his face, it should be correctable.

Big difference between identifying coachable/correctable mistakes and actually correcting them though.

They were taking advantage of the rookie.
JeeQ
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 10 2013, 07:55 AM) *
Stephen A. Smith

The "A" is for "asshat".


For once, I couldn't agree with you more. I can't stand Stephen A. Smith.

As for his assertion that only Vick can run the offense I couldn't disagree more. Not only do I think Foles could run Chip's offense just fine, and so could Barkley in a pinch. Chip's offense isn't anchored by the QB, it's a heavy run attack first and foremost. What we should be hoping is that Bryce Brown finds his groove. Shady can give us 100+ every night but someone has to be there to alleviate him when he gets tired.
koolaidluke
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Sep 10 2013, 12:46 PM) *
I can't stand Stephen A. Smith.


That's the point. You are supposed to not be able to stand him. He is playing a character.

Those ESPN guys can all blow me. All of them. A bunch of jobbers. Smith is probably one of the better ones to tell you the truth.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 10 2013, 03:02 PM) *
I was talking about the running attempts. I don't think most were intended for Vick to really keep the ball. In fact, I'm almost sure of it.

I think they were designed to give Shady the ball and use Vick as a decoy, but there were a number of times where the correct read would have been for Vick to keep the ball. It seemed like when that was really an option, he did so with great success.

Uh, Hello?!?!?

That's the nature of the read option. You want the QB to decoy and keep the DE from crashing down the line. The QB is there to keep him honest. He's not intended to keep the ball beyond every once in a while to . . . you know . . . keep the DE honest. Nobody. In Any League. Wants the QB splitting carries 50/50 with the RB.

And I pointed out that half the PASS PLAYs were read/option to make the point that the vast majority of run plays were clearly of that nature as well.
D Rock
QUOTE (koolaidluke @ Sep 10 2013, 03:14 PM) *
A passing attempt can't be read-option. The read option is by definition a running play. A pass version of the read option is just a play action pass.

Uh, wrong.

Take a look at the first completion to Celek.

Vick has 3 options on that play. Hand off, keep it, or pass if the LBs cheat up.

Do your homework, man.
D Rock
QUOTE (make_it_rain @ Sep 10 2013, 03:44 PM) *
Also, one thing they were talking about last night was when the foreskins brought pressure a few times they ended up with unblocked guys getting a beeline right towards Vick, who was either sacked or hit on each one of those plays.

I'm not sure if it was a breakdown in protection, or if there was a hot read that Vick was simply missing or freezing up on. Either way, no QB (let alone someone like Vick) will last very long getting drilled like that a few times a game.

Whether its a breakdown on the line, or trademark Vick going deer-in-headlights mode when someone gets in his face, it should be correctable.

Big difference between identifying coachable/correctable mistakes and actually correcting them though.

Vick's greatest weakness is, has been, and likely always will be recognizing the blitz.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 10 2013, 02:22 PM) *
Uh, Hello?!?!?

That's the nature of the read option. You want the QB to decoy and keep the DE from crashing down the line. The QB is there to keep him honest. He's not intended to keep the ball beyond every once in a while to . . . you know . . . keep the DE honest. Nobody. In Any League. Wants the QB splitting carries 50/50 with the RB.

And I pointed out that half the PASS PLAYs were read/option to make the point that the vast majority of run plays were clearly of that nature as well.

If he doesn't have the option to keep it, then it's not a read option. My point is that I don't believe he had the option to keep it. They were in a read option formation, but they were designed runs to Shady. It's not incredibly controversial. And no, I don't want my QB splitting carries 50/50 with a RB.

Even if they were to do the same thing with Foles, it wouldn't be nearly as valuable as having Vick do it, because of the threat of the option occasionally being in place. Especially on short yardage. That's my point.

I think his options were handing to Shady and throwing the ball, like you pointed out. Not keeping them himself. That third option is what truly makes the offense a nightmare.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 10 2013, 07:36 PM) *
That third option is what truly makes the offense a nightmare.

So which is it? Did he have the 3rd option? Or didn't he?

You contradict yourself in that response.

You "believe" he didn't have the option to run it? Based on what exactly? A hunch? You said yourself, they were aligned for the option. Vick handled the ball as per the option. So too he kept it 2-3 times to essentially prove the options' availability to him. But yet you "believe" he "didn't really have the option to keep it?"

I'm not busting balls. I'm just trying to figure out where you're coming from. Logically, you're not making sense.

koolaidluke
you anger me
D Rock
ESPN officially reporting that they ran the "read option" on 41 of their 49 rushing attempts.

Just sayin . . .
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 10 2013, 02:43 PM) *
So which is it? Did he have the 3rd option? Or didn't he?

You contradict yourself in that response.

You "believe" he didn't have the option to run it? Based on what exactly? A hunch? You said yourself, they were aligned for the option. Vick handled the ball as per the option. So too he kept it 2-3 times to essentially prove the options' availability to him. But yet you "believe" he "didn't really have the option to keep it?"

I'm not busting balls. I'm just trying to figure out where you're coming from. Logically, you're not making sense.

No - I'm saying he didn't have the third option. But the threat of it being there is valuable. If Foles is in the game, there is no real threat.

The comment was related to the idea that Vick will inevitably get hurt and there not being much of a drop off with Foles. After watching last night, I think Vick's value to the offense is even greater than I had initially considered. And you may remember that I was fully on board with Vick to begin with.

I think we'll run a real read-option (where Vick has the option to keep it) very rarely, but I absolutely think it will be there in short yardage, late game, and goal line situations. In those situations, it offers incredible value (which Foles can't provide.)

So, to summarize, Vick > Foles in this offense. And it's less close than I had thought.

Edit: And to answer your question from the second paragraph, it was because of the number of times he would have made the incorrect read if he really did have that option. It's an opinion, but I would bet on it. I don't think Chip Kelly is calling 40+ plays where Mike Vick would have a legit option to keep a football if the defense called for it.
D Rock
I'll ask again as you've still not answered my question . . .

What exactly leads you to "believe" Vick didn't have the option to run when running the read/option? It must be the 3 times he chose the OPTION to run it.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 10 2013, 03:01 PM) *
I'll ask again as you've still not answered my question . . .

What exactly leads you to "believe" Vick didn't have the option to run when running the read/option? It must be the 3 times he chose the OPTION to run it.

Sorry - missed that the first time I read your question and edited my response to reflect.

You yourself said they ran 41 read option plays. Do you really think the defense only positioned themselves for a Vick keeper on 3 of those plays?

Do you really think Kelly would call 40+ plays where Vick could hypothetically keep the ball?

xsv
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 10 2013, 04:03 PM) *
Sorry - missed that the first time I read your question and edited my response to reflect.

You yourself said they ran 41 read option plays. Do you really think the defense only positioned themselves for a Vick keeper on 3 of those plays?

Do you really think Kelly would call 40+ plays where Vick could hypothetically keep the ball?


I don't think that on all 41 of the option plays we ran (be it the read option, or the spread option) that one of the options was for Vick to keep the ball. In many of those plays, I think the options were to hand it off or to pass it. And I think that there were more than 2 options for many of them.

mcnabbulous
QUOTE (xsv @ Sep 10 2013, 03:26 PM) *
I don't think that on all 41 of the option plays we ran (be it the read option, or the spread option) that one of the options was for Vick to keep the ball. In many of those plays, I think the options were to hand it off or to pass it. And I think that there were more than 2 options for many of them.

I think it was likely 10 or fewer and they were very circumstantial. Short yardage, clock burning, goal line.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 10 2013, 08:03 PM) *
Sorry - missed that the first time I read your question and edited my response to reflect.

Noted.
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 10 2013, 08:03 PM) *
You yourself said they ran 41 read option plays.

No. I didn't say that. ESPN stats did.
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 10 2013, 08:03 PM) *
Do you really think the defense only positioned themselves for a Vick keeper on 3 of those plays?

No he clearly mis read a few of em. Patted his chest in a "my bad" sort of way when McCoy got stuffed.
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 10 2013, 08:03 PM) *
Do you really think Kelly would call 40+ plays where Vick could hypothetically keep the ball?

It doesn't matter what I "think." Likewise, it doesn't matter what you "believe." What matters is the on field evidence which clearly suggests he did just that.

I'll also take this point to note that Chip ran the same sort of plays with Foles in preseason. So Foles will only go 5-7 yards while Vick will go for upwards of 50. It still accomplishes the goal of keeping the DE honest and "accounted for" in the blocking scheme.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 10 2013, 03:39 PM) *
It doesn't matter what I "think." Likewise, it doesn't matter what you "believe." What matters is the on field evidence which clearly suggests he did just that.


I would say the evidence suggests he had around 5 designed runs (give or take) - I'm not going to count. As I've said, I would wager he didn't have dramatically more where that option was on the table.

I'd love if one of the talking heads out there did a breakdown of each carry and how many times he made the "wrong" read.

QUOTE
I'll also take this point to note that Chip ran the same sort of plays with Foles in preseason. So Foles will only go 5-7 yards while Vick will go for upwards of 50. It still accomplishes the goal of keeping the DE honest and "accounted for" in the blocking scheme.

The preseason is meaningless to me at this point. I don't think it will truly keep the defense honest. Even when Vick made the correct read last night, it required his athletic ability to make much of anything happen. Defenses are fast as hell in the NFL.
D Rock
One thing is for certain. We'll get the chance to see Foles run this offense for at least 2-3 games this season. Probably by week 6.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 10 2013, 08:49 PM) *
The preseason is meaningless to me at this point.

Neat.

It doesn't matter what has meaning to you at this point. The only evidence we have beyond last night's game is 4 preseason contests.

Ignore it all ya like. I'm not suggesting we over value it either.

BUT . . .

To discount 80% of the available evidence at this point makes no logical sense regardless of the nature of preseason ball. Preseason for a regime that's been in place for a decade is completely meaningless, I'll grant you. But for a new regime and a first time NFL coach . . . it carries more weight. Not a great deal, but more than none.

And as stated, the current reality is that it comprises 80% of everything we've seen from Chip's Iggles.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 10 2013, 03:58 PM) *
Neat.

It doesn't matter what has meaning to you at this point. The only evidence we have beyond last night's game is 4 preseason contests.

Ignore it all ya like. I'm not suggesting we over value it either.

BUT . . .

To discount 80% of the available evidence at this point makes no logical sense regardless of the nature of preseason ball. Preseason for a regime that's been in place for a decade is completely meaningless, I'll grant you. But for a new regime and a first time NFL coach . . . it carries more weight. Not a great deal, but more than none.

And as stated, the current reality is that it comprises 80% of everything we've seen from Chip's Iggles.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make? Because Foles had moderate success running a read-option against second string preseason defenses, we should anticipate he'll be successful running it as our starter?

Does that in some way conflict with my original opinion on this subject, that is after watching one game, my opinion that Vick is much better suited for this offense has increased?

When push comes to shove, I believe Vick can successfully run the read-option in specific circumstances. I think those circumstances will be limited, because it would be crazy to allow Mike Vick to run 15-20 times a game, even when it was the correct read to do so.

*These are my opinions, as this is a football message board.
D Rock
The point I've made (not TRYING at'tall) is that we ran a great deal of read/option last night. You claimed we did not. I think I successfully put that nonsense to bed. Steer this puppy any which way that pleases you.

My work here is done.

On a secondary basis, I felt the need to put KAL's nonsense that the read/option has no passing element to it, to bed as well.

Mission 2 accomplished with equal aplomb.

cool.gif
mcnabbulous
You seriously proved nothing of the sort. The only thing you proved is that Vick handed the ball off 40 times last night and kept it about 5. Doesn't sound like much of an option to me.

I'm sure glad Geno's inevitable greatness isn't going to be so ambiguous.

D Rock
laugh.gif

Yeah, yeah. I know. You're never wrong. There is no option for Vick to run the ball in Chip Kelly's read option offense. What COULD I (and the rest of the sentient world) have been thinking?

Geno got a win? Blaine Gabbert has a couple too. Is he suddenly great? Geno couldn't beat our Mark "dirty fucking" Sanchez for the job. He only got it by default. He's SO great.

laugh.gif

And for the record, he handed the ball off 49 times. ESPN statisticians (who likely know a wee bit more than you or I) classified 41 of those 49 hand offs as "of the read option variety."

I'll take their word for it, over your "hunch" most days of the week.
Bocadelphia Eagles John
Maybe the best use of the read option is to choose which of these board posts to read and which to ignore ... laugh.gif biggrin.gif tongue.gif ohmy.gif
mcnabbulous
I'm not sure how me stating an opinion (which is largely irrefutable) constitutes me "knowing everything." Unless of course you know the Skins were 6 times more likely to want Shady to get the ball than have Vick keep it.

It's an opinion, man. Get over it.

As for Geno, he basically single handedly won that game on the offensive side. Not sure how many times Blaine Gabbert did that. Time will tell I suppose.

Dr. Claw
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 9 2013, 11:09 PM) *
I think Vick can and will play much better. He was relatively mistake free, but left some points on the field in the first quarter.

The fact that we dominated so hard in the first half with him playing less than exceptional is pretty exciting.


It was the thing I enjoyed the most about that game. Vick didn't turn the ball over and I think that was largely predicated on Chip's offense not asking Vick to do much more than to make the right football decision and not play "Hero Ball".

I know a few of you will disagree on the ground that Andy's bullshit could have been made credible by a "better QB", but the fact that this game should have well been 40-0 at the half and that aside for an unblocked left side on one play, a challenge that made no sense, and a whole half of conservative football that put the opponent back in the game, there was little to complain about for the first time in years... is very promising. I might just be optimistic.

That being said, I kind of wish Vick were not so brittle. That is the one thing I dislike about him other than his tendency for "Hero (Favre) Ball" in dire straits. I don't think our backups are like a Matt Schaub was for Vick (good enough to parlay into a permanent starter job), but that might be good for the Eagles under Chip. Under Andy, we already know that outcome.
mcnabbulous
You know, it's possible that Chip is a really good coach without Andy being the worst coach ever. You may have noticed his starting QB was mistake free this week, and his team dominated.

Chips first game isn't the first time this city has seen a huge run/pass ratio favoring the run. When things are going really well and you have a big lead, it tends to skew the numbers.

Ironically, its the offense that Andy built that makes Chip's system work so well. There is no better RB suited for things than Shady. Implementing Mudd's OL system (and subsequently his preferred athletic linemen) fit the style perfectly, too.

Ultimately, it comes down to Vick. Which is what I've been saying all along. Let's not quite forget how good he looked in 2010 with Andy's "bullshit."

The big difference is that Chip's innovation puts unprecedented pressure on defenses. The fact that Andy didn't figure that out first doesn't mean he's not a good coach. It simply takes away from the potential brilliance of Chip.
HOUSEoPAIN
*yawn*

Just give up.

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.