ConcreteBoard

For me it has to be the lack of running game. I think part of the reason why Mcnabb was pounded all night because because the team passed every down. I don't know if it's as important as it was last week to get a running game, because the Niners stink, but it's definitely something that needs to happen sooner or later.

I said O-line because running the ball (that's right Andy...you can RUN the ball too!) is just a playcalling thing that falls mainly on Red.  Hicks getting his jock handed to him is more than that.  To be 'fair', Hicks was going up against a very good DT and the story might have been different if we ran the ball.  Even if we run the ball 40% of the time, that means Hicks still has to pass block 60% of the time.  It's hard to tell with San Fran (being sucky last year anyway)...bc we can probably play a C game and look like it was our A game. 

Who will Hicks be facing?  I guess no one really since they are 3-4, but I'm guessing he'll see some Young and Andrews/Runyan will see some Peterson?  Or am I flip flopping Peterson...he's an ROLB right?

All I know is that Hicks got ABUSED in the super bowl.  So much so that the Pats were like, "Who's is their Guard?...I don't know...He's HORRIBLE!"  ...but...again...he was going up vs Seymour.

Quote from: Avenger on September 15, 2005, 11:21:56 PM
For me it has to be the lack of running game. I think part of the reason why Mcnabb was pounded all night because because the team passed every down. I don't know if it's as important as it was last week to get a running game, because the Niners stink, but it's definitely something that needs to happen sooner or later.

Atlanta has a monster D, and you should have more success at home against the niners, but to say we suck based on last year is being too dismissive.  We lost our best player (JP) and our 2 starting corners for almost the whole year, not to mention tons of injuries at other positions. 

Last week we held Stephen Jackson to just 3.2 yards per carry (compare with 5.0 ypc last season).  We also just happen to have the top 2 sack leaders in the NFL (no ties, legit #1 and #2).  Our offense is probably no match for your defense, but to overlook our defense is a mistake.

Quote from: GIEFF on September 15, 2005, 11:33:03 PM

Quote from: Avenger on September 15, 2005, 11:21:56 PM
For me it has to be the lack of running game. I think part of the reason why Mcnabb was pounded all night because because the team passed every down. I don't know if it's as important as it was last week to get a running game, because the Niners stink, but it's definitely something that needs to happen sooner or later.

Atlanta has a monster D, and you should have more success at home against the niners, but to say we suck based on last year is being too dismissive.  We lost our best player (JP) and our 2 starting corners for almost the whole year, not to mention tons of injuries at other positions. 

Last week we held Stephen Jackson to just 3.2 yards per carry (compare with 5.0 ypc last season).  We also just happen to have the top 2 sack leaders in the NFL (no ties, legit #1 and #2).  Our offense is probably no match for your defense, but to overlook our defense is a mistake.

It's not a mistake for me, it would be a mistake for the team. But if you know anything about the Eagles, is they never overlook teams. Andy won't let them.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/recap/NFL_20030908_TB@PHI


Tampa Bay finished 7-9.




EDIT:

Also thought I'd bring up this game, you guys gave up 148 yards to Jackson until he left the game...

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20041227_PHI@STL

That was week 1, coming into the season the Bucs were #1 ranked. The Eagles didn't overlook them, they just got outplayed. You can lose a game without overlooking a team.

Quote from: GIEFF on September 15, 2005, 11:48:33 PMEDIT:

Also thought I'd bring up this game, you guys gave up 148 yards to Jackson until he left the game...

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20041227_PHI@STL

Yea that makes sense. Since it was basically a preseason game.

McNabb.

I've noticed a trend with him since, I'd say, the Dallas game.  One, he's looking for the home-run ball too much, and two, he's become overly reliant on Owens.  As a result, he's taken a lot of unnecessary hits -- he's fumbled in 8 of his last 9 games -- and he's become much more cavalier with his passing:  I've seen some uncharacteristcally risky throws from him.

You mean like the Favrian underhand toss to LJ? I cringed when I saw that.

Quote from: MDS on September 16, 2005, 12:39:32 AM

Quote from: GIEFF on September 15, 2005, 11:48:33 PMEDIT:

Also thought I'd bring up this game, you guys gave up 148 yards to Jackson until he left the game...

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20041227_PHI@STL

Yea that makes sense. Since it was basically a preseason game.

Ah, good call.  I forgot they stopped playing their starters after they locked up home-field.

I Ican only point to Reid's history. When we have a game we lose because we pass too much (Patriots 2003), he usually comes out the next game and runs the ball down the opponents' throats (Buffalo).

It's gotta be the lack of running game.  Think about it... if you take care of the run, the other concerns fall into place.  I know I'm talking football 101 here, but you run the ball, you slow up the pass rush a little bit since the D-line's not pinning their ears back...making the O-line look and perform alot better.

You've gotta have balance...

Quote from: bobbyinlondon on September 16, 2005, 03:25:11 AM
I Ican only point to Reid's history. When we have a game we lose because we pass too much (Patriots 2003), he usually comes out the next game and runs the ball down the opponents' throats (Buffalo).

Actually, the ratio of passing to running was the same the game before that Pats game, vs. the Bucs. It took TWO games of embarrassment for Reid to change to running the ball.

The run game has ALWAYS been the concern for me. That hasn't changed.

I don't know how the answer could be anything but the offensive line.

They are also greatly responsible for the lack of running game, the hit on McNabb, and the need to have Akers attempt two 49-yarders in the first place.  The offensive line was looking like 2003 again... underperforming.

Quote from: FFatPatt on September 16, 2005, 07:48:22 AM
I don't know how the answer could be anything but the offensive line.

They are also greatly responsible for the lack of running game, the hit on McNabb, and the need to have Akers attempt two 49-yarders in the first place.  The offensive line was looking like 2003 again... underperforming.

the lack of running game was because reid only called 13 running plays.

Reid only called 13 running plays, because the line wasn't blocking anyone on the first few he called.

Quote from: FFatPatt on September 16, 2005, 07:53:15 AM
Reid only called 13 running plays, because the line wasn't blocking anyone on the first few he called.

Sure, so lets just abandon the ENTIRE game plan because of the first few plays in the first game of the year?

Yes, Reid still should have tried to run more, but you also can't blame him for trying to pass when the Falcons routinely had 8 guys in the box and were stopping Westbrook with relative ease.

Again, it all goes back to the offensive line.

The O-Line is my concern. I've never seen them perform well against the 3-4.

You can't judge the online from one quarter of play...especially in the first game of the season...and Reid knows that.  His plan was to pass pass pass against the blitz and he did. He was wrong.

If McNabb weren't hurt and playing like crap, Reid's strategy would have been good enough to win the game.

McNabb wouldn't have gotten hurt if the O-Line wasn't sucking monkey nuts.


Again, I can see the lack of run game being a concern... but how an informed fan could watch that game and say the area of BIGGEST concern is anything BUT the O-Line is beyond me.  They sucked.  Completely.  Sucked hard.

Quote from: FFatPatt on September 16, 2005, 07:59:56 AM
McNabb wouldn't have gotten hurt if he hadn't been speared in the chest.

McNabb wouldn't have been speared in the chest if his O-Line could block.

the line left a lot to be desired...and the run game was non existent...but both these things have happened numerous times over the last few years...the fact of the matter is mcnabb was horrible and thats the concern right now...he needs to get his schwagger back then everything will be right again

the best thing that could happen sunday would be an early touchdown pass to TO...that would do more for this team right now than 5 john hannahs and an earl cambell coached by jim lee howell

I went with the O line, because we can run the ball, we just don't enough sometimes.

The O line, particularly Hicks, was beaten badly last week.  And Honeybuns has shown a certain lack of savvy with the 3-4 D.  A monster game from the line will make me feel a lot better.

The Oline and Running the ball sort of go hand in hand.

Actually, they don't.

Reid called 13 run plays.

Period.

This team sucks.
No playoffs.
Heck, they won't win a game.  0-17- they'll even lose the bye week.

Love, Merril  :-*

Quote from: Zanshin on September 16, 2005, 08:43:42 AM
The Oline and Running the ball sort of go hand in hand.

Quote from: PhillyGirl on September 16, 2005, 08:44:09 AM
Actually, they don't.

Reid called 13 run plays.

Period.

You're not right all the time, and this is one of those times you're not.

The O-Line played very, very poorly on Monday night and was more to blame than Reid's playcalling.

Period.

Not saying I'm right all of the time, however, Reid can't determine that his line sucks from just a few plays. And he started off the game passing constantly. His playcalling blew. Not saying the oline didn't look bad, but they MIGHT have been helped had Reid mixed it up just a tad.

Makes it real easy for a defense to make an oline look like shtein when the playcalling is as predictable as it was.

You're always here defending Reid when his pass-happy playcalling works.  The run looked like crap when they did do it, save for some lucky breaks with Westbrook finding a hole.  Running more would really not have helped, because the O-Line was NOT winning the battle at the point of attack.  As those who have watched the tape pointed out, McNabb had receivers open, and he either didn't look their way or couldn't hit them accurately.  I blame the O-Line for not protecting him well enough for most of the game, but blaming McNabb would be fair too, depending on how you look at it.

The Falcons were smart.  They stuffed the line and brought extra people, knowing it would take out our run game and rattle McNabb.  They did, because our offensive line was outmatched.

Quote from: FFatPatt on September 16, 2005, 10:52:31 AM
You're always here defending Reid when his pass-happy playcalling works.  The run looked like crap when they did do it, save for some lucky breaks with Westbrook finding a hole.  Running more would really not have helped, because the O-Line was NOT winning the battle at the point of attack.  As those who have watched the tape pointed out, McNabb had receivers open, and he either didn't look their way or couldn't hit them accurately.  I blame the O-Line for not protecting him well enough for most of the game, but blaming McNabb would be fair too, depending on how you look at it.

The Falcons were smart.  They stuffed the line and brought extra people, knowing it would take out our run game and rattle McNabb.  They did, because our offensive line was outmatched.

What? In 2003, I was BLASTING Reid for his lack of run plays. As a matter of fact, the line

QuoteMakes it real easy for a defense to make an oline look like shtein when the playcalling is as predictable as it was.

was posted by me maybe 100 times after weeks one and 2 of that year.

I have ALWAYS wanted more of a run game. ALWAYS.

more of a run game with no FB to speak of and against an 8-man front = no hope to move down the field

I understand, from his press conference, what Reid was trying to do.  Use short to medium passes to slow down the rush, since they were on record as saying they wanted to pressure McNabb.  Two problems arose - McNabb couldn't hit a stationary bus on Monday night, and we kept looking deep.  The OLine got overwhelmed, and played particularly zesty, so McNabb got hammered early and often.

Quote from: PhillyGirl on September 30, 2003, 10:36:16 AM
Reid made questionable calls?

Oh, so giving your #1 RB the ball ONCE in 2 games is questionable?

Its atrocious. We didn't run the ball at ALL in either game...therefore defenses saw that, and bum rushed Mcnabb all day long KNOWING he was going to throw and that we weren't going to run.

::)

QuoteRe:Rush Limbaugh on McNabb...SICKENING!
« Reply #182 on: October 03, 2003, 10:02:13 AM »
   
No, its ALWAYS been an issue. After 3 years, teams KNOW that its throw first, run later (if ever). It was only a matter of time before coaches GAMEPLANNED against that. 

You're reaching if you actually think Koy would have done better in that game, if Reid continued to call the same plays. He wouldn't have even had a CHANCE to get rid of that ball. The oline was awful and McNabb had zero time to do shtein most of the time.

Right.  In early 2003, when McNabb had his thumb injury and was playing like shtein, and when the team had Duce Staley, Correll Buckhalter, and Brian Westbrook, with Jon Ritchie lead-blocking, Chad at TE, and Thrash as the #1 receiver... EVERYONE thought the Eagles should have been running more.

On Monday night, the team had no power runner that knew the offense, no decent fullback, a glorified WR at TE, and a much bigger threat in the #1 WR spot.

Hate to tell you this, but this team is not built to run the ball anymore.  At all.

Quote from: PhillyGirl on September 16, 2005, 08:44:09 AM
Actually, they don't.

Reid called 13 run plays.

Period.

see the broncos

the running game starts with the oline. no RB in the league can run behind a crappy o-line (not saying the eagles fall into the crappy part)

in fact the eagles entire philosophy on both sides of the ball starts with the lines.

and the eagles weaknesses have been exposed when facing a 3-4. it's not a coincidence that the cowboys implemented it, along with a few other teams.

for an expienced o-line, they played like total Hoydas on monday, and they were my biggest reason as to why they lost the game...starting with the penalties

1st quarter

Quote1st and 10 at PHI 18   (9:42) D.McNabb pass to G.Lewis to PHI 28 for 10 yards (A.Rossum, K.Brooking).       
1st and 10 at PHI 28   (9:05) PENALTY on PHI-A.Hicks, False Start, 5 yards, enforced at PHI 28 - No Play.       
1st and 15 at PHI 23   (8:45) D.McNabb pass to T.Owens pushed ob at PHI 27 for 4 yards (D.Hall).       
   PENALTY on PHI-A.Hicks, Illegal Formation, 5 yards, enforced at PHI 23 - No Play.       
1st and 20 at PHI 18   (8:24) D.McNabb pass intended for T.Owens INTERCEPTED by D.Hall at ATL 28. D.Hall to PHI 34 for 38 yards (A.Hicks).

2nd Quarter

QuotePhiladelphia Eagles at 7:26   PHI   ATL
1st and 10 at ATL 38   (7:26) D.McNabb sacked at ATL 45 for -7 yards (R.Coleman).       
   Penalty on PHI-S.Andrews, Offensive Holding, declined.A guy gets held, and makes the sack?

4th Quarter

QuotePhiladelphia Eagles at 7:48   PHI   ATL
1st and 10 at ATL 49   (7:48) D.McNabb pass incomplete to T.Owens.       
2nd and 10 at ATL 49   (7:43) D.McNabb pass incomplete to T.Owens.       
   Timeout #2 by PHI at 07:36.       
3rd and 10 at ATL 49   (7:36) PENALTY on PHI-A.Hicks, False Start, 5 yards, enforced at ATL 49 - No Play.       
3rd and 15 at PHI 46   (7:36) (Shotgun) D.McNabb pass incomplete to G.Lewis.       
   Penalty on PHI-T.Thomas, Illegal Formation, decli

and that just the penalties on drives that were more than just 3 and outs.

the eagles had 18 first downs.
3/12 on 3rd down conversions

they faced 2nd and long(over 10) (reid likes to run mostly on 2nd down) 3 times naturally, and  3 times by penalty on second down.

the line just flat out stunk, which caused the most trouble the whole game.

the oline is my biggest concern, i am not very confident in the left side at all.

Quote from: Wingspan on September 16, 2005, 11:06:58 AM
the line just flat out stunk, which caused the most trouble the whole game.

the oline is my biggest concern, i am not very confident in the left side at all.

Shut up, man.  Obviously, the O-Line would have been stellar had Reid run Westbrook into the 8 man fronts for zero gain at least 5-10 more times.  That would have totally made them back off on passing downs.  Totally.

So...
the O-line sucks and we can't run the ball so Andy doesn't call for running plays.
Or...
Andy doesn't call for running plays 'cuz the O-line sucks and we can't run the ball.
Or..
We can't run the ball so Andy doesn't call for running plays 'cuz the O-line sucks.
I'm confused.
All I know is I got it right! I'm most concerned about McNabbs chest bruise.
And its all Andy's fault.
No wait, its the O-lines fault.
No, its the running game.
Damn, I've got a headache, I need my pills.

Yes, that's what I'm saying FF.  ::)

I'll keep my opinion the same. Reid's playcalling blew, the line played like shtein and so did McNabb.

However, I think Reid's playcalling might have altered the play of the other 2 had he mixed it up. The Defense knew what was coming.

When McNabb decides to actually play like a pro bowl QB, teams wont be able to blitz every down because they will be picked apart.  In turn, the running game then opens up. 

The defense just didn't care if the run was coming.  No threat there because of the stacked alignment.

Quote from: MURP on September 16, 2005, 11:12:40 AM
When McNabb decides to actually play like a pro bowl QB, teams wont be able to blitz every down because they will be picked apart.  In turn, the running game then opens up. 

*ding*  Pass sets up the run in this offense, not vice versa.

Quote from: MURP on September 16, 2005, 11:12:40 AM
When McNabb decides to actually play like a pro bowl QB, teams wont be able to blitz every down because they will be picked apart.  In turn, the running game then opens up. 

decides?  you think he woke up on monday and decided NOT to play like an all-pro quarterback? 

Didn't Jaws say we should've scored 30 points w/ better execution (since Owens was open all day according to him)?  Playcalling was fine.

the defense ALWAYS knows whats coming, jeebus, even if they are retards, it's 1 or 2, run or pass. thats one of the most overused cliches in sports.

thats why it comes down to the execution and disipline. which the o-line displayed none of.

and for a veteran line, that was very disconcerning to me. 

Quote from: Sun_Mo on September 16, 2005, 11:17:34 AM

Quote from: MURP on September 16, 2005, 11:12:40 AM
When McNabb decides to actually play like a pro bowl QB, teams wont be able to blitz every down because they will be picked apart. In turn, the running game then opens up.

decides? you think he woke up on monday and decided NOT to play like an all-pro quarterback?

I think he bet 20 million on the Falcons and chose to tank the game on purpose. 

Quote from: MURP on September 16, 2005, 11:20:59 AM

Quote from: Sun_Mo on September 16, 2005, 11:17:34 AM

Quote from: MURP on September 16, 2005, 11:12:40 AM
When McNabb decides to actually play like a pro bowl QB, teams wont be able to blitz every down because they will be picked apart. In turn, the running game then opens up.

decides? you think he woke up on monday and decided NOT to play like an all-pro quarterback?

I think he bet 20 million on the Falcons and chose to tank the game on purpose. 

i demand an investigation.  obviously, Andy and O-line were part of the consipiracy

When McNabb decides to actually play like a pro bowl QB, teams wont be able to blitz every down because they will be picked apart.  In turn, the running game then opens up. 


the line left a lot to be desired...and the run game was non existent...but both these things have happened numerous times over the last few years...the fact of the matter is mcnabb was horrible and thats the concern right now...he needs to get his schwagger back then everything will be right again

the best thing that could happen sunday would be an early touchdown pass to TO...that would do more for this team right now than 5 john hannahs and an earl cambell coached by jim lee howell


listen to these guys

I am most worried about this team sucking donkey dick and beating itself again.

This is a point I tried to make in another thread - Andy gameplans for situations, not for a specific number of runs and passes.  When things work (allowing for an expected number of "failed" plays) the play balance is what we'd expect.  The problem is when things aren't working - especially 1st and 10.  I'm working on some statistics, but it looks like Andy will run on 2nd and 10 or less, but he automatically goes to the pass in 2nd and long and 3rd and long (with rare exceptions and game situations).

It is correct to say that the pass sets up the run, but not just setting up the defense for the run - it sets up the situation for Andy to call the run.

Andy calls the game like a computer - I bet I could write a program that would predict his pass/run calls with 90% accuracy.  He needs to find an assistant who can feel out the game situation at a gut level, with a better understanding of what is working and what needs to change.  Andy needs to learn that sometimes a really good game plan needs to get canned when things are going in the crapper.

C

McNabb period.

Yes the o-line looked like hell but what we didn't see was McNabb creating like he has done so many times in the past.  Whether it be rolling out and freestyling a pass.  Or him just plain running.  He wasn't 100% and therefore his passes were off and there was no rolling out of the pocket or running the ball.  If McNabb is not healthy, the offense needs to have a plan B, because we all know McNabbs gonna play unless his legs lopped off. 

However they plan to execute this well I guess we will see.  If its a repeat of last weeks game.  Then Reid better get his shtein together and start concentrating on running the ball.  Hell we have 3 running backs now.  Why not have Westbrook, Gordon and Moats in on a rotation.  I say give Moats a chance because of his explosivenss and speed.  I say put Westbrook in the slot and throw gordon as FB and Moats as RB on some plays.  I say pound the fargin ball and tire down the defense.  If McNabb performs like he did monday night.  Get him the hell out and put McMahon in.  Has the line turned into a bunch of panseys because of the lack of run game?  I say throw a wrench on the wheel and run the ball like hell if McNabb is not healthy.  You gotta try something else. 

EXACTLY

which is why i always say andy is great game planner but a horrible game coach

I've said before I think Mcnabb was more of a problem monday night, but that wasn't really all his fault. He was playing hurt. He took a shot to the chest, but that happens sometimes. It's not often you make it through a game without getting hit a few times. The offensive line didn't play well, but it wasn't terrible. There were plenty of plays where he sat back there for a good 5/6 seconds before getting rid of the ball, and then he'd get hit or throw an incomplete pass.

Basically, the offensive line played good enough to win the game, and we were a few plass completions away from winning that game. If Mcnabb was completely healthy, I think he completes those passes. I do think we should've kept trying to run the ball. Westbrook did break 2 nice runs. I think we could've worn them down or at least got them to respect the play action, but when you throw 50 times you are going to get your QB hit PERIOD. No matter what team you are playing or what line is blocking for you.

Quote from: ice grillin you on September 16, 2005, 01:35:50 PM
EXACTLY

which is why i always say andy is great game planner but a horrible game coach

Dude, you need to stop agreeing with me. :sly I'm going to get a bad rep around here...

C

Quote from: Cerevant on September 16, 2005, 04:31:01 PM

Quote from: ice grillin you on September 16, 2005, 01:35:50 PM
EXACTLY

which is why i always say andy is great game planner but a horrible game coach

Dude, you need to stop agreeing with me. :sly I'm going to get a bad rep around here...

C

Going to get?

Quote from: rjs246 on September 16, 2005, 12:30:21 PM
I am most worried about this team sucking donkey meatcicle and beating itself again.

Never did I think I would be concerned about the niners game when the schedule was released 5 months ago.  DMac struggles in this game and continues to throw to TO 19 times without any big plays - hold on for the ugly ride folks.

I would love nothing better than run, run, run, worm burner, run, run, run, 101 mph decapitating fastball, run, run, run..  Here's hoping Gordon gets a few more carries.  We want Moats!

I find this thread very interesting. The 49ers beat the Rams in just about the same way the Falcons beat the Eagles. By shutting down the run and then getting pressure on the QB. It got my team 7 sacks. I wonder how many we can get on your porous line?  :-D

I don't know if you'll lose, but I don't think this game will be as big a blowout as many of you seem to think.

:evil

shutting down the run?  we don't have a run game.  do ur homework homer. 

Quote from: mussa on September 16, 2005, 06:38:51 PM
shutting down the run?  we don't have a run game.  do ur homework homer. 

And this disproves what I have to say how?

How can you stop a run game that doesn't exist?  Im proving that your lame statement of shutting down the run the falcons beat the eagles is false.  Getting pressure on McNabb is key for you guys.  So bad luck with that :yay

Quote from: mussa on September 16, 2005, 06:53:30 PM
How can you stop a run game that doesn't exist?  Im proving that your lame statement of shutting down the run the falcons beat the eagles is false.  Getting pressure on McNabb is key for you guys.  So bad luck with that :yay

Yeah, the run game was non existant either way. Westbrook has had good running games. He didn't against the Falcons because the Falcons shut him down and Reid stopped running the ball. My point was that the Eagles and Rams threw the ball way too much and this allowed the Falcons and Niners to get more pressure on the QB.

I know the Eagles are a pass heavy offense, but it didn't seem to work too well last week, now did it?

yea because McNabb was McSpeared.  we were playing behind the entire game.  run or pass when your behind?  i say pass. 

Quote from: ice grillin you on September 16, 2005, 11:23:43 AM
When McNabb decides to actually play like a pro bowl QB, teams wont be able to blitz every down because they will be picked apart. In turn, the running game then opens up.


the line left a lot to be desired...and the run game was non existent...but both these things have happened numerous times over the last few years...the fact of the matter is mcnabb was horrible and thats the concern right now...he needs to get his schwagger back then everything will be right again

the best thing that could happen sunday would be an early touchdown pass to TO...that would do more for this team right now than 5 john hannahs and an earl cambell coached by jim lee howell


listen to these guys

Maybe if you could work the quote button I'd know who you were talking about when you say, "listen to these guys", or do you expect me to look back and find out myself??

McNabb had a piss poor game. It was the first game of the year, I ain't worried. He'll come back, and in  turn, the whole team will look better. Thats the kind of qb he is, he's carried this team before, he'll do it again. It was one game, one baaad game, but only one game against the best team in the NFC besides the Eagles. It was a tough game against a good D in their house.

Sunday can't get here soon enough.

Quote from: mussa on September 16, 2005, 07:09:21 PM
yea because McNabb was McSpeared.  we were playing behind the entire game.  run or pass when your behind?  i say pass. 

Well, that's what Reid said, too. Look where it got your team.  :-D

Laugh now funny boy, you might be singing a different tune on Sunday. Tell me, what might be your game plan on offense when Trotter gets to play his first game.

Also, I know crab juice, and it ain't nuthin' I'd want to be known by.

Quote from: shorebird on September 16, 2005, 07:35:38 PM
Laugh now funny boy, you might be singing a different tune on Sunday. Tell me, what might be your game plan on offense when Trotter gets to play his first game.

Run the ball at him. We'll see how things work out. I don' think it'll be offense that wins the game for us.  ;)

Quote from: shorebird on September 16, 2005, 07:37:01 PM
Also, I know crab juice, and it ain't nuthin' I'd want to be known by.

Hmm... perhaps that's why it's my handle and not yours?  ::)

Running game.

Reid needs to not go away from it so early. They have a lot of plays in there that could open up the running game. That trap play they ran with Westbrook was one of them. Reid cannot get away from the run so quickly. It's like he says "Well, that run didn't work so I'll throw 12 straight times".

I have no trouble being a 60/40 run/pass ratio team. But you cannot get away from it too early.

Quote from: Larry on September 16, 2005, 12:56:12 AM
McNabb.

I've noticed a trend with him since, I'd say, the Dallas game.  One, he's looking for the home-run ball too much, and two, he's become overly reliant on Owens.  As a result, he's taken a lot of unnecessary hits -- he's fumbled in 8 of his last 9 games -- and he's become much more cavalier with his passing:  I've seen some uncharacteristcally risky throws from him.

You bring up a good point.

What's funny is when Thrash and Co. were here everyone was screaming for Donovan to be a little more daring and try to thread balls into tight spots. Now that he's doing it...he's catching heat.

He'll be fine.

Quote from: Crabjuice on September 16, 2005, 07:45:17 PM

Quote from: shorebird on September 16, 2005, 07:37:01 PM
Also, I know crab juice, and it ain't nuthin' I'd want to be known by.

Hmm... perhaps that's why it's my handle and not yours? ::)

Crab juice is the absolute most rank thing God ever put on earth. You can't even put it in your trash and wait a few days for the trash man, you'll barf if you get within' spitting distance of your can. You have to dispose of it immediately, or maggots will be on it quick fast and in a hurry. It makes buzzards puke.

Does that describe you in any sense??

Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on September 16, 2005, 08:02:12 PM

Quote from: Larry on September 16, 2005, 12:56:12 AM
McNabb.

I've noticed a trend with him since, I'd say, the Dallas game.  One, he's looking for the home-run ball too much, and two, he's become overly reliant on Owens.  As a result, he's taken a lot of unnecessary hits -- he's fumbled in 8 of his last 9 games -- and he's become much more cavalier with his passing:  I've seen some uncharacteristically risky throws from him.

You bring up a good point.

What's funny is when Thrash and Co. were here everyone was screaming for Donovan to be a little more daring and try to thread balls into tight spots. Now that he's doing it...he's catching heat.

He'll be fine.

I hope he keeps on doing what he's doing. Look at what it did for his stats last year.

I agree, he'll be fine. I look for a breakout game against the Niners.

I think the problem is that we don't have running backs who can grind out tough yards (or any yards) when the passing game isn't going well. We have RBs who can catch the ball, and can occasionally pop a good run when a successful passing game has spread the defense a little bit.

That's the conundrum...as I believe FF and MURP pointed out earlier in this thread, the Eagles are no longer built to run the ball successfully, ever, as a first option. If McNabb is off or the opponent successfully focuses on shutting down the pass, they have a difficult time doing anything else.

And, Larry's point was also very good, RE: going for the home run ball too frequently. It's difficult to run--or, throw short passes, when you're never at third and less than five, as they weren't on Monday night.

Quote from: PhillyPhreak54 on September 16, 2005, 08:02:12 PM
You bring up a good point.

What's funny is when Thrash and Co. were here everyone was screaming for Donovan to be a little more daring and try to thread balls into tight spots. Now that he's doing it...he's catching heat.

He'll be fine.

McNabb is a good QB. I don't understand how some people can't see that. People complained about him running too much, too. He's shown that he can be a good pure passer. Last season wasn't a fluke.

That said, he does have a bit of trouble with pressure.  :P

Brady is the only qb who looks not to be much effected by pressure. He gets the ball off split seconds before the D can get to him. Even Manning will throw picks if you can get to him.

Quote from: shorebird on September 16, 2005, 08:15:07 PM
Brady is the only qb who looks not to be much effected by pressure. He gets the ball off split seconds before the D can get to him. Even Manning will throw picks if you can get to him.

That's because Brady it really a robot.  :-D

His mechanics look like it.

It is definately the running game that needs to show up it will help the whole offense in general especially the line.

Quote from: Avenger on September 15, 2005, 11:21:56 PM
For me it has to be the lack of running game. I think part of the reason why Mcnabb was pounded all night because because the team passed every down. I don't know if it's as important as it was last week to get a running game, because the Niners stink, but it's definitely something that needs to happen sooner or later.

Great point...and with Bryant Young and Julian Peterson on the other side of the ball, I don't see the running improving much this week.  Plus, with McNabb hurting are we really going to be able to have a decent passing game?  This is why I think we'll lose.  The 49ers were pathetic last year...but this is NOT last year's team.  I watched that game last week and they crushed the Rams...the only reason the game was close is because of the POS running back they have who kept fumbling the ball.

Quote from: Ploobus on September 17, 2005, 07:30:35 AM

Quote from: Avenger on September 15, 2005, 11:21:56 PM
For me it has to be the lack of running game. I think part of the reason why Mcnabb was pounded all night because because the team passed every down. I don't know if it's as important as it was last week to get a running game, because the Niners stink, but it's definitely something that needs to happen sooner or later.

Great point...and with Bryant Young and Julian Peterson on the other side of the ball, I don't see the running improving much this week. Plus, with McNabb hurting are we really going to be able to have a decent passing game? This is why I think we'll lose. The 49ers were pathetic last year...but this is NOT last year's team. I watched that game last week and they crushed the Rams...the only reason the game was close is because of the POS running back they have who kept fumbling the ball.

Man, the Falcons have a much, much bettter D than the Niners. We aren't gonna' lose this one. McNabb will bounce back.

Many problems but most of them should clear up with good coaching.   We have alot of young receivers and a young Offensive lineman.  I think some stupid penalties and bad line play are going to happen early in the season.

McNabb looked good early but I think the shot in the chest took him down a notch.  He was obviously grimacing with throwing. 

This brings up a major concern of mine which is a major lack of confidence in the back-up QB position.  Koy Detmer is basically a College Head Coach in training not a true back-up.  The guy is smaller than me in weight and height which is just sad for a NFL QB.  We need a halfway decent QB as a back-up.  Is that Mike Mcmahon?  I don't know, he played OK with Detroit sometimes, but I'd feel a lot more confident if we had a Testaverde, Trent Dilfer, or Gus Ferrotte or some mediocre but proven Veteran who won't panic in times of need.

Donovan also has to be willing to leave the pocket and run instead of forcing the ball to TO in triple coverage. I'm also still not sold on LJ Smith's hands.

I have nothing to contribute