Jason Avant

Feva · January 07, 2009, 09:42:39 AM

Quote from: rjs246 on January 07, 2009, 08:53:47 AM
There are plenty of teams that have 'true #1 receivers' and they all still need to use the run game to be competitive. This idea that adding a receiver will make the Eagles the conference favorite is laughable.

Andy Reid is still their coach for god's sake.

I never said that they wouldn't still need to run. I also fully admit that Andy would be tempted to pass even more. What I said is when they do pass... it makes them a whole lot more dynamic.

reese125 · January 07, 2009, 09:51:50 AM

you can disagree/laugh all you want...if they added a bona fide #1 receiver, not only would their red zone issues be reduced (scoring even more points than they already have this year), their running game improves because the defense has to sit back more

and yes...they would be considered the conference favorites because of their defense

rjs246 · January 07, 2009, 09:53:30 AM

No, they wouldn't.

ice grillin you · January 07, 2009, 09:57:00 AM

Quote from: rjs246 on January 07, 2009, 08:38:10 AM
How can you even think that they would avoid those dud games? Andy Reid would still be the coach. Donovan would still be the quarterback. And they still wouldn't run the ball. A WR isn't going to change any of those facts.

2004 says

reese125 · January 07, 2009, 09:57:59 AM

Quote from: rjs246 on January 07, 2009, 09:53:30 AM
No, they wouldn't.

youre wrong

rjs246 · January 07, 2009, 10:09:11 AM

Quote from: ice grillin you on January 07, 2009, 09:57:00 AM
Quote from: rjs246 on January 07, 2009, 08:38:10 AM
How can you even think that they would avoid those dud games? Andy Reid would still be the coach. Donovan would still be the quarterback. And they still wouldn't run the ball. A WR isn't going to change any of those facts.

2004 says

I'm not ready to compare this team with a young(er) McNabb and a young Westbrook and an extremely weak NFC of 2004, but whatever, if you're trying to make a point you've made it.

Diomedes · January 07, 2009, 10:11:31 AM

Quote from: ice grillin you on January 07, 2009, 09:57:00 AM
Quote from: rjs246 on January 07, 2009, 08:38:10 AM
How can you even think that they would avoid those dud games? Andy Reid would still be the coach. Donovan would still be the quarterback. And they still wouldn't run the ball. A WR isn't going to change any of those facts.

2004 says

You yourself have argued that the rest of the division was much weaker in '04, and it was. Reid's schtick doesn't work anymore, and though I admit a stud WR would have improved his chances, I don't admit it would have vaulted the team into front runner status.

ice grillin you · January 07, 2009, 10:13:56 AM

save pittsburgh they ROLLED over everyone in the league that year...hell they should have even won the superbowl

the dominance of that offense cancels out any improvement the division might have made since then

rjs246 · January 07, 2009, 10:14:33 AM

No.

Diomedes · January 07, 2009, 10:15:11 AM

So we disagree. About hypotheticals and would haves. Yay.

ice grillin you · January 07, 2009, 10:16:33 AM

nothing is definite...but with an offense like that you have a real chance at a superbowl and thats all anyone wants

Feva · January 07, 2009, 10:32:33 AM

You sure as hell don't get swept by the farging Skins.

rjs246 · January 07, 2009, 10:33:17 AM

It's ridiculous to claim that.

Feva · January 07, 2009, 10:36:13 AM

no.

rjs246 · January 07, 2009, 10:43:44 AM

Do they 'sure as hell' not tie the Bengals or not get blown out by the Ravens? We'd all like to think that one player would have changed the outcome of those games but the fact is that Reid lost a couple of those games and the players laid down and took it up the shteinter for a couple of them. A studmuffin WR doesn't call the plays or make McNabb accurate.