Ready for End of Andy Reid Era
is andy reid a bad coach? looking at it objectively, the fact that he has a .620 winning percentage after 9+ seasons seems to indicate no. the fact that many of us consider this 5-4 team a failure also indicates no. expectations are high for big red, and rightfully so -- he's set his own bar pretty high.
he makes some head scratching mistakes and isn't a dynamic thinker, but in order to compile the record he has, he's done more good things than bad. no, the question is not whether andy reid is a good coach or a bad coach -- he is a good coach.
discussing that issue takes the focus away from the real issue --andy reid is fundamentally not a good match for this team or for this fanbase or me. i've written plenty of times about my dislike of the worst coast offense, but it goes even beyond that. this is a finesse team, built with finesse players on both sides of the ball. losing is one thing, getting embarrassingly manhandled several times a season is a completely different beast. i can't stand a team that gets physically overmatched.
why is the team built like it is? why is this big red's philosophy? it almost seems like the andy reid/jim johnson combo is trying to build artificial handicaps for themselves. andy reid is a good evaluator of talent (as we've discussed here, here, here, here, and here), but i'm really starting to think that he believes that size is not a talent.
many sports have weight classes. want to know why? because a good big guy always beats a good little guy. a good big guy probably beats a great little guy. in order for the little guy to win, he has to be much better than the big guy. it's a fact of life. why then do the eagles insist on building a middleweight team to compete for the heavyweight title?
i touched on it a bit in my game 9 thoughts, but here are some comparisons:
these are taken from each team's official website. i've listed some of the positions that stick out to me, i'm not omitting positions that run counter to my point, just trying to keep the list manageable.
the eagles field the smallest player at their position almost across the board -- and several of the eagles players are overstated. i know this is very common in professional sports, but the eagles have more reason to do it than others because they field midgets all over the field. goodness knows i enjoy watching midgets as much as the next guy, but not on my professional football team! i've highlighted in red the positions where guys are listed bigger than they appear or have mysteriously grown an inch or two in their 20s and 30s.
i know that the eagles believe that speed wins games, but why can't they get full sized fast guys? seriously, did the giants look any slower than the eagles last night? (though who could tell because our guys were on their backs all game).
i'm ready for the end of the andy reid football era not because he is a bad coach, but because his philosophy and style are making me start to lose interest in professional football. with andy reid, winning is the only enjoyment you get out of watching a game. by design, the fans get nothing else.
andy doesn't let you in on what he's thinking. andy doesn't address reasons why things are happening. andy chooses to play the infernal worst coast offense. andy chooses to field a team giving up inches and pounds at almost every position on the field.
those are all his choices and are his choices to make. however, he has to lie in the bed that he makes. if he's going to choose to build a boring team and display a boring public persona, he must understand that winning and losing will be the only criteria. you can get away with some extra losses if you are entertaining. by design, andy's teams cannot.
i'm not ready to watch another rebuilding effort -- and that is where we are headed with the eagles loading up for the kevin kolb era -- led by andy reid. i can't take it anymore.
his teams lack size and physicality on both sides of the ball -- even his superbowl team was a finesse team. his offense bores me to death. i'm ready to move on -- and remember, this is coming from a fan who is constantly accused of being a reid apologist. i'm ready to move on.
he makes some head scratching mistakes and isn't a dynamic thinker, but in order to compile the record he has, he's done more good things than bad. no, the question is not whether andy reid is a good coach or a bad coach -- he is a good coach.
discussing that issue takes the focus away from the real issue --andy reid is fundamentally not a good match for this team or for this fanbase or me. i've written plenty of times about my dislike of the worst coast offense, but it goes even beyond that. this is a finesse team, built with finesse players on both sides of the ball. losing is one thing, getting embarrassingly manhandled several times a season is a completely different beast. i can't stand a team that gets physically overmatched.
why is the team built like it is? why is this big red's philosophy? it almost seems like the andy reid/jim johnson combo is trying to build artificial handicaps for themselves. andy reid is a good evaluator of talent (as we've discussed here, here, here, here, and here), but i'm really starting to think that he believes that size is not a talent.
many sports have weight classes. want to know why? because a good big guy always beats a good little guy. a good big guy probably beats a great little guy. in order for the little guy to win, he has to be much better than the big guy. it's a fact of life. why then do the eagles insist on building a middleweight team to compete for the heavyweight title?
i touched on it a bit in my game 9 thoughts, but here are some comparisons:
| Position | Eagles | Giants | Redskins | Cowboys |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RB | 5-10 / 203 | 6-4 / 264 | 5-11 / 223 | 6-0 / 221 |
| WR | 6-0 / 186 | 6-5 / 232 | 5-10 / 200 | 6-3 / 218 |
| WR | 5-10 / 175 | 6-3 / 203 | 5-10 / 190 | 6-3 / 220 |
| TE | 6-3 / 258 | 6-6 / 253 | 6-3 / 249 | 6-5 / 266 |
| DE | 6-3 / 270 | 6-5 / 274 | 6-4 / 252 | 6-7 / 299 |
| DE | 6-2 / 250 | 6-5 / 265 | 6-4 / 266 | 6-4 / 305 |
| DT | 6-0 / 292 | 6-4 / 306 | 6-4 / 320 | 6-3 / 300 |
| DT | 6-2 / 306 | 6-4 / 317 | 6-3 / 311 | 6-4 / 298 |
| S | 6-0 / 210 | 6-1 / 215 | 6-2 / 213 | 6-2 / 206 |
| S | 5-10 / 203 | 6-2 / 210 | 6-0 / 200 | 6-5 / 208 |
these are taken from each team's official website. i've listed some of the positions that stick out to me, i'm not omitting positions that run counter to my point, just trying to keep the list manageable.
the eagles field the smallest player at their position almost across the board -- and several of the eagles players are overstated. i know this is very common in professional sports, but the eagles have more reason to do it than others because they field midgets all over the field. goodness knows i enjoy watching midgets as much as the next guy, but not on my professional football team! i've highlighted in red the positions where guys are listed bigger than they appear or have mysteriously grown an inch or two in their 20s and 30s.
i know that the eagles believe that speed wins games, but why can't they get full sized fast guys? seriously, did the giants look any slower than the eagles last night? (though who could tell because our guys were on their backs all game).
i'm ready for the end of the andy reid football era not because he is a bad coach, but because his philosophy and style are making me start to lose interest in professional football. with andy reid, winning is the only enjoyment you get out of watching a game. by design, the fans get nothing else.
andy doesn't let you in on what he's thinking. andy doesn't address reasons why things are happening. andy chooses to play the infernal worst coast offense. andy chooses to field a team giving up inches and pounds at almost every position on the field.
those are all his choices and are his choices to make. however, he has to lie in the bed that he makes. if he's going to choose to build a boring team and display a boring public persona, he must understand that winning and losing will be the only criteria. you can get away with some extra losses if you are entertaining. by design, andy's teams cannot.
i'm not ready to watch another rebuilding effort -- and that is where we are headed with the eagles loading up for the kevin kolb era -- led by andy reid. i can't take it anymore.
his teams lack size and physicality on both sides of the ball -- even his superbowl team was a finesse team. his offense bores me to death. i'm ready to move on -- and remember, this is coming from a fan who is constantly accused of being a reid apologist. i'm ready to move on.
Labels: football
posted by The Mean Guy at 2:31 PM
35 Comments:
This is the most sensible thing you've ever written. Nice job, Pete. Fair, objective, and accurate. Hard to beat that combination.
Ed Wade
Yup. This quieted my rage and said it better than I have been saying it. The team is boring, slow, weak, and running an offense and defense that I absolutely loathe. That makes me expect them to lose and disdain watching them do it.
A few random things have run through my head that are really getting to me
1. Poor Donovan. Listen I get on this guy and he is not fantastic in the 2 minite drill, but he really is talented and I think the best QB they've ever had. Imagine what he might have done with good receivers (he did a lot when he had just 1 in 2004), a semblance of a running game, an offense that doesn't force him to do things that aren't his strength, and a coach who doesn't make him win every single game almost single handedly. We'll never know how good he could've been, and unfortunately he only has 2-3 years left and will probably spend them elsewhere. I sort of hope he gets traded to a good running team that lets him do what he does well and maybe he wins the SB.
2. Reid really isn't doing well with talent procurement, primarily for the reasons TMG eloquently highlighted-he's looking for speed and eschewing basic football skills. How else do you explain the busts he has on the roster such as Clemons, Gocong, and Booker. In theory they all can run, but none of them play football very well. Heck most of them don't play.
3. Castillo is a shitty O line coach. I am tired of hearing how hard he works. It isn't paying off. the biggest line in the league cannot dig in and get one yard. They have no pulling game, they get smoked up the middle, and they never get to the LB. Runyan and Tra play power forward well and box out in the passing game, but they cannot run block at all and I blame that on technique, attitude, and coaching.
4. I totally agree on B Wes. In fact, I'd try and trade him in the off season because he is on his own downward parabola and you may still get something for him. I want 2 backs who can play, a big power guy and a change of pace guy. 1 back isn't enough now, especially when teams have figured out the Birds basic offense and are just stuffing it in its tracks.
5. Akers had 3 kicks land at the 15 or worse. That is unacceptable.
6. I cannot decide where Reid is hurting this team worse-poor talent procurement as GM or poor coaching. I want him out of both roles badly and I want two guys replacing him. Too much conflict of interest otherwise.
7. Why pay Samuel so much to be an OK d-back. He did nothing useful last night. He has done nothing useful this season-another wasted free agent expenditure?
8. You win by running the ball and stuffing the run. It is the most basic tenet of football, but it's true. The Birds can do neither well, thus they are an average/below average team.
9. The Birds and Giants are not playing the same sport right now. Despite a deceivingly close score, the Giants pummelled them last night. Without Don, that would have been an outright slaughter. My point is, imagine how badly the Giants will kick their butts for years to come once Don is gone. It will be a looooooooong dark period in the city of brotherly love.
Bumble
I too, am ready for the Andy Reid era. I have reached the point where I am not upset when they lose. I was disappointed last night, but not surprised and not really even angry. All of what TMG stated is true, but I am still not sold on Reid being that good of a coach. Much of his winning percentage was built in his first 6 years when the eagles were talent-wise the best team in the NFC by far. He has been outcoached in big games and lost to teams that were physically inferior to the eagles - Tampa Bay, Carolina in playoffs. And in recent years in important division games. This team has lost a bunch of prime-time games in a row, they are 1-10 in their last 11 games decided by 7 points or less. No, that is not a sign of a good coach. Neither is the lack of in game adjustments, or the inability to handle some of the basic game day functions -- getting plays in, unnecessary burnt time-outs, anemic 2 minute drill, these have been ongoing issues for years -- you get the point.
I am thru bashing McNabb, he is what he is, and he's very good. I would like to see him end up in Minnesota or Chicago and I would root for him to win a SB.
Westbrook is hurt - ribs, maybe leg still. He has no burst right now. He's my favorite Eagle player, but I don't know how much he has left.
If we're going into rebuild mode, and we might as well, we have some positions that we're way old at without much depth -- OT, Safety, Kicker, QB, RB. I do not want to rebuild with Reid and his infernal worst coast offense and boring style. A new head coach will not be committed to Kolb. I don't know enough about him to say if he's the future or not, so I'm just pointing out that a new coach will not feel committed as Reid does.
Blow it up, boyz. We had a good run, but the window has closed.
Captain
Ouch....sigh....
In all seriousness, what is going to happen? We as fairly objective fans see the forest through the trees. Will the Eagles front office? My god it is so obvious. TMG, Captain's and Bumble's post is dead on....we are all much bigger fans than the coach and players. We will be here when they are not. Getting humiliated time and time again...and think of all of the times since the Super Bowl..just drains the life out of me. It is great when you are there, but to watch this on TV has almost become painful. It is NOT entertaining. It is NOT good football. It is boring and lifeless.
I still don't understand how 3 yards and a cloud of dust football is more entertaining than the WCO.
And I'd say we're no more objective than any other Eagles fans. We're all still making the same comments/arguments we made last year. Just because we're not screamers or flamers, doesn't mean we're objective.
I still don't understand how 3 yards and a cloud of dust football is more entertaining than the WCO.
i'm not advocating switching to a woody hayes offense, just one primarily driven by power running.
i dislike the west coast offense concept in general due to the lack of deep passing, but i really dislike andy's version because he completely eliminated the power run from his arsenal.
i'm talking about power sweeps and i-formation off-tackle runs with a fullback leading the way.
instead we're fed a steady diet misdirection quick pitches and delays with a scat back as our primary running threat.
i'm looking for the kind of running game that wears down and demoralizes a defense rather than one that leaves the defense scratching their heads afterwards. power football setting up play action deep passing.
WCO and power running are not mutually exclusive. there are several WCO variations (including the one run by reid's mentor) that field a power running game.
so i'm not looking for 3 yards and a cloud of dust. i'm looking for 7 yards and a cloud of dust setting a 2nd and 3 with mcnabb bombing away in play action.
It is great when you are there, but to watch this on TV has almost become painful.
big dog, i'd argue it is much worse being there than watching at home. nothing is worse than sitting in a cold stadium watching your team get physically pummeled.
at home you have options. in the stadium, you're a prisoner forced to watch the pain.
"i'm looking for the kind of running game that wears down and demoralizes a defense rather than one that leaves the defense scratching their heads afterwards. power football setting up play action deep passing."
Amen, brother. Every time I watch a team physically maul the Eagles (it happens at least once or twice a year), I realize how badly I want to be THAT team.
As a fan, there is nothing worse than seeing an opponent come into your house and say, "We're going to run the ball right over you and through you all night long; We're going to stuff you at the line of scrimmage and make your quarterback feel like he's taking a walk to the showers on his first night at Gratersford." It's a helpless feeling.
This is why I loved the Buddy Ryan Eagles. We'd lose some games to inferior opponents, we'd get outcoached in playoff games, but you never knew when we were going to physically anihilate another great team. We were powerful. We were thrilling. We were THAT team.
Ed Wade
Reid's WCO is an awful bastard step child of what this offense is supposed to be. Look how Holmgren runs it, Gruden runs it, Bill Walsh ran it. All were predicated on power FB and RB who could eaisly get 6-8 yards a clip and WR who caught the ball well and always got 5-7 YAC. The Birds have nothing close to that in either category.
Andy's bad decisions on personnel and his inability to adjust are killing this team. Many of the additions he brought in over the last year are either gone or not even suiting up. His team cannot win close games or gain 1 yard when they need to. Unfortunately, whining about it does nothing because we're stuck with this lump until his contract runs out ina few years. Next year will suck even worse because Kolb will be in, they'll be a year older with no noticeable upgrades in talent, and Redi will get a pass as they "adjust". For a guy who talks about gold standards, Luries sure seems to have low expectations for his coach and GM.
And yes Ed, I loved, LOVED the Buddy defenses. If he had given a second of attention to offense, they could've been dominant. And this was back when the NFC East was dynamite, with hall of fame Gibbs, Landry, and Parcells. That was fun football. Even the stud teams hated playing the Birds.
Bumble
Bumble
you bring the house
we'll bring the pain
Look how Holmgren runs it, Gruden runs it, Bill Walsh ran it
it's been a while, but i don't recall that walsh ran a lot of power stuff. i think he's the one who popularized the "pro set" with split half back/full back with both available as runners or receivers.
The strange thing is that McNabb throws a killer deep ball, but is only average at the 5 yard slant that is supposed to get YAC. However, Reid,though he has been saying it for years, has been unable to establish a conistent running game when McNabb has played. Strangely it worked when Garcia or Feeley played.
My "favorite" play is when they have passed 5 straight times and the 6th is a play-action that does not fool anybody...just great.
On Reid, I think the current argument is legid. I am just worried that they will stink for the next four year if they switch headcoaches.
Simon just nailed my primary concern. Y'all are advocating dumping a coach that AVERAGES over 10 wins a season (and has a winning record again so far). I understand and appreciate everyone's frustrations, but these are tiny issues compared to getting stuck with another Kotite (or Crennel or Linehan or Lane or Cameron or Nolan or . . ). It sounds like you want Childress back and they hate the offense he runs in MIN.
And all this is besides the real issue. The issue is not an offense that is 4th in the league in scoring this year (and 10.7 average rank over the past 6 years), it's the defense. When you average 28 points a game, the issue is not offensive philosophy or small players. The issue is the defense. JJ needs to go before Reid.
Disagree on the defense Phil. Yes they are tiny and inadequate against power running teams and are really built to stop the pass, but they are a pretty talented group. The problem is they are on the field for 40 minutes a game because the offense has so many 3 and out drives or 2 minute drives due to no power running game that chews up clock. if the offense could put points on people and grind clock, it would force other teams to throw which is exactly playing into the teeth of their D. Conversely, if you don't score, you open the door for other teams to grind you down, exactly what you don't want. Is the defense versatile enough, no. Are they good enough, yes. The woes stem from offense.
Also, last I checked Andy Reid did not invent football. seems like some new faces and new ideas are doing great things in Baltimore, Atlanta, Miami, and Arizona. Good coaches exist, that is the job of Eagles management to find them. Don't assume you'll get Kotite. And who ever heard of Reid before he came here?
TMG-Walsh had Craig and Rathman for the power game. That seems pretty powerful to me.
Bumble
Well, PHI's only middle of the pack when it comes to plays/game (14th) and 1 more play/game (63 average plays per game) would get them to 10th in the league this year. Their rank in this has been 13.3 over the past 6 years with a wider variance (4th in '02, 5th in 2007 vs. 29th in '03) than scoring. The numbers don't back up your opinion that this is a 3 and out offense.
The problem is they are on the field for 40 minutes a game because the offense has so many 3 and out drives or 2 minute drives due to no power running game that chews up clock.
i don't know that the eagles has more 3 and outs than other teams. they all have 3 and outs on offense.
however, i'd be shocked if the eagles defense was even middle of the pack in forcing 3 and outs on defense. if the offense has a 3 and out, it's the defense's job to force their own three and out. the eagles haven't been able to get off the field on third down for several seasons now. it's a big problem.
TMG-Walsh had Craig and Rathman for the power game. That seems pretty powerful to me.
tom rathman was a stud, no doubt about it, but i don't recall him being used all that much as a lead blocker to be honest with you. i definitely could be wrong about this, but i remember rathman being used as a pass blocker, a pass catcher, and an occasional ball carrier, but don't recall him being used all that much as a lead blocker.
again, definitely could be wrong, but i just really remember a lot of split back formations with rathman running one way at the snap and craig running in the opposite direction.
However, Reid,though he has been saying it for years, has been unable to establish a conistent running game when McNabb has played. Strangely it worked when Garcia or Feeley played.
the play mix is completely different for mcnabb vs. any other QB. can't establish a running game if you don't run the ball.
reid's generally seems to want to have the ball in his best player's hands. if mcnabb is on the field, it's in his hands. if mcnabb isn't on the field, it's in westbrook's hands.
My "favorite" play is when they have passed 5 straight times and the 6th is a play-action that does not fool anybody...just great.
or when they call play action in the last two minutes of a half. what defensive player is falling for that?
Simon just nailed my primary concern. Y'all are advocating dumping a coach that AVERAGES over 10 wins a season (and has a winning record again so far). I understand and appreciate everyone's frustrations, but these are tiny issues compared to getting stuck with another Kotite (or Crennel or Linehan or Lane or Cameron or Nolan or . . ). It sounds like you want Childress back and they hate the offense he runs in MIN.
well, he's averaged 8 wins a season for the last 3 years, and for me that's not enough winning to offset his boring style of offense and the puny makeup of his roster.
the team may hit 10 wins this year, but 10 wins probably doesn't get them into the playoffs, and then we're in full rebuilding mode around a fledgling QB.
Note-I said 3 and out or 2 minute drives. My point is their offense doesn't devour clock and keep the defense fresh. The massive disparity between time of possession tells that tale. I am not sure if that stat is kept, but I'd love to know the average TOP disparity in most Birds games.
Bumble
Note-I said 3 and out or 2 minute drives. My point is their offense doesn't devour clock and keep the defense fresh. The massive disparity between time of possession tells that tale. I am not sure if that stat is kept, but I'd love to know the average TOP disparity in most Birds games.
not sure, but TOP by itself isn't a very useful stat. i think for what you're talking about number of plays may be more meaningful (or possibly not). anyway, the eagles offense has run 567 plays from scrimmage and the eagles defense has defended 560 plays from scrimmage. so overall, they've had the ball more than their opponents have had the ball (though only marginally so).
i agree with the notion that the offense can help keep the defense fresh by staging long drives, but i think the primary way the defense can help keep themselves fresh by is by getting themselves off the field.
agree TMG, defense has to do their part, but it is very deflating when you get turnovers or have a huge stop and your offense goes out and turns the ball over within 2 minutes. If you look at all time great defenses and even just very good defenses, they break at some point. Baltimore has lived this for years, as have the Bears this year and the Vikes this year. Great defenses cannot offset inconsistent offenses. And when your kicker always gives the otehr team starts at the 30 or worse, then you relaly struggle because a team can drive 30 yards on you and be in legitimate scoring position. That is nerve wracking.
Bumble
against the giants, the eagles turned turnovers into touchdowns.
regardless of whether the style is power football or finesse football, sustained drives or quick scores, scoring 30 points should be enough points to win a game.
Had the Eagles scored 50 points and won the game, I'd still have been left with the following impression:
Egad, the Giants kicked the shit out of us. They could have scored as many points as the needed simply by running the ball up the gut over and over again.
The fact that the score was close serves only to mask the chasm that has developed between the quality of these two teams. I wish I could write it off to a bad night, a culmination of flukey plays, "3 yards, 3 games" or whatever, but we all know that isn't the case.
From my humble vantage, the Giants were much the better team, physically dominant, and couldn't have lost this game under any circumstances.
In this regard, the 30 points are a rather moot point, even though I get what you're saying about how that should be enough to win under most circumstances.
Ed Wade
Well, I for one am excited to see if the Eagles can make the playoffs. I'm not giving up! They're 1 stinking game out with 7 games to play, but you'd think we were following the Lions or Raiders. Giants and Steelers have shown that all you have to do is make the playoffs and you've go a shot at winning the SB. The Eagles don't have an impossible shot either. Will it be easy? No. Will it require better play? Yes! But it's not like 5 and 36 aren't capable of carrying this team. Maybe Scapplelog has gotten too used to very goood football teams and only cares about rooting for underdogs in other sports. Phooey on you!
And how any objective person can point a finger at the O after putting up 30 points is beyond my comprehension. JJ deserves most of the blame.
Phil -
Speaking strictly for myself, you may be misreading the sentiment a little. I also haven't given up on the season and think anything is possible. I bet others (maybe not Bumble) feel the same way.
I remain optimistic that things will turn out better and we'll make the playoffs. I'll be rooting to the bitter end.
Nevertheless, the Giants kicked the crap out of us, dominating in a way that was painful to watch.
There's no getting around it.
I still think this squad is better than some people here think, and better than they have played; it just gets pretty frustrating seeing the team make the same mistakes and offer the same excuses game after game. For me, Andy has to go not because he isn't a good coach or a decent human being. He has to go because he's sucking the life out of Philadelphia.
Aside from the Phillies, I care about this team more than any other. The sad reality is that they are less fun to watch now than they used to be. Doesn't mean we're giving up on them, doesn't mean we aren't hoping for better things.
I'll be with you in this thing until the end, and I'll be back next year no matter how it ends.
Ed Wade
We'll all be back, that isn't the point. If we didn't care, then we wouldn't write random comments about a football team every day with a bunch of cyber guys we've never met. Not true actually, I met most of you at least once and find all of you to be good dudes and upstanding citizens who share my love for the Birds.
Phil the season may not be over, but who's kidding who, this team is going nowhere. They aren't good enough, they are clearly less talented and less tough than many teams they've played. That is pretty indisputable. The game has evolved and left them behind. They cannot man up and play physical football and physical football teams just pummel them. To win in the playoffs, you need to run the ball and stop the run. They cannot do either. So what if they sneak into the playoffs, they are not a championship team. I know that, and I have to believe that deep down you know that. Unlike the Giants and Steelers teams you listed, the Birds do not have a physical presence on either side of the ball. Those teams won because when the chips were down, they could revert to power football, eat clock, play keep away, and physically dominate the other team. That has never and will never happen with an Andy Reid team.
I am laughed at as negative, but I consider it realistic. They have no FB. They have tiny DL who get manhandled with one on one blocking. They have a very slow O line who run blocks poorly. they have a bunch of WR who cannot get open. They have the worst TE in the league. Their kicker sucks. Their OLB is a converted DE who is too slow to switch direction and make plays in the open field and too weak to get off blocks. They have a 34 year old safety who routinely gets beat. They have a highly over-paid free agent CB who makes very few impact plays and created a ton of tension by being here. They have a coach who makes the same poor game day decisions again and again and does an awful job evaluating and procuring talent.
Aside from a QB who is talented (but awful in crunch time), an RB who has some mad skills (but is always dinged up and playing at 80%), and a dynamic young WR, what do they have that imbues you with such optimism? I struggle to understand why people think this is a 10 or 11 win team. I hate that, but my eyes tell me they have more holes than the plot of any Pauly Shore film. I love your loyalty and you may be a better fan than I am, but what has this team done lately to deserve your unwavering faith and devotion?
Bumble
Answer to Bumble's last question:
They are my team, so, they are the team I root and cheer for. If my team loses, they are still my team.
- Joe
Bumble, if I remember correctly, the Eagles won a very physical game againt PIT only a month ago. And no matter how physically dominant the NYG looked (and they were), we still only lost by 4 points! This isn't a Rams or Lions or Raiders team with no shot at beating good teams. Again - we lost by 4 points to the BEST team in football. There are no moral victories, but how is that hopeless?
Sorry, lost by ONLY 5 points. Point is sill valid. If the only thing that matters is Ws and Ls, then it shouldn't matter whether another team was more physical or faster or had a better FB, etc. Scoreboard is the only thing that matters.
Hey, would anyone be interested in getting together to watch the at NYG (12/7) or at WAS (12/27) games? Kind of a Scrapplelog end of season complain-o-rama? Much more fun to do this in person. I can probably host if people are interested.
I would be in for 12/7...I would drag the Bull (Bumble)
I could also be in for 12/7. I could also potentially host something, but I'm probably too far out for most of you guys (Collegeville). Where are you located, Phil ??
Captain
Andy had/has the opportunity the be One of the Best coaches in the league....All that was needed is to Let Your Offensive Coordinator Call The Offense!!...We Had Brad Childress and he never let him run the offense, Mornhinweg calls A play every now or then.
The Hardest thing to do is call plays while Standing Eye Level to The Field.
Put the Play Cards DOWN andy and Let your OC and the man stationed in the skybox call the plays.....Just stand there and hold the Red Flag and Throw It When Told to Do So!!!
Why Can't Our QB call his Own Play's?? Put the Weight On His Shoulders...sink or swim.......
I'm near Kennett Square behind Longwood Gardens.
ouch...now that was ugly!!!
I am disheartened.
Post a Comment
<< Home