Just like dumping ABreu helped the Phils ...

Started by schoebelsballs, September 18, 2006, 01:00:13 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

General_Failure

Schoebelsballs reminds me of Freddies Dance, only not as crazy.

The man. The myth. The legend.

PhillyPhreak54

Good ol' Scho-boat had a great TD catch yesterday.

PhillyandBCEagles

Quote from: PhillyGirl on September 18, 2006, 01:03:25 PM
I've scraped dog shtein off my shoe that was better looking than this post

I have a midget that licks dog shtein off my shoe for me.

Susquehanna Birder

What's really funny to me is that this chode can't even come up with original name.

PoopyfaceMcGee


Diomedes

Quote from: Susquehanna Birder on September 18, 2006, 08:40:49 PM
What's really funny to me is that this chode can't even come up with original name.

I woulda gone with Schoeballs myself.
There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists." - Yosemite Park Ranger

General_Failure

Quote from: FFatPatt on September 18, 2006, 08:43:56 PM
I wonder if the e-mail addy is legit:   schoebelsballs@yahoo.com

Email verification is turned on. I think. And no, I'm not gonna go check.

The man. The myth. The legend.

joel in providence

you'd rather have cutler? how much bathtub crank have you been snorting? do you think QBs that can shred the giants D for 400 yards grow on trees?

brady, palmer, peyton, maybe brees

ugh. how long have you been watching the NFL for? two weeks? this league EATS qbs up and spits them out as empty shells (see culpepper, warner, bledsoe, etc.).

this loss had zippy to do with mcnabb. maybe reid... but i really think it was just a perfect storm of poor execution. dropped balls, inability to grab fumbles, dropped passes, a cornerback (hanson) who was in over his head, a stupid penalty for kicking, lewis' inability to protect the deep pass in the cover 2, etc. 

Don Ho

#38
Quote from: SD_Eagle on September 18, 2006, 02:29:34 PM
I agree with this guy, its obvious to the entire NFL that benching MacNabb in favor of FeEly and firing Reed in favor of MorNingw00d is the best option at this point. w00t.

I was thinking the same thing ::)

Actually, peckerheads like this schoebellballs just get me ready for TruckRathams appearence any time now.  I can't wait!
"Well where does Jack Lord live, or Don Ho?  That's got to be a nice neighborhood"  Jack Singer(Nicholas Cage) in Honeymoon in Vegas.

TempleOwl

Apparently in my absence ConcreteField removed several key filters that keep the idiots out.  Is there a way to simply reroute these nuts to the Eagles message board where they can converse with all the other idiots?   :paranoid
"If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and swims like a duck...SHOOT IT!"

moats23

Quote from: PhillyGirl on September 18, 2006, 04:27:52 PM
Quote from: mahe34 on September 18, 2006, 01:59:50 PM
Quote from: schoebelsballs on September 18, 2006, 01:00:13 PM
dumping Reid and McNabb would do wonders for the Eagles.  Addition by subtraction is true.  Lurie and the rest of the cronnies need to remove Reid from power.  If they would have done this at the end of last year, we could have drafted Jay Cutler as the QB of the future and have Brad Childress as our head coach.  Maybe then we wouldn't have to painfully watch Reid waste more and more and more timeouts.   If we had an extra timeout at the end of the first half, maybe we put up seven instead of three. 

What the hell was McNabb doing on that 4th down rollout ????? THrow the ball dummy, it's 4th down ! Maybe you complete a pass, or at worse, pin the Giants down at their 5 yard line.

schoebelsballs has spoken !!

i agre with you totally.  i am tired of not winning.  he has had his time, and its not working.  how many more wasted timeouts andy, how many ?

Can the admins ban this mahe34, moats23, etc etc etc assclown already?

thats not nice
your 24 hours a day, 6 days a week source for everything moats-centric

stalker

Quote from: ice grillin you on September 18, 2006, 01:49:11 PM
its been clear for a while now that reid gotta go gotta go...theres no argument about that...the debate is now when hes goes...id put the over under at four years

There is absolutely an argument about that!! And putting the over/under at four years is a little cowardly. If it is that evident to everyone I would be left with the assumption that he will be gone after this year. If he wins a Super bowl in the next three years, do you think he will be fired? Take a look at Cowher, would you fire him this year?
Alert, alert. Look well at the rainbow. The fish will be running very soon.

Sgt PSN

I get pissed as hell at Reid for some of his bone headed play calling sometimes but overall, I'm very pleased with the job he's done.  He's helped turn the Eagles into one of the premier franchises in the NFL and has had a legitimate SB contender for about 5 years now.  Last year was a disaster but far from Reid's fault. 

Anywho, I'm sure there have been fans in Pitt who have been calling for Cowher's head for years.  After all, it had been a decade since their last SB appearance.  But the guy kept putting an extremely competetive team on the field year after year. 

I think people make too much out of it when a coach wins a SB early in his coaching tenure with a team.  It only took Billick a couple of years to win one but the Ravens haven't really been competitve since.  Gruden won in his first year with the Bucs and they've done next to nothing since then. 

The biggest problem in the NFL today when it comes to building championship franchises is keeping continuety among the players because of free agency.  The best way to combat that is to keep continuity with the coaches.  If you're changing head coaches every 5 years then you're probably not going to have a successful team.  You might get lucky one year and win a SB but the long term success of the franchise has been compromised imo. 

stalker

Alert, alert. Look well at the rainbow. The fish will be running very soon.

Cerevant

An ad hominem fallacy consists of asserting that someone's argument is wrong and/or he is wrong to argue at all purely because of something discreditable/not-authoritative about the person or those persons cited by him rather than addressing the soundness of the argument itself.