Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Time for some talk about the 'fins
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Phits


QUOTE
I see a high-scoring affair this week. Both defenses can be handled and both squads have offenses perfectly capable of scoring those frequent points. For Miami, I think they unleash Landry deeper downfield to open things up for Miller and force more single coverage on speedster Kenny Stills. I donít think the Eagles let Miller get going on the ground, not after last week, so his damage will be in the vacated area underneath.

The Eagles will be tempted to dink and dunk again, but they must open it up and attack deep. The offensive line is clicking well enough so both Murray and Mathews should be effective again, and I think that will open things up. Who takes advantage of that? Whoever the third receiver is. Right now thatís Miles Austin, but it could be Nelson Agholor if heís active. I have a feeling Riley Cooper sits this one out.

In the end, I think the plays will be there more for the Eagles, and theyíre better built to run the clock out. I think they can protect a lead better than Miami and will do so in a shootout.

Prediction: Eagles 34, Dolphins 27


Link
mcnabbulous
Because Chip more or less invented Miami's offense, I think he will be able to best prepare to stop it. That's my hope at least.

Want to see a continuation of the Bradford/Matthews connection.
Zero
I want to see Agholor contribute in a meaningful way.
SAM I Am
QUOTE (Zero @ Nov 12 2015, 05:37 AM) *
I want to see Agholor contribute in a meaningful way.

I know we're going to see Demarco Murray contribute in a meaningful as we get into the second half of the season. It wouldn't surprise me if he is the MVP of this team by the end of the season. But then again, never count out Darren Sproles. As we know, he can single-handedly win games.
Joegrane
Murray has been solid in recent games but Cox is the MVP. I suppose they don't trust Matthew's health, but he should be getting more carries. I love the way he runs the ball.
QUOTE (SAM I Am @ Nov 12 2015, 07:58 AM) *
I know we're going to see Demarco Murray contribute in a meaningful as we get into the second half of the season. It wouldn't surprise me if he is the MVP of this team by the end of the season. But then again, never count out Darren Sproles. As we know, he can single-handedly win games.

jackhinkle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 11 2015, 06:24 PM) *
Because Chip more or less invented Miami's offense, I think he will be able to best prepare to stop it. That's my hope at least.

Want to see a continuation of the Bradford/Matthews connection.



that can easily be argued in the other direction
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (jackhinkle @ Nov 13 2015, 04:07 AM) *
that can easily be argued in the other direction

No. It can't.
jackhinkle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 13 2015, 06:19 AM) *
No. It can't.


of course it can. He knows what Kelly does because he learned his stuff. Its not hard to figure that out
Phits
QUOTE (Joegrane @ Nov 12 2015, 10:52 PM) *
I suppose they don't trust Matthew's health, but he should be getting more carries. I love the way he runs the ball.

It's become obvious that Murray needs a heavy workload to be productive. Whereas, Mathews is most effective with limited carries. IMO Mathews would ideally get 10-12 carries per game.

With that said, M&M is a very good change-up.
nephillymike
Mathews is the better runner and truth be told, if I needed to run for a crucial first from any distance, Mathews and Sproles are my first two choices over Murray.

They went form 18-6 Murray to 18-11 Murray in the Dallas game as far as carries distribution.

They need to get to even or better for Mathews to properly utilize out talent, which is especially important given the dearth of WR talent, and our QB struggles this year.

One reason we struggle so bad at the beginning of games?

Murray starts, Mathews sits.

Put the best players on the field.

We're not nearly good enough to do otherwise.

That isn't rocket science.

As far as the game, I see a close win, maybe 28-24 Eagles.

MIA will stack the box given our running game and their weakness in defending the run. That means our QB/WR will have to play well again for us to win, and I'd rather rely on our running game.

Our D will hold it's own, but they have a good passing game that will be productive.

More than any team in the NFL, MIA is the most hot and cold. That part is scary.
mcnabbulous
I don't have any numbers to back this up (and curious to see if anyone does), but to the naked eye, Murray has been pretty awesome on short yardage. I am struggling to think of a scenario in which he was stuffed.

Mathews has started at least one game. Maybe more.
Zero
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Nov 14 2015, 08:14 AM) *
One reason we struggle so bad at the beginning of games?

Murray starts, Mathews sits.

Put the best players on the field.

We're not nearly good enough to do otherwise.

That isn't rocket science.

Phits may have a valid point. Maybe Mathews has been more productive because he's fresher and is being used as a change up. DKD, but it also seems like Murray is improving as the season gets along. The recent chatter about an injury problem earlier may have something to do with it too. Kelly hasn't and isn't likely to be telling us what's up so this is mostly "who's getting the next round" talk anyway. smile.gif
JeeQ
This has all the makings of a trap game... last place team with nothing to lose going against a team who could takeover the division lead with a win

I could easily see Miami coming in and out-Chip Kellying Chip Kelly
jackhinkle
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Nov 14 2015, 09:33 AM) *
This has all the makings of a trap game... last place team with nothing to lose going against a team who could takeover the division lead with a win

I could easily see Miami coming in and out-Chip Kellying Chip Kelly


its only a trap game if the Eagles were consistently a good team but they arent.

the Eagles can lose this game because they are schitzo and weak in plenty of areas as their record shows
nephillymike
QUOTE (Zero @ Nov 14 2015, 10:53 AM) *
Phits may have a valid point. Maybe Mathews has been more productive because he's fresher and is being used as a change up. DKD, but it also seems like Murray is improving as the season gets along. The recent chatter about an injury problem earlier may have something to do with it too. Kelly hasn't and isn't likely to be telling us what's up so this is mostly "who's getting the next round" talk anyway. smile.gif


I don't think so Z.

Mathews is more productive on his first run than Murray is on his first and on his last run than Murray is on his last and just about every carry in between in the same offense with the same supporting cast. He also gains more yards after contact and runs with more power.

Now maybe Mathews shouldn't be used to run it 20+ times a game, I'll agree with that.

But he can sure as hell carry it 16-18 times a game.

Also, Murray has the best hands of the three so he should be out catching passes more than the others.

We'll see if Chip finally figures it out. He's moving in that direction, ever so slowly. Just hope it doesn't cost us a game along the way.
mcnabbulous
I think your point about hands is key and you're completely missing it. Our offense always tries to exploit mismatches. Murray gives us more flexibility in play calling because he is a better receiving threat. When the defense gives us a matchup that facilitates throwing the ball, he has been more reliable.

I love what Mathews has done running the ball, but his hands have been pretty awful. I would bet that's keeping him off the field.
JeeQ
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Nov 14 2015, 09:33 AM) *
This has all the makings of a trap game... last place team with nothing to lose going against a team who could takeover the division lead with a win

I could easily see Miami coming in and out-Chip Kellying Chip Kelly


Fuck me... sad.gif

Out coached by an interim head coach
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Nov 15 2015, 03:16 PM) *
Fuck me... sad.gif

Out coached by an interim head coach

Not sure how that is on the coaches. What specific coaching decision cost us the game?
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 15 2015, 10:18 PM) *
Not sure how that is on the coaches. What specific coaching decision cost us the game?


The only issue I had was when it was 1 and goal a the end. I was begging Chip to just run it 3 teams. Worse case scenario, you take the lead with a FG and Miami burns some of their timeouts. Other than that series I thought the coaching was fine.
mcnabbulous
I mean, I can understand the frustration, but I put that on the players. Sanchez, while more entertaining to watch than Bradford, has an obvious situational awareness issue that appears to be here to stay.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 15 2015, 10:41 PM) *
I mean, I can understand the frustration, but I put that on the players. Sanchez, while more entertaining to watch than Bradford, has an obvious situational awareness issue that appears to be here to stay.



Part of coaching is taking the strengths and weaknesses of your players into consideration and putting them into a position to succeed. Chip failed to do that. You said it yourself. Sanchez has an obvious situational awareness issue. So what does Chip do? He puts the game in the hands of Sanchez. I agree that the execution sucked but were you surprised that the execution sucked? I wasn't and I doubt that there are many that have followed this team this year that were surprised. Running the ball 3 times would have been the smart play. Chip thought otherwise and the Eagles paid the price
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 15 2015, 03:49 PM) *
Part of coaching is taking the strengths and weaknesses of your players into consideration and putting them into a position to succeed. Chip failed to do that. You said it yourself. Sanchez has an obvious situational awareness issue. So what does Chip do? He puts the game in the hands of Sanchez. I agree that the execution sucked but were you surprised that the execution sucked? I wasn't and I doubt that there are many that have followed this team this year that were surprised. Running the ball 3 times would have been the smart play. Chip thought otherwise and the Eagles paid the price

It's fair criticism. I just expect more from pro athletes.

We just aren't very good and won't be until we get a QB.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 15 2015, 10:10 PM) *
It's fair criticism. I just expect more from pro athletes.

We just aren't very good and won't be until we get a QB.


Agreed about the QB. I usually have more tolerance before asking for a QB change but I think I have seen enough of Bradford. The only question I really have regarding this year revolves around the lack of a deep passing game. Is it the WRs not getting open, the QB not seeing them or a combination of both. Tough to tell without watching the all 22.
JeeQ
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 15 2015, 01:18 PM) *
Not sure how that is on the coaches. What specific coaching decision cost us the game?


70+ Million On RBs, Short Yardage GL Situation, 31st Ranked Rush Defense, Backup QB... Passes

mcnabbulous
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Nov 15 2015, 04:17 PM) *
70+ Million On RBs, Short Yardage GL Situation, 31st Ranked Rush Defense, Backup QB... Passes

It wasn't really short yardage. It was second and 9 and we had been stuffed the previous play.
nephillymike
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 15 2015, 05:10 PM) *
It's fair criticism. I just expect more from pro athletes.

We just aren't very good and won't be until we get a QB.



Plenty of blame on Sanchez there. Shame the WR didn't run the full route, maybe a catch or incompletion happens instead.

I don't know how these coaches can watch the film week after week and decide there is no advantage to the QB keeping the ball on the option a few times. All game long, there was NOBODY there.
mcnabbulous
Sanchez kept it once.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Nov 16 2015, 12:19 AM) *
I don't know how these coaches can watch the film week after week and decide there is no advantage to the QB keeping the ball on the option a few times. All game long, there was NOBODY there.



With Bradford, there is no option. No defender is going to respect his running ability. Sanchez is mobile enough but there were several read option plays where Murray and Sanchez looked like they never practiced the play. Tongue in cheek because I am sure they have received very few reps running the read option together.
Phits
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 15 2015, 05:49 PM) *
Part of coaching is taking the strengths and weaknesses of your players into consideration and putting them into a position to succeed. Chip failed to do that. You said it yourself. Sanchez has an obvious situational awareness issue. So what does Chip do? He puts the game in the hands of Sanchez. I agree that the execution sucked but were you surprised that the execution sucked? I wasn't and I doubt that there are many that have followed this team this year that were surprised. Running the ball 3 times would have been the smart play. Chip thought otherwise and the Eagles paid the price

Sanchez was playing well before the end zone interception. He certainly looked more effective than our running game. Chip went with what was working at the time. The passying game seemed to move better with Sanchez under Centre.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 16 2015, 01:01 AM) *
Sanchez was playing well before the end zone interception. He certainly looked more effective than our running game. Chip went with what was working at the time. The passying game seemed to move better with Sanchez under Centre.


I think you miss the point of running it 3 times there. You eat the clock, force Miami to burn timeouts and then take the lead with either a TD or at the very least, a field goal. Running the ball is the safest path to securing the lead. It does not matter what was effective for the past 10 minutes or so. You know Sanchez does not take care of the ball so you do not put the game in his hands. You saw the result. It was predicted by everyone sitting in their living begging chip to run the ball for that very reason. I was one of those begging and I am sure I was not the only one.
Zero
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 15 2015, 05:46 PM) *
It wasn't really short yardage. It was second and 9 and we had been stuffed the previous play.

It seems they were stuffing 3 out of 4 running attempts.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 15 2015, 05:42 PM) *
With Bradford, there is no option. No defender is going to respect his running ability. Sanchez is mobile enough but there were several read option plays where Murray and Sanchez looked like they never practiced the play. Tongue in cheek because I am sure they have received very few reps running the read option together.

Yeah they were a total mess together.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Zero @ Nov 15 2015, 06:34 PM) *
It seems they were stuffing 3 out of 4 running attempts.

Agreed. Which is why the call wasn't egregious. Poor decision by QB. Bad route by bad WR.
Zero
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 15 2015, 07:36 PM) *
Agreed. Which is why the call wasn't egregious. Poor decision by QB. Bad route by bad WR.

He didn't try to catch the ball or to defend against the interception. He quit.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Zero @ Nov 15 2015, 06:38 PM) *
He didn't try to catch the ball or to defend against the interception. He quit.

Yeah he is awful. He shouldn't be getting snaps. Not sure what he has done to justify them at this point.
CT_Eagle
You guys saw the result of Chip trusting in Sanchez knowing full well that Sanchez is not to be trusted. The smart play was to burn the clock and get the lead.

Did you watch the ending of NE-NYG? Fassell decided to let Manning throw the ball instead of bleeding the clock. At least Manning protected the ball and the Giants took the lead. However, they left too much time on the clock and NE won with a FG while only 6 seconds were on the clock. A couple of runs there and the Giants probably win that game.
JeeQ
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 15 2015, 04:12 PM) *
I think you miss the point of running it 3 times there. You eat the clock, force Miami to burn timeouts and then take the lead with either a TD or at the very least, a field goal. Running the ball is the safest path to securing the lead. It does not matter what was effective for the past 10 minutes or so. You know Sanchez does not take care of the ball so you do not put the game in his hands. You saw the result. It was predicted by everyone sitting in their living begging chip to run the ball for that very reason. I was one of those begging and I am sure I was not the only one.


All this right here... Play to win the game
Phits
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 15 2015, 08:54 PM) *
You guys saw the result of Chip trusting in Sanchez knowing full well that Sanchez is not to be trusted. The smart play was to burn the clock and get the lead.

Did you watch the ending of NE-NYG? Fassell decided to let Manning throw the ball instead of bleeding the clock. At least Manning protected the ball and the Giants took the lead. However, they left too much time on the clock and NE won with a FG while only 6 seconds were on the clock. A couple of runs there and the Giants probably win that game.

I understand the logic in trying to burn as much clock as possible, but the run game was ineffective. They wouldn't have had to use any time-outs. The INT happened on second down (2nd & 9) around the four and half minute mark. We would have only had a 2 point lead. They would have given at least 2 minutes and all of their time-outs, a FG wins the game for them. I think going for a TD in that situation is the right call.

Besides we missed a 32 yard FG earlier so the kick isn't a gimme.
Phits
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Nov 15 2015, 09:05 PM) *
All this right here... Play to win the game

That's not playing to win. That's trying not to lose. You go for the TD, that's trying to win.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 15 2015, 08:10 PM) *
That's not playing to win. That's trying not to lose. You go for the TD, that's trying to win.


And when your K isn't good, it may be your only shot.

Sanchez walks in on a keeper on the option.

mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 15 2015, 07:10 PM) *
That's not playing to win. That's trying not to lose. You go for the TD, that's trying to win.

Absolutely. You nailed this.
nephillymike
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 15 2015, 08:21 PM) *
Absolutely. You nailed this.


Besides, wasn't there a lot of time left?

Can't kick a FG just to let them go down and beat you with a FG.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 16 2015, 02:10 AM) *
That's not playing to win. That's trying not to lose. You go for the TD, that's trying to win.


Apparently both options were playing to lose because guess what? The Eagles lost.

Your philosophy in that situation was proven to be wrong just a few hours ago but you still cling to it.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Nov 16 2015, 02:25 AM) *
Besides, wasn't there a lot of time left?

Can't kick a FG just to let them go down and beat you with a FG.



There are three facets to a team. Offense, Defense and Special teams. The defense is the strength of this Eagles team, not the offense. Chip and those who agree with passing in that situation banked on the offense and lost. I stated my reasons for banking on the defense. Know your team and put them in the best position to succeed. Don't rely on a known choker so he can try to throw to Miles Austin.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Nov 16 2015, 02:25 AM) *
Besides, wasn't there a lot of time left?

Can't kick a FG just to let them go down and beat you with a FG.


4:26 left on the clock after the interception. Running the ball burns off approx. 1.5 minutes unless Mia burns a timeout. You kick the field goal, kick off and trust the strongest unit on your team to hold the lead. I don't know about you guys but I had more faith in the D doing that than I in Mark Sanchez not turning the ball over.
Phits
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 15 2015, 09:30 PM) *
There are three facets to a team. Offense, Defense and Special teams. The defense is the strength of this Eagles team, not the offense. Chip and those who agree with passing in that situation banked on the offense and lost. I stated my reasons for banking on the defense. Know your team and put them in the best position to succeed. Don't rely on a known choker so he can try to throw to Miles Austin.

Caleb Sturgis also has a bad reputation of missing kicks. He missed a 32 yard FG earlier in the game.

With this team you can't take anything for granted.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 16 2015, 02:37 AM) *
Caleb Sturgis also has a bad reputation of missing kicks. He missed a 32 yard FG earlier in the game.

With this team you can't take anything for granted.


No doubt that Strugis share some blame for today. No excuse for missing that kick. Even with that in mind, a 25 yard go ahead field goal is a high percentage play.
Phits
QUOTE (CT_Eagle @ Nov 15 2015, 09:36 PM) *
4:26 left on the clock after the interception. Running the ball burns off approx. 1.5 minutes unless Mia burns a timeout. You kick the field goal, kick off and trust the strongest unit on your team to hold the lead. I don't know about you guys but I had more faith in the D doing that than I in Mark Sanchez not turning the ball over.

Under your scenario (assuming that Sturgis hits the FG), all Miami had to do was get into field goal position. They would not have to hurry, they would have had plenty of time (plus the 2 min. warning and all of their time-outs). Franks has hit 4/6 FG's from 40+ yards (including a 53 yard FG a few weeks ago).

A TD, for us, forces Tannehill to go the length of the field to score a game winning TD. I like those odds better than your scenario.
CT_Eagle
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 16 2015, 02:45 AM) *
Under your scenario (assuming that Sturgis hits the FG), all Miami had to do was get into field goal position. They would not have to hurry, they would have had plenty of time (plus the 2 min. warning and all of their time-outs). Franks has hit 4/6 FG's from 40+ yards (including a 53 yard FG a few weeks ago).

A TD, for us, forces Tannehill to go the length of the field to score a game winning TD. I like those odds better than your scenario.


Agreed but in my scenario the Eagles would have relied on the strongest part of their team, not the weakest. That is what is meant by a coaching putting their team into a position to succeed. Chip relied on Mark Sanchez to win that game and he was predictably wrong.

Everybody would rather have a TD in that situation but that, not surprisingly, did not happen.
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.