40 replies to this topic

[MightyJNC]

rich36, on 04 February 2013 - 01:55 PM, said:

Not looking for anything...I know what I've posted before and what I haven't..there's no "tap dancing" as you like to call it..but if you find something, by all means post it..in the end I'll admit I was wrong if something is there..but it won't change the fact that the E's are gonna suck in 2013...

Just like jersey was going to win 11 games in 2012, the NFCE and were the favorites to win the SB right?

But by all means keep predicting how bad the Birds are going to be and how good jersey because just based on your track record it basically guarantees the exact opposite happening is a lock.

[rich36]

MightyJNC, on 04 February 2013 - 02:11 PM, said:

Just like jersey was going to win 11 games in 2012, the NFCE and were the favorites to win the SB right?

But by all means keep predicting how bad the Birds are going to be and how good jersey because just based on your track record it basically guarantees the exact opposite happening is a lock.

Not predicting anything..the Eagles won 4 games last year and are ushering in a new system on both sides of the ball...if you think everything is going to transition smoothly next season, then you are a bigger clown than I give you credit for

[MightyJNC]

rich36, on 04 February 2013 - 02:16 PM, said:

Not predicting anything..the Eagles won 4 games last year and are ushering in a new system on both sides of the ball...if you think everything is going to transition smoothly next season, then you are a bigger clown than I give you credit for

"Transition smoothly", of course not, but to act like a new regime completely reversing a team's fortunes in a very short period of time is unprecidented/impossiblei  in the NFL is just another example of how woefully lacking you're in actual league historical perspective.

[rich36]

MightyJNC, on 04 February 2013 - 02:52 PM, said:

"Transition smoothly", of course not, but to act like a new regime completely reversing a team's fortunes in a very short period of time is unprecidented/impossiblei  in the NFL is just another example of how woefully lacking you're in actual league historical perspective.

You need a legit franchise QB to win in this day and age..as of this moment, the E's are severly lacking in that area..you look at the legit contenders in the league year in and year out and they all have "that guy"...when you get that guy, then maybe I'll take the Eagles seriously..as of now I see a team with holes, none of which is bigger than at the QB position..that's primarilly why I can't see the E's doing better than 5 or 6 wins next season, despite the crap Jackson is spewing on NFL.com

[MightyJNC]

rich36, on 04 February 2013 - 02:56 PM, said:

You need a legit franchise QB to win in this day and age..as of this moment, the E's are severly lacking in that area..you look at the legit contenders in the league year in and year out and they all have "that guy"...when you get that guy, then maybe I'll take the Eagles seriously..as of now I see a team with holes, none of which is bigger than at the QB position..that's primarilly why I can't see the E's doing better than 5 or 6 wins next season, despite the crap Jackson is spewing on NFL.com

Kelly never had anything close to a blue-chip prospect at QB at New Hampshire or Oregon and that still didn't stop his O's from rewritting the NCAA record books.

You also have no idea what Foles (if he turns out to be the guy) can do but we do know that in his first 6+ career starts he seriously out-performed what not-Elite did in his.

BTW did you happen to catch what Dungy said about what he expects from Kelly's NFL O?

Peter King, also of SI.com, talked with Tony Dungy about what kind of coach he thinks Kelly will be:

"He'll be good,'' Dungy said. "One of the things everybody's getting wrong is that he has to coach one way. Not true. He'll adjust. I think he'll be able to win in a lot of ways. I think the offense he'll run will be very similar to what Buffalo ran with Jim Kelly, the K-gun. High-pace, fast tempo. His thing is tempo, and making a defense respond to what he's doing. Say it's 3rd-and-5, and you have all these tendencies from watching his offense -- what they'll do on 3rd-and-5. But your pre-snap stuff is out the window because their tempo isn't going to give you time to substitute or to think that much. The thing with Chip is it's not just the scheme or the plays he's running. His detail work is strong. He outhustles, outpaces, out-thinks people. His practices are so fast. His team gets used to doing everything at a faster pace."

[rich36]

MightyJNC, on 04 February 2013 - 03:11 PM, said:

Kelly never had anything close to a blue-chip prospect at QB at New Hampshire or Oregon and that still didn't stop his O's from rewritting the NCAA record books.

You also have no idea what Foles (if he turns out to be the guy) can do but we do know that in his first 6+ career starts he seriously out-performed what not-Elite did in his.

BTW did you happen to catch what Dungy said about what he expects from Kelly's NFL O?

Peter King, also of SI.com, talked with Tony Dungy about what kind of coach he thinks Kelly will be:

"He'll be good,'' Dungy said. "One of the things everybody's getting wrong is that he has to coach one way. Not true. He'll adjust. I think he'll be able to win in a lot of ways. I think the offense he'll run will be very similar to what Buffalo ran with Jim Kelly, the K-gun. High-pace, fast tempo. His thing is tempo, and making a defense respond to what he's doing. Say it's 3rd-and-5, and you have all these tendencies from watching his offense -- what they'll do on 3rd-and-5. But your pre-snap stuff is out the window because their tempo isn't going to give you time to substitute or to think that much. The thing with Chip is it's not just the scheme or the plays he's running. His detail work is strong. He outhustles, outpaces, out-thinks people. His practices are so fast. His team gets used to doing everything at a faster pace."

Funny thing about Kelly: when playing most teams in the PAC 12, he had a major talent advantage...thus the crazy scores...when he played teams with similar talent, he lost...guess what? In Philly, there won't be any major talent advantage over the other teams in the league (for the most part)...

And, now Manning isn't an elite-level QB? The same guy going to the HOF 5 years after announcing his retirement? OK..keep telling youself that..anything to forget about how bad the E's are going to be for the next few seasons...

[Pegger]

L.E., on 03 February 2013 - 06:01 PM, said:

Nicks is their #1 priority but they'll end up paying both of them big money.

I don't get Nicks being the priority. To me Cruz is just the better WR. He's better in the slot has better pure speed and has been more healthy.

Either way they will be trying to sign both and both will get paid DJax type money.

[rich36]

Pegger, on 04 February 2013 - 03:24 PM, said:

I don't get Nicks being the priority. To me Cruz is just the better WR. He's better in the slot has better pure speed and has been more healthy.

Either way they will be trying to sign both and both will get paid DJax type money.

Nicks is the key to the offense, plain and simple..the Giants know this. See the Cincinatti game this past season as exhibit A. That's why they are "priortizing" Nicks. Yeah, it's also a negotiating strategy to get Cruz's agent (fairly new to the game) in place..

[MightyJNC]

rich36, on 04 February 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:

Funny thing about Kelly: when playing most teams in the PAC 12, he had a major talent advantage...thus the crazy scores...when he played teams with similar talent, he lost...guess what? In Philly, there won't be any major talent advantage over the other teams in the league (for the most part)...

And, now Manning isn't an elite-level QB? The same guy going to the HOF 5 years after announcing his retirement? OK..keep telling youself that..anything to forget about how bad the E's are going to be for the next few seasons...

The man lost 7 lousy games in 4 years at Oregon (46 -7, lost 3 total games in the coference and 4 others outside in the conference over that span), but that record was all based on just having "a major talent advantage", well you obviously know even less about NCAA football than you do the NFL and that in and of itself is almost unfathomable.

And much like Strahan, Corky who, will eventually get in, but when his "resume" is evaluated in comparision to primary contemporaries (Brady, Brees, Peyton, Rodgers) he'll also not be considered 1st ballot worthy by the voters.

[McNabb2Jackson7]

Victor Cruz to the Eagles.

[rich36]

MightyJNC, on 04 February 2013 - 03:36 PM, said:

The man lost 7 lousy games in 4 years at Oregon (46 -7, lost 3 total games in the coference and 4 others outside in the conference over that span), but that record was all based on just having "a major talent advantage", well you obviously know even less about NCAA football than you do the NFL and that in and of itself is almost unfathamable.

And much like Strahan, Corky who, will eventually get in, but when his "resume" is evaluated in comparision to primary contemporaries (Brady, Brees, Peyton, Rodgers) he'll also not be considered 1st ballot worthy by the voters.

OK dude..look back at Oregon's seasons in his tenure..he had a crazy talent advantage over the rest of the PAC 12...deny it all you want..I know you want him to be the next Jimmy Johnson, but it's more likely he's the next Bobby Petrino, especially if/when USC makes a coaching change...but again, whatever helps you cope with what the immediate future holds for the E's...

McNabb2Jackson7, on 04 February 2013 - 03:37 PM, said:

Victor Cruz to the Eagles.

Never...he's no trader

Plus, you have Avant