Dallas @ Eagles - Ugh. Just no words for this one.
Lions spanking Denver - Hmm, not sure if it's a Cinderella season, or they are for real.
Minnesota - Eagles beat the Vikes, then the Vikes tear up San Diego. Such a strange year in the NFL.
Adrian Peterson - If he can keep this up for 8 or 10 seasons, we'll be saying Emmit who? Barry who? Just amazing ability. Could be the first rookie to run for 2K also.
Minnesota - Eagles beat the Vikes, then the Vikes tear up San Diego. Such a strange year in the NFL.
Adrian Peterson - If he can keep this up for 8 or 10 seasons, we'll be saying Emmit who? Barry who? Just amazing ability. Could be the first rookie to run for 2K also.
Yeah, no doubt, Peterson is just amazing.
Should make for a good game next Sunday in Greenbay. I'll be there when the Packers beat the Viqueens
Well, it wasn't pretty but they got the job done today. McNabb at least ran when he needed to. Too bad he fumbled and didn't pass well. Still, I'll take it. And man...Westbrook. Jeez!
Well, it wasn't pretty but they got the job done today. McNabb at least ran when he needed to. Too bad he fumbled and didn't pass well. Still, I'll take it. And man...Westbrook. Jeez!
At this point I think we turn to next year. I have been considering the future of Reid and McNabb.
I say there is a 40% chance that Reid resigns all together after the season. I give it 60% chance that he gives up the VP of Football Ops position.
McNabb: If his play continues to improve modestly, stay stagnant, or goes downhill, I say there is a 60% chance they trade McNabb. I think that goes down to 20% or less if he improves significantly throughout the season and they make the playoffs. But if they finish 8-8 or 9-7? I don't think they aare going to keep him around.
Really, I think McNabb's still a pretty good (or at the very least average) QB, although Westbrook is clearly the most valuable player on the team now. McNabb's only real stinker this season was the first Washington game where he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. I think the defense is your teams biggest problem; it has aged rapidly.
and by their stats, the Eagle's D is 22nd in the league. If McNabb gets traded and you start a 2nd year guy with a declining defense that leads to playing from behind, well, I think the Eagle's will be in for a much worse season next year than they're having now.
Really, I think McNabb's still a pretty good (or at the very least average) QB, although Westbrook is clearly the most valuable player on the team now. McNabb's only real stinker this season was the first Washington game where he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. I think the defense is your teams biggest problem; it has aged rapidly.
and by their stats, the Eagle's D is 22nd in the league. If McNabb gets traded and you start a 2nd year guy with a declining defense that leads to playing from behind, well, I think the Eagle's will be in for a much worse season next year than they're having now.
Flounder, I think if I was to look at this with my rational brain, I would come up with much the same conclusion. McNabb isn't what he was in his good areas and he is no better in his weak areas, but he is still better than a Joe Schmo.
To be honest, I have no idea what the prospects of a Kolb are in the NFL--based on the various opinions I have read, I guess no one else really knows either.
But at this point in the season, I cannot begin to give up. We are only 2 games out of the wildcard with 7 yet to play. Hell, that's nothing compared to what the Phillies did!
Of course they don't look like a playoff team now (they have a losing record--I know) but after we win 6 of the last seven we are going to look much better...
Really, I think McNabb's still a pretty good (or at the very least average) QB, although Westbrook is clearly the most valuable player on the team now. McNabb's only real stinker this season was the first Washington game where he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. I think the defense is your teams biggest problem; it has aged rapidly.
and by their stats, the Eagle's D is 22nd in the league. If McNabb gets traded and you start a 2nd year guy with a declining defense that leads to playing from behind, well, I think the Eagle's will be in for a much worse season next year than they're having now.
McNabb played poorly until the Vikings game, where he did a nice job. But the last two weeks he's fumbled and not been very accurate. We started to see some of the old McNabb again this week with his mobility and ability to create success out of nothing. What I'm saying is that if he got no better, I still see a good chance that he'll be traded. If he continues to improve at a good pace, then I'd say he'll be OK.
Flounder, I think if I was to look at this with my rational brain, I would come up with much the same conclusion. McNabb isn't what he was in his good areas and he is no better in his weak areas, but he is still better than a Joe Schmo.
To be honest, I have no idea what the prospects of a Kolb are in the NFL--based on the various opinions I have read, I guess no one else really knows either.
But at this point in the season, I cannot begin to give up. We are only 2 games out of the wildcard with 7 yet to play. Hell, that's nothing compared to what the Phillies did!
Of course they don't look like a playoff team now (they have a losing record--I know) but after we win 6 of the last seven we are going to look much better...
2007 ain't over yet!
If they win all but the Patriots game they go 10-6, which would be enough for a Wild Card this year. The question is whether or not they can knock off Dallas too. I kind of doubt it. Realistically I see them going 9-7, and MAYBE getting a Wild Card berth. They might even win a round, but as soon as they hit a Dallas or Green bay, they're done.
What's all this talk about McNabb not playing well? The only seasons he's put up better numbers were last year and the Super Bowl year. As I pointed out on an Eagles board I frequent, he's #9 in the NFL in passer Rating, YPG, and has the fewest INTs of any starter. That puts him above Manning, Palmer and Hasslebeck in Rating. It means there are only 8 QBs in the league putting up better numbers than him, and 3 of them are probable Hall of Famers. Even before the Washington game Donovan was above his career averages in Completion %, Rating and INT %. All that with no real threat at WR/TE, and very poor coaching/game planning. And remember, McNabb's never been a really accurate QB at any point in his career. (Career comp % - 58.5%)
And the most important statistic of all...Donovan doesn't play defense!
IMHO if the Eagles get rid of Reid, I'd expect a huge turnaround as soon as the team gets acclimated to the new coach. I hear Bill Cower is available!
What's all this talk about McNabb not playing well? The only seasons he's put up better numbers were last year and the Super Bowl year. As I pointed out on an Eagles board I frequent, he's #9 in the NFL in passer Rating, YPG, and has the fewest INTs of any starter. That puts him above Manning, Palmer and Hasslebeck in Rating. It means there are only 8 QBs in the league putting up better numbers than him, and 3 of them are probable Hall of Famers. Even before the Washington game Donovan was above his career averages in Completion %, Rating and INT %. All that with no real threat at WR/TE, and very poor coaching/game planning. And remember, McNabb's never been a really accurate QB at any point in his career. (Career comp % - 58.5%)
And the most important statistic of all...Donovan doesn't play defense!
IMHO if the Eagles get rid of Reid, I'd expect a huge turnaround as soon as the team gets acclimated to the new coach. I hear Bill Cower is available!
One of the reasons he doesn't throw interceptions is that if he misses, he usually misses big. He throws passes down and away, making it impossible for anyone to catch them. And really...McNabb not being that accurate is hardly a point FOR him, agreed? The other thing you're not pointing out is fumbles. He seems to do that a lot. He's fumbled twice in two games because he doesn't protect the ball.
But there is also an intangible here: McNabb's attitude...his urgency, his leadership. He's never shown the kind of urgency he's needed to, nor displayed the leadership qualities he needs. He doesn't have that x factor of turning it on when the game is on the line. He can make great plays, and sometimes those plays ARE game winners, but he blows it just as often. He lacks that Tom Brady, Joe Montana, John Elway and Peyton Manning game-winning drive quality.
I still root for him to do well. I WANT him to do well. I really would love to see him turn this thing around and prove people wrong...including me. But I've been saying that since, oh, 1999. And just when it seems he's there...like in the Super Bowl, the old shit-eating grin and tapping himself on the chest when he messes up begins. Did I mention the shit-eating grin?
As I pointed out on an Eagles board I frequent, he's #9 in the NFL in passer Rating, YPG, and has the fewest INTs of any starter. That puts him above Manning, Palmer and Hasslebeck in Rating.
This isn't particularly about McNabb, but I just wanted to say that the passer rating statistic is terrible. It dramatically over-rewards check down passes. 6 yard passes on third and 10 are good for your QB rating, but don't help your team win.
Since I mentioned them before, I'll link to footballoutsiders again
But there is also an intangible here: McNabb's attitude...his urgency, his leadership. He's never shown the kind of urgency he's needed to, nor displayed the leadership qualities he needs. He doesn't have that x factor of turning it on when the game is on the line. He can make great plays, and sometimes those plays ARE game winners, but he blows it just as often. He lacks that Tom Brady, Joe Montana, John Elway and Peyton Manning game-winning drive quality.
I would never compare McNabb to Elway, Montana, etc., I was just pointing out that statistically he's not having as bad a year as many seem to think. The way people are talking, you'd think he was making Ryan Leaf look good. Yes, he's having some problems, but I don't believe he's a major cause of the Eagles being 4-5. He doesn't coach the game plan (or lack thereof); has nobody other than Westbrook who scares a defense to throw to; doesn't play special teams or defense, both of which have lost at least 3 games this year. I think he's a very good, but not quite 'special' QB, not quite able to control a game on his own, but still better than 90% of the QBs out there. I'd compare him favorably to O'Brien, Esiason or Moon.
I do have to agree with you about his intangibles, they have always been iffy at best. But then, if QBs were judged solely on intangibles, Jim McMahon would be the best QB of all time!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flounder
This isn't particularly about McNabb, but I just wanted to say that the passer rating statistic is terrible. It dramatically over-rewards check down passes. 6 yard passes on third and 10 are good for your QB rating, but don't help your team win.
Agreed, the QB Rating is outdated with today's high percentage passing systems, IIRC it was invented when QBs threw 15-20 passes per game, most of which were long ball attempts. That said, it's still considered to be an important statistical record by the NFL. (most seasons leading league, seasons with >100 QB Rating, etc.)
I would never compare McNabb to Elway, Montana, etc., I was just pointing out that statistically he's not having as bad a year as many seem to think. The way people are talking, you'd think he was making Ryan Leaf look good. Yes, he's having some problems, but I don't believe he's a major cause of the Eagles being 4-5. He doesn't coach the game plan (or lack thereof); has nobody other than Westbrook who scares a defense to throw to; doesn't play special teams or defense, both of which have lost at least 3 games this year. I think he's a very good, but not quite 'special' QB, not quite able to control a game on his own, but still better than 90% of the QBs out there. I'd compare him favorably to O'Brien, Esiason or Moon.
I do have to agree with you about his intangibles, they have always been iffy at best. But then, if QBs were judged solely on intangibles, Jim McMahon would be the best QB of all time!
I agree with most of that actually. The Eagles would have won the Green Bay game if not for the punt returns (or fumbles, actually). They should have won the bears game. They didn't play well enough in total to win the Giants, Redskins, or Dallas games. Really I think they are probably more a 6-3 team right now, quality wise.
As for McNabb, I think my problem is he seems to portray himself as Montana or Elway. He just seems to think of himself in that light.
Quote:
Agreed, the QB Rating is outdated with today's high percentage passing systems, IIRC it was invented when QBs threw 15-20 passes per game, most of which were long ball attempts. That said, it's still considered to be an important statistical record by the NFL. (most seasons leading league, seasons with >100 QB Rating, etc.)
I think the passer rating needs to go away. Look...my rating is a perfect 158.3! What the hell? Check this out
Agreed, the QB Rating is outdated with today's high percentage passing systems, IIRC it was invented when QBs threw 15-20 passes per game, most of which were long ball attempts. That said, it's still considered to be an important statistical record by the NFL. (most seasons leading league, seasons with >100 QB Rating, etc.)
You know, I read an article somewhere that I can't remember, talking about how while the 70's were a very run heavy era, prior to that there was quite a lot of passing. It's just that most of today's football commentators played/grew up watching football in the 70's so that is what is thought of as "old football" today. Granted, there wasn't all the short passing that there is today, but the football of the past wasn't as run oriented as we sometimes think was the general point.
I wish I could remember where I read that.
Here's a good recent rant about the QB rating system
This is not going well. 3 INTS, McNabb in the locker getting X-rays, 7 to 3. At least the D is holding up. Ugh...Is it 2008 yet?
Edit: Well they won, but it wasn't pretty. I will say the defense was really good. That's two consecutive games with 4 down goal line stands. McNabb sucked and I think he used his injury to bail out. Feeley was a little better, but not much. And once again, Westbrook proved he should be considered among the top running backs in the league.
Comments
Lions spanking Denver - Hmm, not sure if it's a Cinderella season, or they are for real.
Minnesota - Eagles beat the Vikes, then the Vikes tear up San Diego. Such a strange year in the NFL.
Adrian Peterson - If he can keep this up for 8 or 10 seasons, we'll be saying Emmit who? Barry who? Just amazing ability.
Minnesota - Eagles beat the Vikes, then the Vikes tear up San Diego. Such a strange year in the NFL.
Adrian Peterson - If he can keep this up for 8 or 10 seasons, we'll be saying Emmit who? Barry who? Just amazing ability.
Yeah, no doubt, Peterson is just amazing.
Should make for a good game next Sunday in Greenbay. I'll be there when the Packers beat the Viqueens
-t
So far so good!
McNabb isn't throwing too well (except into the ground) and the Cowboys Offensive line is doing its job and giving Romo lots of time.
Second half is make or break for the Eagles.
They could easily lose to New England, Washington, New York (Giants) and New Orleans in the coming weeks.
I hope SDW is drinking heavily at the game.
I was, in fact, totally wasted. At this point the season is done. At least I got there and drank for 10 hours before hand.
My season was done in Week 6. All I have to look forward is drinking 10 hours before hand...
I was, in fact, totally wasted. At this point the season is done. At least I got there and drank for 10 hours before hand.
Well, hell - sounds like you found a way to enjoy the game! Can't beat that.
Well, it wasn't pretty but they got the job done today. McNabb at least ran when he needed to. Too bad he fumbled and didn't pass well. Still, I'll take it. And man...Westbrook. Jeez!
Second. I liked the 4th quarter...
Second. I liked the 4th quarter...
At this point I think we turn to next year. I have been considering the future of Reid and McNabb.
I say there is a 40% chance that Reid resigns all together after the season. I give it 60% chance that he gives up the VP of Football Ops position.
McNabb: If his play continues to improve modestly, stay stagnant, or goes downhill, I say there is a 60% chance they trade McNabb. I think that goes down to 20% or less if he improves significantly throughout the season and they make the playoffs. But if they finish 8-8 or 9-7? I don't think they aare going to keep him around.
This is one of my favorite sites
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/200...-ratings/5752/
and by their stats, the Eagle's D is 22nd in the league. If McNabb gets traded and you start a 2nd year guy with a declining defense that leads to playing from behind, well, I think the Eagle's will be in for a much worse season next year than they're having now.
Really, I think McNabb's still a pretty good (or at the very least average) QB, although Westbrook is clearly the most valuable player on the team now. McNabb's only real stinker this season was the first Washington game where he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. I think the defense is your teams biggest problem; it has aged rapidly.
This is one of my favorite sites
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/200...-ratings/5752/
and by their stats, the Eagle's D is 22nd in the league. If McNabb gets traded and you start a 2nd year guy with a declining defense that leads to playing from behind, well, I think the Eagle's will be in for a much worse season next year than they're having now.
Flounder, I think if I was to look at this with my rational brain, I would come up with much the same conclusion. McNabb isn't what he was in his good areas and he is no better in his weak areas, but he is still better than a Joe Schmo.
To be honest, I have no idea what the prospects of a Kolb are in the NFL--based on the various opinions I have read, I guess no one else really knows either.
But at this point in the season, I cannot begin to give up. We are only 2 games out of the wildcard with 7 yet to play. Hell, that's nothing compared to what the Phillies did!
Of course they don't look like a playoff team now (they have a losing record--I know) but after we win 6 of the last seven we are going to look much better...
2007 ain't over yet!
Really, I think McNabb's still a pretty good (or at the very least average) QB, although Westbrook is clearly the most valuable player on the team now. McNabb's only real stinker this season was the first Washington game where he couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. I think the defense is your teams biggest problem; it has aged rapidly.
This is one of my favorite sites
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/200...-ratings/5752/
and by their stats, the Eagle's D is 22nd in the league. If McNabb gets traded and you start a 2nd year guy with a declining defense that leads to playing from behind, well, I think the Eagle's will be in for a much worse season next year than they're having now.
McNabb played poorly until the Vikings game, where he did a nice job. But the last two weeks he's fumbled and not been very accurate. We started to see some of the old McNabb again this week with his mobility and ability to create success out of nothing. What I'm saying is that if he got no better, I still see a good chance that he'll be traded. If he continues to improve at a good pace, then I'd say he'll be OK.
Flounder, I think if I was to look at this with my rational brain, I would come up with much the same conclusion. McNabb isn't what he was in his good areas and he is no better in his weak areas, but he is still better than a Joe Schmo.
To be honest, I have no idea what the prospects of a Kolb are in the NFL--based on the various opinions I have read, I guess no one else really knows either.
But at this point in the season, I cannot begin to give up. We are only 2 games out of the wildcard with 7 yet to play. Hell, that's nothing compared to what the Phillies did!
Of course they don't look like a playoff team now (they have a losing record--I know) but after we win 6 of the last seven we are going to look much better...
2007 ain't over yet!
If they win all but the Patriots game they go 10-6, which would be enough for a Wild Card this year. The question is whether or not they can knock off Dallas too. I kind of doubt it. Realistically I see them going 9-7, and MAYBE getting a Wild Card berth. They might even win a round, but as soon as they hit a Dallas or Green bay, they're done.
The question is whether or not they can knock off Dallas too. I kind of doubt it.
Of course, one can't forget that the Dallas game comes late--Dallas may be playing for nothing at that point--especailly if GB stays hot...
It is all part of my master plan...
And the most important statistic of all...Donovan doesn't play defense!
IMHO if the Eagles get rid of Reid, I'd expect a huge turnaround as soon as the team gets acclimated to the new coach. I hear Bill Cower is available!
What's all this talk about McNabb not playing well? The only seasons he's put up better numbers were last year and the Super Bowl year. As I pointed out on an Eagles board I frequent, he's #9 in the NFL in passer Rating, YPG, and has the fewest INTs of any starter. That puts him above Manning, Palmer and Hasslebeck in Rating. It means there are only 8 QBs in the league putting up better numbers than him, and 3 of them are probable Hall of Famers. Even before the Washington game Donovan was above his career averages in Completion %, Rating and INT %. All that with no real threat at WR/TE, and very poor coaching/game planning. And remember, McNabb's never been a really accurate QB at any point in his career. (Career comp % - 58.5%)
And the most important statistic of all...Donovan doesn't play defense!
IMHO if the Eagles get rid of Reid, I'd expect a huge turnaround as soon as the team gets acclimated to the new coach. I hear Bill Cower is available!
One of the reasons he doesn't throw interceptions is that if he misses, he usually misses big. He throws passes down and away, making it impossible for anyone to catch them. And really...McNabb not being that accurate is hardly a point FOR him, agreed? The other thing you're not pointing out is fumbles. He seems to do that a lot. He's fumbled twice in two games because he doesn't protect the ball.
But there is also an intangible here: McNabb's attitude...his urgency, his leadership. He's never shown the kind of urgency he's needed to, nor displayed the leadership qualities he needs. He doesn't have that x factor of turning it on when the game is on the line. He can make great plays, and sometimes those plays ARE game winners, but he blows it just as often. He lacks that Tom Brady, Joe Montana, John Elway and Peyton Manning game-winning drive quality.
I still root for him to do well. I WANT him to do well. I really would love to see him turn this thing around and prove people wrong...including me. But I've been saying that since, oh, 1999. And just when it seems he's there...like in the Super Bowl, the old shit-eating grin and tapping himself on the chest when he messes up begins. Did I mention the shit-eating grin?
As I pointed out on an Eagles board I frequent, he's #9 in the NFL in passer Rating, YPG, and has the fewest INTs of any starter. That puts him above Manning, Palmer and Hasslebeck in Rating.
This isn't particularly about McNabb, but I just wanted to say that the passer rating statistic is terrible. It dramatically over-rewards check down passes. 6 yard passes on third and 10 are good for your QB rating, but don't help your team win.
Since I mentioned them before, I'll link to footballoutsiders again
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb.php
Per their statistics, McNabb is rated 13th, which seems about right to me.
But there is also an intangible here: McNabb's attitude...his urgency, his leadership. He's never shown the kind of urgency he's needed to, nor displayed the leadership qualities he needs. He doesn't have that x factor of turning it on when the game is on the line. He can make great plays, and sometimes those plays ARE game winners, but he blows it just as often. He lacks that Tom Brady, Joe Montana, John Elway and Peyton Manning game-winning drive quality.
I would never compare McNabb to Elway, Montana, etc., I was just pointing out that statistically he's not having as bad a year as many seem to think. The way people are talking, you'd think he was making Ryan Leaf look good. Yes, he's having some problems, but I don't believe he's a major cause of the Eagles being 4-5. He doesn't coach the game plan (or lack thereof); has nobody other than Westbrook who scares a defense to throw to; doesn't play special teams or defense, both of which have lost at least 3 games this year. I think he's a very good, but not quite 'special' QB, not quite able to control a game on his own, but still better than 90% of the QBs out there. I'd compare him favorably to O'Brien, Esiason or Moon.
I do have to agree with you about his intangibles, they have always been iffy at best. But then, if QBs were judged solely on intangibles, Jim McMahon would be the best QB of all time!
This isn't particularly about McNabb, but I just wanted to say that the passer rating statistic is terrible. It dramatically over-rewards check down passes. 6 yard passes on third and 10 are good for your QB rating, but don't help your team win.
Agreed, the QB Rating is outdated with today's high percentage passing systems, IIRC it was invented when QBs threw 15-20 passes per game, most of which were long ball attempts. That said, it's still considered to be an important statistical record by the NFL. (most seasons leading league, seasons with >100 QB Rating, etc.)
I would never compare McNabb to Elway, Montana, etc., I was just pointing out that statistically he's not having as bad a year as many seem to think. The way people are talking, you'd think he was making Ryan Leaf look good. Yes, he's having some problems, but I don't believe he's a major cause of the Eagles being 4-5. He doesn't coach the game plan (or lack thereof); has nobody other than Westbrook who scares a defense to throw to; doesn't play special teams or defense, both of which have lost at least 3 games this year. I think he's a very good, but not quite 'special' QB, not quite able to control a game on his own, but still better than 90% of the QBs out there. I'd compare him favorably to O'Brien, Esiason or Moon.
I do have to agree with you about his intangibles, they have always been iffy at best. But then, if QBs were judged solely on intangibles, Jim McMahon would be the best QB of all time!
I agree with most of that actually. The Eagles would have won the Green Bay game if not for the punt returns (or fumbles, actually). They should have won the bears game. They didn't play well enough in total to win the Giants, Redskins, or Dallas games. Really I think they are probably more a 6-3 team right now, quality wise.
As for McNabb, I think my problem is he seems to portray himself as Montana or Elway. He just seems to think of himself in that light.
Agreed, the QB Rating is outdated with today's high percentage passing systems, IIRC it was invented when QBs threw 15-20 passes per game, most of which were long ball attempts. That said, it's still considered to be an important statistical record by the NFL. (most seasons leading league, seasons with >100 QB Rating, etc.)
I think the passer rating needs to go away. Look...my rating is a perfect 158.3! What the hell? Check this out
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passer_..._passer_rating
Check out their formula under "NFL perfect passer rating" <head spins>
Agreed, the QB Rating is outdated with today's high percentage passing systems, IIRC it was invented when QBs threw 15-20 passes per game, most of which were long ball attempts. That said, it's still considered to be an important statistical record by the NFL. (most seasons leading league, seasons with >100 QB Rating, etc.)
You know, I read an article somewhere that I can't remember, talking about how while the 70's were a very run heavy era, prior to that there was quite a lot of passing. It's just that most of today's football commentators played/grew up watching football in the 70's so that is what is thought of as "old football" today. Granted, there wasn't all the short passing that there is today, but the football of the past wasn't as run oriented as we sometimes think was the general point.
I wish I could remember where I read that.
Here's a good recent rant about the QB rating system
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...tem/index.html
Edit: Well they won, but it wasn't pretty. I will say the defense was really good. That's two consecutive games with 4 down goal line stands. McNabb sucked and I think he used his injury to bail out. Feeley was a little better, but not much. And once again, Westbrook proved he should be considered among the top running backs in the league.
Oh, and....