Blow this farging team up

Started by PhillyandBCEagles, November 05, 2007, 01:11:06 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

reese125

Quote from: Sgt PSN on November 07, 2007, 01:58:28 PM
Quote from: reese125 on November 07, 2007, 11:54:21 AM
QuoteAll of that is not gone. McNabb's not done. He doesn't have the weapons, and he's not 100 percent McNabb. That isn't an excuse; it's a reality. So is this: A quarterback is always better his second year after a major knee surgery than his first.

Really? Carson Palmer would disagree


Really?  Carson Palmer would disagree with you disagreeing about him disagreeing with Ashely Fox. 

2006:  16 G, 324 Comp, 520 Att, 62.3%, 4035 yds, 7.8 Avg, 28 TD, 13 Int, 93.9 Rat

2007:  8 G, 190 Comp, 294 Att, 64.6%, 2193 yds, 7.5 Avg, 16 TD, 10 int, 91.0 Rat

He's currently on pace to throw for approx 4400 yards and 32 td's this year which would make it his best season as a pro.   

You just discount the int's?  Hes on pace for 20 ints-- which puts his team in position to lose every game. Best season as a pro....no.

PoopyfaceMcGee


smeags

we need a "here's why carson palmer will never be an eagle" thread now.
If guns kill people then spoons made Rosie O'Donnel a fatass.

Quote from: ice grillin you on March 16, 2008, 03:38:24 PM
phillies will be under 500 this year...book it

Sgt PSN

According to Eskin (gag, gag), since 2000 the Eagles have spent more money on WR's than 30 of the other 31 NFL franchises.  

Wow.   If that's not reason enough to blow up the front office/scouting department then I don't know what is. 

PhillyandBCEagles

To be fair, probably 50%+ of that is TO.

Sgt PSN

TO was only on the books for 2 years and his salary was probably a bit less than market value.  He never said who the only team was that has spent more but my guess is either the Rams or Colts.  So you've still got 30 other teams out there with Boldin, Fitzgerald, Smith, Ward, Walker, Johnson and Moss and a bunch of other recievers better than anyone the Eagles have run out on the field not named TO and they've been spending less money.

So apparently the Eagles aren't cheap when it comes to recievers.  They're just completely, totally, undeniably inept at scouting them.   

Father Demon

Quote from: Sgt PSN on November 07, 2007, 04:56:12 PM
According to Eskin (gag, gag), since 2000 the Eagles have spent more money on WR's than 30 of the other 31 NFL franchises. 

Wow.   If that's not reason enough to blow up the front office/scouting department then I don't know what is. 

HOLY shtein!

That is an amazing tell-tale story about this farging front office. 

Plus, I think it was the Rams.  Had to have been.

My anger level just went up a notch.
The drawback to marital longevity is your wife always knows when you're really interested in her and when you're just trying to bury it.

rjs246

Contract extensions for Greg Lewis and Reggie Brown and maybe Todd Pinkston and TO if they're still on the books.

I heart the Eagles.
Is rjs gonna have to choke a bitch?

Let them eat bootstraps.

ice grillin you

if its even true...could be a straight up lie or numbers cooked by banner and fed to eskin to give to his audience to try and quell the calls for a number one wr that fly into wip every day

eskin is nothing more than an extension of spadaro
i can take a phrase thats rarely heard...flip it....now its a daily word

igy gettin it done like warrick

im the board pharmacist....always one step above yous

Cerevant

No, rjs & Demon are right - the Eagles are spending money on wide receivers, they are just spending too much money on the wrong wide receivers. 
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.

ice grillin you

im not saying they arent but i dont see the numbers adding up...before i believe eagles mouthpiece eskin i wanna see some proof
i can take a phrase thats rarely heard...flip it....now its a daily word

igy gettin it done like warrick

im the board pharmacist....always one step above yous

Cerevant

It probably depends on whether you count TO's entire contract (49M) , or just what he collected while he was here (12M).

TO: 49M
Curtis: 32M
Brown: 27M
Pinkston: 18M
Stallworth: ? (trade)
Avant: 1.2M
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.

ice grillin you

lol at TO counting 49 million...you can only count what they actually spent...not what they would have spent if he was still here
i can take a phrase thats rarely heard...flip it....now its a daily word

igy gettin it done like warrick

im the board pharmacist....always one step above yous

PoopyfaceMcGee

They haven't spent enough on scouting and coaching WR's, regardless.

Cerevant

I'm not saying it is right - just trying to figure out where this spin could be coming from.  Even if it is true, it is more damning than if they were being cheap.
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.