Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Why I changed my mind on Desean
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Pages: 1, 2
nephillymike
Throughout this year, my gripe with them not keeping Desean was not really about them cutting ties with him. I thought there was a real good shot that Maclin would put up better numbers than Jackson which it appears he will as he has done every year that he and Jackson have played on the same team where Maclin did not miss the entire year.

My gripe was in the timing of it, when they knew that they wanted to do it for a while and they waited until the good opportunities and pressure to spend his money was gone, ie when top tier free agency was over.

I never really thought his talent mattered much. Sure he was better than Cooper and most likely any rookie, but we really could have used his money to improve other positions of need on the defensive side. But they saw no need to do so, so we were left with a cap stash and nadda on field improvements nor extra draft picks that maybe could have helped out at positions of need.

But I heard Jaws tonight. He was never a big Jackson guy and never thought the sky was falling when he left.

But he too has converted.

Why?

Check out this comparison stat:

Last year, on passes travelling 20 or more yards in the air, the Eagles got 14 TD's and 1 INT.
This year in that same stat, they have 10 TD's and 9 INT's.

As Jaws said, you can see the benefit of Jackson taking the "top off" the defense.

Also Jaws had this defensive stat.

Against empty backfields where teams are putting all WR's and Te's on the field, thus stretching our already barren talent defensive backfield, teams have this successful stat line:

Opposing QB's are 37-54 for 433 yds 6 TD's and 0 INT's for a nice little 129.5 passer rating.

Ouch. We see in this post not only what losing Desean costs but what not getting anything for him costs.

That double error will haunt us the rest of the year.
HOUSEoPAIN
Did it really take all of that statistical analysis and 14 weeks of the season to convince you of his value?
make_it_rain
Arguing with the Chip fanboys about whether the team is better off with or without Jackson (as well as other issues regarding his release, e.g compensation, justification, "culture") is like arguing with a young earth creationist. It's pointless, you're not going to get anywhere, and its really not worth your time.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (make_it_rain @ Dec 18 2014, 02:27 PM) *
Arguing with the Chip fanboys about whether the team is better off with or without Jackson (as well as other issues regarding his release, e.g compensation, justification, "culture") is like arguing with a young earth creationist. It's pointless, you're not going to get anywhere, and its really not worth your time.


cheers.gif
Phits
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Dec 17 2014, 09:58 PM) *
Check out this comparison stat:

Last year, on passes travelling 20 or more yards in the air, the Eagles got 14 TD's and 1 INT.
This year in that same stat, they have 10 TD's and 9 INT's.

As Jaws said, you can see the benefit of Jackson taking the "top off" the defense.

Then there is the stat that shows:
Foles
(2013) 71.7% in the oppositions red zone - 18 TD 0 INT
(2014) 42.9% in the oppositions red zone - 5 TD 2 INT

I don't believe that Jacko was ever a red zone threat. So how does his absence explain the above?

Foles regressed more than most of us expected. We lead the league in turnovers. Jacko's absence on this roster is a moot point and is only relevant for message board conversations. "If" he were still on the team it "might" move us from 5th overall in yards to 3rd or 4th, the record would likely remain the same because our QB play has been unexpectedly poor.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Phits @ Dec 18 2014, 03:52 PM) *
Then there is the stat that shows:
Foles
(2013) 71.7% in the oppositions red zone - 18 TD 0 INT
(2014) 42.9% in the oppositions red zone - 5 TD 2 INT

I don't believe that Jacko was ever a red zone threat. So how does his absence explain the above?

Foles regressed more than most of us expected. We lead the league in turnovers. Jacko's absence on this roster is a moot point and is only relevant for message board conversations. "If" he were still on the team it "might" move us from 5th overall in yards to 3rd or 4th, the record would likely remain the same because our QB play has been unexpectedly poor.



QUOTE
Arguing with the Chip fanboys about whether the team is better off with or without Jackson (as well as other issues regarding his release, e.g compensation, justification, "culture") is like arguing with a young earth creationist. It's pointless, you're not going to get anywhere, and its really not worth your time.


cheers.gif
koolaidluke
It goes way beyond Chip. You can support Chip as a coach and acknowledge that Desean is a petulant, me-first diva without denying that he was a special player who brought a lot to the offense.

I still think Maclin is the better player, but the offense would definitely be better with Desean and not Cooper starting on the other side.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (koolaidluke @ Dec 18 2014, 04:41 PM) *
I still think Maclin is the better player, but the offense would definitely be better with Desean and not Cooper starting on the other side.

I don't know, you think? I mean Cooper did get a whopping zero yards on this play:
http://www.thechipwagon.com/.a/6a019aff7e1...c65b9970c-800wi
Phits
QUOTE (koolaidluke @ Dec 18 2014, 05:41 PM) *
It goes way beyond Chip. You can support Chip as a coach and acknowledge that Desean is a petulant, me-first diva without denying that he was a special player who brought a lot to the offense.

I still think Maclin is the better player, but the offense would definitely be better with Desean and not Cooper starting on the other side.

You may have a point, however it isn't a question of whether Jacko was or is any good. The question really is: Would Jacko, on the current roster, make us a legitimate SB contender? I don't believe he is. I also don't believe that Chip wants to build his offense around a "petulant, me-first diva". I think it is perfectly acceptable to sever ties with a receiver that doesn't fit your player profile. Especially when his productivity is replaceable.

The real failure of this team is the regression of our QB and the complete 180 as it relates to turnovers. Last season we didn't turn the ball over (ranked #1) this season we are at the bottom of the league.
Birdman420
I think desean did more then open up the run for shady and the pass to maclin, he made the field larger for foles to throw by moving the safeties back off the box. Without desean and a regression, Foles has a much smaller field to work with and the result is as shown.

I'm on the side that having a deep threat that has to be accounted for creates a vertical dynamic to an offense that we do not have this year. Find me another guy that can stretch the field like Jackson did without all of the diva-like tendencies and I'll forget all about #10.
nephillymike
You know, if we cut Jackson and used his cap money to sign a high caliber CB, Bryant doesn't have his way and we're in first place. Reallocating his resources to CB would be fine.

Even with the lower tier QB play, we'd be much better off.

The crux is not cutting Jackson, it was not using his money elsewhere.

People act like they were gonna spend at a high level. If it wasn't Jackson they cut, it would have been one or two other high contributors to attain the goal with very little risk....15% of the cap in the bank.

Add Jackson, take away Maclin and about $5 M more.

Same shit, different year.
nephillymike
Another thing.

It's hard for me to criticize Chip's offense when week after week I see guys wide open with QB's who either don't see them or misfire. The design is there, the decision and accuracy are not.
Zero
QUOTE (Phits @ Dec 18 2014, 11:07 PM) *
The real failure of this team is the regression of our QB and the complete 180 as it relates to turnovers. Last season we didn't turn the ball over (ranked #1) this season we are at the bottom of the league.

But the question remains: why? Why has the QB play regressed? Looking only at Foles, was it the depleted OL he was playing behind? Did the absence of DJax stretching the field cause ripples throughout the offense, ultimately landing at Foles' retreating feet? Did the loss of that downfield speed move the safety to LOS, plug up Shady and add undo pressure to Foles, especially coupled with OL injuries? There were a few potentially significant incidents that could have affected an offense that was being led by a third year QB in his first stint as the proclaimed starter.
make_it_rain
QUOTE (koolaidluke @ Dec 18 2014, 06:41 PM) *
You can support Chip as a coach and acknowledge that Desean is a petulant, me-first diva without denying that he was a special player who brought a lot to the offense.



This perfectly sums up on my feelings on the issue, and to a larger extent the Kelly regime as a whole. I think Chip is a good coach and very happy he's running the show, but it baffles me how some just take everything he does as gospel and act as if the guy is infallible.
HobbEs
QUOTE (Zero @ Dec 19 2014, 07:02 AM) *
But the question remains: why? Why has the QB play regressed? Looking only at Foles, was it the depleted OL he was playing behind? Did the absence of DJax stretching the field cause ripples throughout the offense, ultimately landing at Foles' retreating feet? Did the loss of that downfield speed move the safety to LOS, plug up Shady and add undo pressure to Foles, especially coupled with OL injuries? There were a few potentially significant incidents that could have affected an offense that was being led by a third year QB in his first stint as the proclaimed starter.


Or could it be that there was a new QB coach this year?
Phits
QUOTE (Zero @ Dec 19 2014, 06:02 AM) *
But the question remains: why? Why has the QB play regressed? Looking only at Foles, was it the depleted OL he was playing behind? Did the absence of DJax stretching the field cause ripples throughout the offense, ultimately landing at Foles' retreating feet? Did the loss of that downfield speed move the safety to LOS, plug up Shady and add undo pressure to Foles, especially coupled with OL injuries? There were a few potentially significant incidents that could have affected an offense that was being led by a third year QB in his first stint as the proclaimed starter.

Those are all valid points. I don't feel that the fanbase (as a whole) expected a repeat performance of last season. It would be unrealistic for us to believe that Foles is as good as his 2013 statistics led us to. That said, he has regressed far past the point of expectations. Speaking for myself, the one aspect I expected Foles to demonstrate is the ability to take care of the football and limit his turnovers. That hasn't been the case. His maturation seems stagnated as he has shown poor pocket presence and mechanics. He back-pedals too much instead of stepping up into the pocket. These are supposed to be fixable issues, which still makes me believe there is upside to Foles. All-22 has an article detailing his mechanics from the Arizona game this season: LINK

What concerns me about Foles is the unknown reasons for his lapses in games. We all wondered what happened to him in the Dallas game last season and whether that was an abhor ration. Unfortunately, whatever haunted him that game also revealed itself in the playoff game vs The Saints and was an ongoing issue before his injury. On the plus side, he has shown a tremendous ability to battle through adversity with his late game drives. So the jury is still out with him. He hasn't played much better than Sanchez this season, and that is disappointing. Since Mark is a capable backup and not much more.
mcnabbulous
I'm convinced that Foles is the same guy we saw last year. The difference is that our opponents have made defensive adjustments that have resulted in throwing lanes being NFL sized, as opposed to the wide open opportunities he was afforded last year. As a result, we're seeing the real, NFL Nick Foles.

He can probably be a bit better, but I don't think we'll ever see anywhere close to last year or the top-tier guys in the game.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (make_it_rain @ Dec 19 2014, 08:15 AM) *
This perfectly sums up on my feelings on the issue, and to a larger extent the Kelly regime as a whole. I think Chip is a good coach and very happy he's running the show, but it baffles me how some just take everything he does as gospel and act as if the guy is infallible.

All coaches are flawed. No coaches should be dictating personnel. The only exception being an offensive minded coach and QB. I'm comfortable with Chip having autonomy there.

Otherwise, our FO should be working to put the most talented team on the field and Chip's responsibility should be maximizing that talent.
Dreagon
Honestly, I think Kelly deserves all the benefit of the doubt in the world when it comes to his coaching and decision making so far. As a fan of an opposing team, I can truthfully say he scares me more than any other coach in our division. Not to mention, you have to be impressed with what he has accomplished while using his backup quarterbacks. Like the old saying goes, "When you have Mark Sanchez as your quarterback...well...dude, you have Mark Sanchez as your quarterback!" Yet Kelly has kept things respectable despite that. I'm scared to imagine what's going to happen when he drafts "his guy" and grooms him up.

I wouldn't count Desean as the loss that some of you do....and not just because he says dumb shit (because that's what receivers do...it's in their contract or something). The fact is that receivers of Desean's type (small and speedy) tend to get old suddenly, and a lot sooner than the big possession types. Jackson kind of reminds me of Murray, in that he has done enough that he can probably get some team to overpay for him soon...and then they will stand there and look surprised when the wheels fall off. Sometimes cutting that star player is addition through subtraction, even if he goes on to do good somewhere else.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE
Honestly, I think Kelly deserves all the benefit of the doubt in the world when it comes to his coaching and decision making so far.


No, he doesn't. I don't care if he finished 2nd in college football once a few years ago, you don't cut Pro-Bowlers for nothing in return. Just because lazy Philly 'journalists' have dubbed him a genius doesn't mean he gets to defy common sense without criticism. End of story.

QUOTE
Not to mention, you have to be impressed with what he has accomplished while using his backup quarterbacks. Like the old saying goes, "When you have Mark Sanchez as your quarterback...well...dude, you have Mark Sanchez as your quarterback!" Yet Kelly has kept things respectable despite that. I'm scared to imagine what's going to happen when he drafts "his guy" and grooms him up.


Can we stow this ridiculous point already? Foles has started almost 30 NFL games, and Sanchez has started 75 games, including 6 playoff games. Yes, Foles was technically a backup entering last year, and Sanchez was the backup this year. It's also incumbent on The Genius to maximize the talent on his roster, and if he enters a season with Foles and Sanchez as his QB's, that's on him. Maybe with a deep threat things would be easier for his 'backups.'
Phits
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Dec 19 2014, 11:54 AM) *
Can we stow this ridiculous point already? Foles has started almost 30 NFL games, and Sanchez has started 75 games, including 6 playoff games. Yes, Foles was technically a backup entering last year, and Sanchez was the backup this year. It's also incumbent on The Genius to maximize the talent on his roster, and if he enters a season with Foles and Sanchez as his QB's, that's on him. Maybe with a deep threat things would be easier for his 'backups.'


Common sense would suggest that "The Genius" is maximizing the talent on the roster. Under "The Genius" Jacko and McCoy became All-Pro's and had their best seasons. Maclin is having a career year. Foles had one of the best statistical seasons in QB history. Sproles, a cast off, re-emerged as a legitimate offensive scoring threat. The fact that the #1 & #2 QB's on the roster aren't elite and (combined) lead the league in turnovers, yet we still rank in the top 5 offensively speaks for itself.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Phits @ Dec 19 2014, 04:17 PM) *
Common sense would suggest that "The Genius" is maximizing the talent on the roster.


QUOTE (make_it_rain @ Dec 18 2014, 02:27 PM) *
Arguing with the Chip fanboys about whether the team is better off with or without Jackson (as well as other issues regarding his release, e.g compensation, justification, "culture") is like arguing with a young earth creationist. It's pointless, you're not going to get anywhere, and its really not worth your time.


cheers.gif
Phits
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Dec 19 2014, 04:42 PM) *


cheers.gif

Maybe he should just make McCoy run the ball 20+ times per game. We could have an undefeated season.

Phits 2
HoP 0
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Phits @ Dec 19 2014, 04:47 PM) *
Maybe he should just make McCoy run the ball 20+ times per game. We could have an undefeated season.


Or instead he can cut McCoy and name Polk our starter, and you can spend all of next year defending the move as 'maximizing talent.'
Phits
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Dec 19 2014, 04:52 PM) *
Or instead he can cut McCoy and name Polk our starter, and you can spend all of next year defending the move as 'maximizing talent.'

It wouldn't matter who the RB is, our offensive strategy seems to land us in the top 5 every year. As long as he gets 20+ carries we will win, so it's all good.

Phits 3
HoP 0
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Dec 19 2014, 04:09 PM) *
It wouldn't matter who the RB is, our offensive strategy seems to land us in the top 5 every year. As long as he gets 20+ carries we will win, so it's all good.

Phits 3
HoP 0

FWIW, our adjusted offensive DVOA is 14 by Football Outsiders' measure:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamoff

Just another dataset.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Dec 19 2014, 05:22 PM) *
FWIW, our adjusted offensive DVOA is 14 by Football Outsiders' measure:


And our record (at the end of the day, the only thing that matters) is 12th in the league.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Dec 19 2014, 05:22 PM) *
FWIW, our adjusted offensive DVOA is 14 by Football Outsiders' measure:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamoff

Just another dataset.

FWIW Here's a few more
#5
#5
#4
#4
#4


Phits 4
HoP 0
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Dec 19 2014, 05:02 PM) *
FWIW Here's a few more
#5
#5
#4
#4
#4


Phits 4
HoP 0

Well those are all the same stat, and that original post wasn't from him. It's just a different way to interpret offensive efficiency. It was simply presented, without comment, as a reference point.

Our offense hasn't been quite as good (compared to the rest of the league) as it might seem.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Dec 19 2014, 06:46 PM) *
Well those are all the same stat, and that original post wasn't from him. It's just a different way to interpret offensive efficiency. It was simply presented, without comment, as a reference point.

Our offense hasn't been quite as good (compared to the rest of the league) as it might seem.


Also, out of our 416 points we've had an incredible 70 non-offensive points (including 10 extra points on 10 d/st td's. Our offense is very good, obviously, but we seem to constantly get caught wasting our time explaining to people how a pro-bowl WR opposite our current pro-bowl WR might help a tad.
Birdman420
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Dec 19 2014, 12:54 PM) *
No, he doesn't. I don't care if he finished 2nd in college football once a few years ago, you don't cut Pro-Bowlers for nothing in return. Just because lazy Philly 'journalists' have dubbed him a genius doesn't mean he gets to defy common sense without criticism. End of story.



Can we stow this ridiculous point already? Foles has started almost 30 NFL games, and Sanchez has started 75 games, including 6 playoff games. Yes, Foles was technically a backup entering last year, and Sanchez was the backup this year. It's also incumbent on The Genius to maximize the talent on his roster, and if he enters a season with Foles and Sanchez as his QB's, that's on him. Maybe with a deep threat things would be easier for his 'backups.'


Yeah Dreagon, You have posted here long enough to know that nobody gets slack in philly!


HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Birdman420 @ Dec 19 2014, 09:18 PM) *
Yeah Dreagon, You have posted here long enough to know that nobody gets slack in philly!


I would argue the opposite, using this thread as Exhibit A. The fact that we're debating the merits of cutting DJax for nothing in return shows that sometimes people get TOO much slack in Philly. Nobody here is calling for his head, least of all me - I'm happy with him overall and have never said otherwise. But I will not fall in line with the fanboys and media and assume he has some genius master plan at work. Talent on the field wins games.
Phits
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Dec 20 2014, 12:20 PM) *
Talent on the field wins games.

How's that working for the Bears, Chargers and Redskins?
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Dec 20 2014, 11:43 AM) *
How's that working for the Bears, Chargers and Redskins?

What about those teams is so talented?

The Bears have the worst safeties in football. Jay Cutler isn't very good. Their Oline is mediocre.

The Chargers are 8-6, right about where they should be given their talent levels. They'd possibly be a bit better if Rivers wasn't suffering through injuries the way he is. They seem to beat the teams they should and lose to the teams they're expected to lose to.

The Redskins are a dumpster fire. Where is all the talent you speak of?

Every team has talented players. It's about having talent at the right positions (namely QB) and depth. If you don't have the QB, you better damn well be way more talented than the competition.
Phits
There are 2 common ways to go about developing a team. You devise a system and find the talent to make the system work. Or you build your system around the talent. How often have you seen a team assemble a group of "star" players and win it all?

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Dec 20 2014, 12:54 PM) *
What about those teams is so talented?

The Bears have the worst safeties in football. Jay Cutler isn't very good. Their Oline is mediocre.

The discussion at hand is geared towards offenses.

How do you define talent? Is it based on results or skillset? The Bears have a receiving corp that have the skills to be dominant. They have QB is that built to get them the ball. Their system fails them and they appear to be a shittier than they should be.

QUOTE
The Chargers are 8-6, right about where they should be given their talent levels. They'd possibly be a bit better if Rivers wasn't suffering through injuries the way he is. They seem to beat the teams they should and lose to the teams they're expected to lose to.


The Chargers are 17th in points in 21st in yards. Given the "talent" at WR, TE and QB that would be considered underachieving. I contend that "if" Rivers (or a QB of his caliber) was on the Eagles our record would be better by 2-3 wins. More so, if Chip was coaching SD I believe they would be contending for the division.

QUOTE
The Redskins are a dumpster fire. Where is all the talent you speak of?

Washington has a legitimate QB and 2 #1 receivers. They also have a great RB

QUOTE
Every team has talented players. It's about having talent at the right positions (namely QB) and depth.

Agreed
QUOTE
If you don't have the QB, you better damn well be way more talented than the competition.

I feel that without the right coach/system, even with "the QB", success will be very difficult to achieve.

nephillymike
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Dec 20 2014, 12:20 PM) *
The fact that we're debating the merits of cutting DJax for nothing in return shows that sometimes people get TOO much slack in Philly.



People focus on whether we should have or shouldn't have cut Jackson.

People have debated that all along ad nauseum.

The real issue is NOT cutting him.

It is cutting him for nothing in return.

That is indefensible.

That is general managership malpractice. Howie signed it and if Chip was OK with him, throw him under that same bus.

THAT is why we have shit CB's that can't cover anyone and S Allen who can't help anyone.

Sometimes you get what you pay for. There were good CB's available in FA this year. Would we be fretting our situation and praying for another Dallas meltdown if we signed D. Revis to that one year contract that NE did? If we signed V. Davis? There were about four other guys that would have helped. To think you can put a good enough product on the field while spending 80-90% of the cap each year is wishful thinking.

Let's agree whether you wanted Jackson here or didn't want him here that there is NO excuse to pocket his money and leave that defensive backfield like it is.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Dec 20 2014, 02:16 PM) *
Let's agree whether you wanted Jackson here or didn't want him here that there is NO excuse to pocket his money and leave that defensive backfield like it is.


Everyone rational agrees with this. I don't personally give a rat's ass about him, but dropping him for nothing is indefensible - just not to his legions of fanboys.

As for our secondary, that's where our first round pick should've gone IMO.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE
Arguing with the Chip fanboys about whether the team is better off with or without Jackson (as well as other issues regarding his release, e.g compensation, justification, "culture") is like arguing with a young earth creationist. It's pointless, you're not going to get anywhere, and its really not worth your time.


cheers.gif

4 rec., 126 yards. His two big plays, 51 and 55 yards, led to touchdowns. That used to be our production.

I look forward to another week of arguing about this.
mcnabbulous
At least the loss of Desean didn't ultimately result in the end of our season.
JeeQ
DeSean put the fork in the Eagle's season...

Game, Set, Match
mcnabbulous
No matter your opinion on our decision to release him, allowing him to go to a division rival ultimately cost us. The Skins don't win that game without him.

Not sure how the people who were fine with that decision are feeling today, but as someone on the other side...I'm extremely unhappy.

Hopefully it was a wakeup call for Chip.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Dec 21 2014, 11:18 AM) *
No matter your opinion on our decision to release him, allowing him to go to a division rival ultimately cost us. The Skins don't win that game without him.

Nonsense. Eagles lost because they played undisciplined and made too many mental errors (players and coaches alike). Had Parker hit either of the 2 missed FGs or Sanchez doesn't throw the late game INT (that led to the game winning FG), it would be a different conversation.

We didn't lose because of Jacko, we lost because of us.

mcnabbulous
If we didn't give up two 50+ yard receptions we don't lose that game. Your denial on this one is sad. Just own it.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Dec 21 2014, 04:37 PM) *
If we didn't give up two 50+ yard receptions we don't lose that game. Your denial on this one is sad. Just own it.

It's not denial, it's common sense. If we don't miss a 34 yard FG or a 46 yard FG, we win the game. You're letting your emotion cloud your judgment.

Despite the 2 long pass completions to Jacko, neither of them a scoring play, we had an opportunity to defend against the TD's.

51 yard pass completion to Jacko followed by a 28 yard RUN for the TD
55 yard pass completion to Jacko followed by a 2 yard run then a PI penalty for 10 yards and then a 1 YD run up the gut

Of course the long completions affected us, but they weren't knock out blows. We lost that game because we failed to execute and turned the ball over in crucial situations.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Dec 21 2014, 04:37 PM) *
If we didn't give up two 50+ yard receptions we don't lose that game. Your denial on this one is sad. Just own it.


QUOTE (make_it_rain @ Dec 18 2014, 02:27 PM) *
Arguing with the Chip fanboys about whether the team is better off with or without Jackson (as well as other issues regarding his release, e.g compensation, justification, "culture") is like arguing with a young earth creationist. It's pointless, you're not going to get anywhere, and its really not worth your time.


cheers.gif
nephillymike
NO.

If we cut punk ass Jackson and sign a top FA CB, his punk ass is neutralized and we win that game.

THAT is the takeaway here.

Of course if you cut a borderline PB WR and get nothing for him, your talent level is going to go down. Combine that with a bad first round pick, and below average WR play for someone expected to help pick up the slack of the lost punk and it compounds the issue.

But it didn't have to be.

We knew we were going to part ways and decided to hold off until the FA store was virtually closed.

And us assholes like me and most everyone else here cheer for this team as if they're committed to bringing a Super Bowl here.

Wake up people.

Same Shit Different Year.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Dec 21 2014, 04:06 PM) *
It's not denial, it's common sense. If we don't miss a 34 yard FG or a 46 yard FG, we win the game. You're letting your emotion cloud your judgment.

Despite the 2 long pass completions to Jacko, neither of them a scoring play, we had an opportunity to defend against the TD's.

51 yard pass completion to Jacko followed by a 28 yard RUN for the TD
55 yard pass completion to Jacko followed by a 2 yard run then a PI penalty for 10 yards and then a 1 YD run up the gut

Of course the long completions affected us, but they weren't knock out blows. We lost that game because we failed to execute and turned the ball over in crucial situations.

No shit they weren't knockout blows. They just directly led to two scores by the Redskins in a game we lost by 3 points. It's not the only reason we lost, but if they didn't have him, they wouldn't have won the game.

A guy doesn't have to score to change the game. Desean did that yesterday. Twice.

You're very wrong on this one, man. Cutting Desean was a mistake. Allowing him to sign with a division rival was a mistake. It directly led to the end of our season.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Dec 21 2014, 04:12 PM) *
If we cut punk ass Jackson and sign a top FA CB, his punk ass is neutralized and we win that game.

THAT is the takeaway here.

Signing a "top FA CB" absolutely guarantees nothing as it relates to neutralizing Desean. It improves the chances, but he lit up the best defense in football. He's a stud and we parted ways with him for foolish reasons.
Phits
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Dec 21 2014, 05:12 PM) *
NO.

If we cut punk ass Jackson and sign a top FA CB, his punk ass is neutralized and we win that game.

Are you suggesting that we were a FA CB away from being a legitimate SB contender?

QUOTE
Of course if you cut a borderline PB WR and get nothing for him, your talent level is going to go down. Combine that with a bad first round pick, and below average WR play for someone expected to help pick up the slack of the lost punk and it compounds the issue.

What would have been acceptable compensation for Jacko? a draft pick? a player? If they received a 3rd or 4th round pick for him how would that have helped the poor QB play or the league leading turnovers or the injuries to the o-line?

QUOTE
And us assholes like me and most everyone else here cheer for this team as if they're committed to bringing a Super Bowl here.

You can't honestly say that you expected the Eagle to be legitimate SB contenders this season. With or without Jacko or an acceptable draft pick.

Admit it, your expectations were higher than they should have been because Nick Foles fooled you into believing he was an elite level QB.

mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Dec 21 2014, 05:04 PM) *
What would have been acceptable compensation for Jacko? a draft pick? a player? If they received a 3rd or 4th round pick for him how would that have helped the poor QB play or the league leading turnovers or the injuries to the o-line?


Our Oline has been intact during our 3-game losing streak. It's really a non-issue. I'm really not sure why it's even a talking point anymore.

There is no compensation, outside of a player as talented as DJax, that would have been helpful for 2014.

QUOTE
You can't honestly say that you expected the Eagle to be legitimate SB contenders this season. With or without Jacko or an acceptable draft pick.

Admit it, your expectations were higher than they should have been because Nick Foles fooled you into believing he was an elite level QB.

When you don't have an elite QB you have to be extremely talented to compensate. Having Desean and Maclin at WR would have made us significantly more formidable. It's impossible to say just how much of an impact they would have had together.

I agree that Foles made people have warped expectations. I never thought he was elite, but was fooled into thinking he might be a good starter. He's not. He's just a guy, which is what my original thought was after his rookie year.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.