Q & A With Andy Reid

ice grillin you · March 30, 2006, 09:29:37 AM

Herremans was drafted as a pure tackle

pretty crazy considering thats what he is

PoopyfaceMcGee · March 30, 2006, 09:32:34 AM

Quote from: ice grillin you on March 30, 2006, 09:29:37 AM
Herremans was drafted as a pure tackle

pretty crazy considering thats what he is

I know... right?

I simply can only buy into Herremans as a guard as a desperate effort to get him some playing time.

ice grillin you · March 30, 2006, 09:33:39 AM

for the record id like to point out that i think herremans has a bright future at tackle

PoopyfaceMcGee · March 30, 2006, 09:36:48 AM

Me too.

SunMo · March 30, 2006, 09:37:58 AM

me three, ROFL!1!

rjs246 · March 30, 2006, 09:38:52 AM

Quote from: Sun_Mo on March 30, 2006, 09:37:58 AM
me three, ROFL!1!

Maybe I'm just sufferring from the morning after stupids, bt this made me laugh.

SunMo · March 30, 2006, 09:39:37 AM

i semi-stole it from that Sam Adams commercial. but i put that special Sun touch on it to make it real

PhillyPhreak54 · March 30, 2006, 09:41:29 AM

If you can play, you can play. Herremans can play so they'll plug him in at LG because, like I said, he is one of the 5 best guys on the OL.

Reid, Heckert and Castillo like versatile players. If you notice a lot of the players they draft or sign, with the exception of Runyan and Thomas have played elsewhere on the OL.

Clarke - T/G
Jackson - T/G/C
Darilek - T/G/C
Hicks - T/G
Andrews - G/T

And you look at Andrews. He was exclusively a T in college and where is he playing now? GUARD.

PoopyfaceMcGee · March 30, 2006, 09:49:57 AM

Right, because Andrews and Herremans are similar-style players with similar physiques. Good point.

Rome · March 30, 2006, 09:51:28 AM

The object is to have your best five offensive linemen playing at the same time.

If the Eagles think Herremans is one of those five and his natural tackle position is already being occupied by someone better, he'll be placed at the guard position. Players switch offensive line spots all the f'n time. It's not like you're taking a wide receiver and making him a running back.

PhillyPhreak54 · March 30, 2006, 09:52:48 AM

My point was that just because you are labled a tackle does not mean you cannot play OG. What the hell? Can you guys not understand that the GM and the coach (which doesn't really count in IGY's eyes because he said "jump in") said the guy can play OG? Or do you not understand that having your 5 best players out there is the best thing to do regardless of what the hell their "true" positions are.

Maybe they should let him rot on the bench. Put Hicks back in there and let McNabb have a few more ribs busted up. Good point!

PoopyfaceMcGee · March 30, 2006, 09:53:20 AM

Not Hicks... Clarke. A better pure OG.

SunMo · March 30, 2006, 09:54:19 AM

it's like in madden, sometimes your 3rd tackle has a better rating at RG than your best RG, so you play the tackle there

PoopyfaceMcGee · March 30, 2006, 09:55:36 AM

Quote from: Sun_Mo on March 30, 2006, 09:54:19 AM
it's like in madden, sometimes your 3rd tackle has a better rating at RG than your best RG, so you play the tackle there

That's why Westbrook was my slot receiver!!11!! LOLLERSKATES

PhillyPhreak54 · March 30, 2006, 09:55:55 AM

Another example:

Tra was a RT in 1998. He moved to LT after some seasoning at RT

Jordam Gross played RT and then was moved to LT. Why? Because they let him get acclimated to the NFL on the right side and he was one of the 5 best players on the Panthers OL.

Larry Allen? Played both T and G.

Bentley? C & G.

But hey, I',m totally wrong on this one.