2015 Eagles: What the hell is going on here?!
- Thread starter LondonSox
- Start date
The Eagles defense certainly looked good, but it was more of a complete Giants meltdown. They made one horrific mistake after another, and after a while most of the players seeemed to be operating at half speed. The white flag was clearly waving early in the 4th quarter, and even the Bradford turnovers didn't provide a spark. As for Sam....somehow he doesn't seem comfortable yet in this offense, but even that doesn't explain most of the interceptions. The touch was just all wrong, and you can't even say it was due to pressure - because it wasn't. It's not saying much, but he does seem to be more careful with the ball on the Philly side of the field.
Good news: 3 more picks, Mathews big run. Despite eh numbers Bradford looked actually better- not good just better.
Bad News. Can't can't the F ing ball. The really good run D was gashed badly for the first time. Credit the Panthers for now, impressive from them. Mathews got one mroe carry after the 65 yard TD run.... Not one deep pass of note despite a lot of single high by not great cover secondary. Didn't like the game plan at all, once again there is a trend of allowing the defense to set it's scheme and taking what that gives you, dictate a bit more eh.
Bottom line the Panthers are solid, Cam is solid, the run game is good (until the inevitable Stewart injury?) and the D is ok, especially the front 7, so clearly let's not attack the weakness of the defence. Gah.
Yet again Peters got hurt, good news it looked worse than back spasms and the bye is next week and much needed. Any significant injury to Peters or Johnson and the Eagles are toast. They might be toast anyway.
There's a lot of criticism about not resigning Maclin, but that was too much money imo. There's criticism of cutting Herremans and Mathis, but the former is a healthy scratch for the not very good Colts and Mathis hasn't been good. IT's not this it's the lack of signing replacements that has killed things.
It's all very disappointing. If you'd have told me the Eagles had a defense this solid and they'd be playing this badly due to total failure on offense, I'd have have scoffed. Bugger.
Huge game in two weeks post bye vs Cowboys, still sans Romo but likely with Dez, IF they can't get anything moving after the bye and drop another division game I think it's probably likely to become a failure of a season and the hounds will be after Chip.
Bad News. Can't can't the F ing ball. The really good run D was gashed badly for the first time. Credit the Panthers for now, impressive from them. Mathews got one mroe carry after the 65 yard TD run.... Not one deep pass of note despite a lot of single high by not great cover secondary. Didn't like the game plan at all, once again there is a trend of allowing the defense to set it's scheme and taking what that gives you, dictate a bit more eh.
Bottom line the Panthers are solid, Cam is solid, the run game is good (until the inevitable Stewart injury?) and the D is ok, especially the front 7, so clearly let's not attack the weakness of the defence. Gah.
Yet again Peters got hurt, good news it looked worse than back spasms and the bye is next week and much needed. Any significant injury to Peters or Johnson and the Eagles are toast. They might be toast anyway.
There's a lot of criticism about not resigning Maclin, but that was too much money imo. There's criticism of cutting Herremans and Mathis, but the former is a healthy scratch for the not very good Colts and Mathis hasn't been good. IT's not this it's the lack of signing replacements that has killed things.
It's all very disappointing. If you'd have told me the Eagles had a defense this solid and they'd be playing this badly due to total failure on offense, I'd have have scoffed. Bugger.
Huge game in two weeks post bye vs Cowboys, still sans Romo but likely with Dez, IF they can't get anything moving after the bye and drop another division game I think it's probably likely to become a failure of a season and the hounds will be after Chip.
They would have to be really bad to lose to this Cowboys squad. They'll look better whenever Dez returns but that game against New York was very reminiscent of the same old Cowboys. Throw the Hardy incident cherry on top of the shit sundae and, well, that team doesn't inspire much confidence right now.
Given two weeks to prepare and heal up, while the Cowboys will be coming off of a slugfest with Seattle, I think the Eagles win in a walk.
Given two weeks to prepare and heal up, while the Cowboys will be coming off of a slugfest with Seattle, I think the Eagles win in a walk.
LondonSox said:
Do you think Bradford is better, worse or the same as Sanchez? Bradford's started 7 games while last year Sanchez started 9 games. Sanchez averaged more yards per game (268 - 252), per attempt (7.8-6.4) and had a better TD-INT ratio than Bradford (14-11), (9-10). Sanchez did throw one more pick.
Part of that is the poor performance of the Eagles in the first two weeks. But Bradford has 6 TDs and 6 picks in his last 4 games. His Y/A is 30th of qualified QBs, Sanchez was 6th last year. Even if you throw away the first two weeks, he's closer to the bottom than the top of QBs.
Jordan Matthews has dropped a lot of balls this year and last night's interception was mostly his fault but, that throw was off the mark and behind him. If the Eagles are going to be effective passing the ball, they need Matthews and he's shown no chemistry with Bradford of late.
I think he's basically the same but with higher upside if it all clicks.
He wasn't the problem yesterday.
He wasn't the problem yesterday.
Do you think the OL is creating the offensive problems, a la Brady last Sept? Bradford looked yip-y, esp at the end of last night's game. Any prospects of fixing that? Chip has got to be pulling his hair out.LondonSox said:
Edit :tense
Sunday was worse as Peters got hurt. And the line had been a little better recently. The concern is its down to bare bones. Babre has been ok actually and Johnson and Peters are good. Kelce had a terrible start but has improved.
When Peters got hurt Tobin went to T and Kelly came in. He is. Not good. Any injury from here and it's worse. If they stay healthy maybe they continue to gel and improve. But the risks seems the other way.
I don't think that's helping, and maybe it's a factor overall. It was Sunday for sure. But bradford just has been cautious and inaccurate when he's had time. He's just looked like a different arm from preseason etc which was strong accurate etc. It's got to be his head
When Peters got hurt Tobin went to T and Kelly came in. He is. Not good. Any injury from here and it's worse. If they stay healthy maybe they continue to gel and improve. But the risks seems the other way.
I don't think that's helping, and maybe it's a factor overall. It was Sunday for sure. But bradford just has been cautious and inaccurate when he's had time. He's just looked like a different arm from preseason etc which was strong accurate etc. It's got to be his head
Barnwell has a good article on Bradford's performance this year:
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-eagles-on-the-brink/
http://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-eagles-on-the-brink/
I hate to be the statistics scold, but you should ignore almost every sentence in that article in which Barnwell uses a number. Football statistics are poor to begin with, and small sample size dominates here.
For example, a third of the article denigrates Bradford for having a 3.6% instead of 2.2% interception rate. Given he's thrown about 300 balls this year, I highly doubt that 1.2% difference is statistically significant. Ultimately though, Barnwell says it doesn't matter and Bradford is likely to take better care of the ball than Sanchez going forward
I don't think this article adds much to our knowledge bout Bradford's play.
Also Barnwell says that Houston's quarterback changes have yielded two mediocre quarterbacks with no confidence (and now one since Mallett has been cut). Disagree. I think they have one mediocre quarterback (Hoyer) who's playing to his talent level. The team has other problems but it's dumb to say O'Brien has destroyed Hoyer's confidence.
For example, a third of the article denigrates Bradford for having a 3.6% instead of 2.2% interception rate. Given he's thrown about 300 balls this year, I highly doubt that 1.2% difference is statistically significant. Ultimately though, Barnwell says it doesn't matter and Bradford is likely to take better care of the ball than Sanchez going forward
I don't think this article adds much to our knowledge bout Bradford's play.
Also Barnwell says that Houston's quarterback changes have yielded two mediocre quarterbacks with no confidence (and now one since Mallett has been cut). Disagree. I think they have one mediocre quarterback (Hoyer) who's playing to his talent level. The team has other problems but it's dumb to say O'Brien has destroyed Hoyer's confidence.
Not really. There is one major issue. The offensive line. The Eagles game is built on the run and they can't get it established, or at least with any consistency. When they can run everything works.GeorgeCostanza said:
Bradford to me isn't great but there is upside. It would be encouraging to see a step forward post bye.
The wr need to improve. And it would be nice to see Murray better or Mathews have a larger split. I saw a Stat that Murray as the worst ypc in a decade and Mathews has the best!
The d is good. Kelly gambled on bradford or getting mariota. I don't quibble too much as foles was not the guy. It was a little too much for me to give up for bradford. But totally understand. If he improves from here it still could be ok.
The big issue is not addressing the o line. He stuck to his board and from everything I read the o line guys kept being taken right ahead of his picks. Annoying. But you see what picking to your board gets you (hicks and the corner who tore his acl I forget the name who look or looked like steals).
But that's no excuse for not going after some depth. Babre has actually settled in nicely. But it's not even the guards it's the lack of depth. Any o line injury from here is massive.
I've watched parts of three games now. Bradford looks good at times and scared at times. To me it looks like Brady last Sept, who looked like trash as a passer in part because he couldn't trust his OL. One issue with Bradford is that he doesn't move well in the pocket, so that may limit his upside even with a decent OL.LondonSox said:
On the positive side Bradford makes some nice throws, better than what I've seen from Sanchez in the past.
As an Eagles fan you have to hope that the OL gels and Bradford gets comfortable and his accuracy improves. Is his upside Jay Cutler with fewer dumb mistakes? If so that's a valuable QB.
I'm not a huge Barnwell fan, but I don't think you're being fair here. Bradford's high interception rate this year is germane to how he has played. Avoiding picks is the one thing he was good at statistically in St. Louis, so if you're looking at why he has disappointed, you've got to talk about how much he's turned the ball over relative to what we might have expected. And Barnwell rightly distinguishes between the reality of this failure of Bradford in 2015 and how predictive it is going forward, i.e., not very.crystalline said:
Plus of course the injury fear. Playing behind a flat out bad oline for the first few games before you are 100% trusting of your knees was not idealcrystalline said:
The oline is improving and the starting 5 is not awful now but the depth is zero.
I think if you watch the last couple of games bradford is improving in his pocket presence. Esp vs the Panthers which he was under a lot of pressure he was stepping up nicely.
The upside for the Eagles is there. If the oline can stay healthy and gel. Kelly can tweak the game plan some and bradford gets comfortable and improves. The wr have lots of talent and bradford settling will help them and of course the running game.
That happens and they are a solid to good team. But more importantly you think about extending bradford and improving the big flaw in the team the oline in the offseason. If bradford doesn't improve then your resources still need to look for a qb.
If I was Kelly I would be building a oline machine. If his team can line up and hurry up and ram the ball down your throat with Murray and Mathews then it totally changes the team. They can't and so bradford is throwing all the time. Too much.
This is Kelly's big gm fail for me. He spent big on rb and cheap on the line. This is exactly backwards. If you don't sign Murray and get a cheaper back and invest in the line this team is better.
I defended the trade of Mccoy because that money on an rb is outdated. Then he spent it again on Murray.
Gore Mathews and a top guard and a really good depth tackle and I think this team is much better.
I think too much too fast overall. Assuming cheap scrub guards could get it done when you rely on running and need bradford comfortable and have a lot of young talented but unproven wr too. Just not the right move.
I agree that Bradford's care with the ball is a huge determinant of past and future success, I just don't think that those data tell you anything. You need a LOT of samples to determine whether 2.2% and 3.6% represent true different skill levels or whether the latter is just chance fluctuation. You can run a fisher exact test to tell you whether 3.6% might mean Bradford is taking more disk, or if it is indistinguishable from last year and he's just unlucky. My guess is it's indistinguishable from bad luck but I am not digging up the test now.Super Nomario said:
People are notoriously bad about intuiting differences between small percentages. (Math side: error bars depend on Bernoulli variance, p(1-p), so as p gets very small or very large your CIs blow up).
That said I think Bradford has been asked to do more this year. I just think Barnwell's article uses a lot of numbers, and those numbers don't support his argument.
Sure, but Barnwell writes "It could also be randomness; Tom Brady has thrown picks on 1.9 percent of his passes as a pro but had a seven-game stretch with nine picks in 2011. It happens."crystalline said:
I don't think Barnwell really understands statistics, either, but I think here he is pretty careful about not drawing sweeping conclusions from a small sample.crystalline said:
Though Crystalline is correct that fisher's exact test is the appropriate test here, there are other tests that can approximate the same result. Statistically (as Crys notes), the power is so low with these samples that any statistical significance should be taken with a grain of salt anyways.crystalline said:
That being said, a fisher's exact test will find this insignificant (p = 0.1344). A much simpler chi-squared test (pro-rated to 275 passes to take into account differences in raw totals) is also insignificant (p ~ 0.146).
The effect size here is pretty small relative to the distribution of possible effect sizes, so whether a difference of 1.2% on the interception rate is real will require thousands of samples to verify. 275 passes will net a difference of 3 picks.
More importantly, and as I've stated before, Bradford is playing almost exactly at the level he has throughout his career. He's not playing worse than he had with the Rams, so this notion that he somehow regressed makes no sense. The concept that he's been an accurate, and cautious QB comes from his college days, some weird narrative, and certainly not his time with the Rams.
His accuracy has never been present at the NFL level, but I think "cautious" is fair. He's had a below-average INT rate and he has been below-average on percentage of passes thrown deep his entire career. I agree that he mostly has always stunk and still stinks.EricFeczko said:
EDIT: I think a lot of the disappointment comes from a) the idea that Bradford always had a bad supporting cast in St. Louis and would have a better one in Philly, b) Chip turning mediocrities like Foles and Sanchez into reasonable starters, and c) an excellent preseason that reinforced a) and b). In actuality I think the supporting cast was totally overrated: the receivers are unproven, the guards are unproven, and many folks just seemed to assume they would be good because of Chip. Maclin gone? They drafted Agholor, and he'll be awesome because Chip. Mathis gone? It's OK, Chip. Little depth? It's OK, Chip's sports science, no one will get hurt. Josh Huff: breakout candidate. Reason: Chip, and Oregon - DOUBLE CHIP! Bradford will be good, because Chip. In actuality, this is a below-average offense almost across the board (OT and RB are good) and there's a limit to how much scheme can fix talent problems.
I think your point regarding cautious is reasonable, I include fumbles in considering whether a QB is "cautious". Bradford does lose a number of fumbles, though sanchez is obviously much more fumble prone.Super Nomario said:
Regarding your edit, I've been trying to make that point, albeit less clearly, since the Foles-Bradford trade occurred. Furthermore, I take issue with the idea (I'm glad you called it an idea and not fact) that Bradford always had a bad supporting cast in St. Louis. In 2010, the cast was pretty bad. I'll admit that the Rams line only had two guys on the line drafted above the 2nd round, and the only great skillset players were Danny Amendola and a 27 year old Steven Jackson. Even Jackson underperformed that year due to a weak line. Over the next three years, the Rams added line depth and maintained talented skillset players around him. Steven Jackson gave way to Zac Stacy, and Danny Amendola left in 2013. However, Chris Givens and Brandon Gibson weren't bad receivers. Lance Kendricks was a decent pass catching tight end, and the line was better. By 2013, you had Jake Long and Chris Williams starting on the left side, with Roger Saffold and Joe Barksdale on the right.
By no means are the 2012/2013 Rams rosters elite, or even "good". However, I completely agree with your assessment of Chip's moves to reassemble the Eagles offense. For me, the Bradford-Foles trade is the trade that confirmed my suspicions about Chip; he may be a good (even great) coach, but so far he's been awful at both player evaluation and roster construction.
On Bradford - when you say he stinks, how do you break down his skills? He has a rocket arm (I know, obvious and overrated) and his accuracy is middling - neither as good as someone like Brady or as bad as someone like Sanchez - based on what I've seen. Can you assess how good he is at reading progressions? To my eye he appears bad at moving in the pocket to avoid pressure. Which seems like an important skill for a pocket passer but I have no idea how to weight it.Super Nomario said:
This is a real bummer, as he was seriously in the running for DROY. That said he may have almost single handedly broken Dallas's season between the Romo sack and resultant injury and the pick 6 in the second game. Which is quite the impact.
He does seem to have an injury curse, though this is a Pec muscle which is pretty unrelated to hip and Achilles issues.
Overall though heck of a result for the Eagles, even if the secondary seemed to take a step back and this is the first time the Eagles under Chip have had back to back 100 yard rushing games by the opposition running back.
Hicks is a shame, but Kendricks and Alonso are more or less back, if rusty, and Ryans should be back soon too. Hicks was huge when they needed him most, better now than earlier.
Bradford looked the best we've seen him as An Eagle for a whole game, that's encouraging. The line missing Peters played well, which is a big positive surprise. Apparently Kelly is better at Tackle than Guard and the guards and Kelce are starting to gel. The running backs look more like the concept was meant to be.
So overall encouraging I think. The next three games for the Eagles are Bucs, Lions and Dolphins. Chance to grab the division by the throat.
The Cowboys have the Bucs next week probably still sans romo. Loss there and they are very much dead I think. Given they have Carolina and away at Green bay on their remaining schedule. 8-8 starts looks like a best case scenario.
Eagles have on paper the easiest schedule from here, but they've been so inconsistent it's hard to be confident.
Separately, it's worth noting that the Eagles running game is BACK.
Carolina leads the NFL with 144.0 rushing yards per game so far this year. In games one through four, the Eagles managed only 70. Since then, they've averaged 173.25 per game.
And as noted by Reuben Frank
This is the first time since 1992 the Eagles have rushed for 150 or more yards in four straight games.
Carolina leads the NFL with 144.0 rushing yards per game so far this year. In games one through four, the Eagles managed only 70. Since then, they've averaged 173.25 per game.
And as noted by Reuben Frank
This is the first time since 1992 the Eagles have rushed for 150 or more yards in four straight games.
So it's pretty clear now. The Eagles are just not very good offensively. The defense is solid the offensive line is shit. The qb play is average to poor and the wide receivers are nothing special.
This was a horrible loss after a fast start at home to a bad team. No excuse. Bad.
The Giants have the division to lose despite one of the worst defences in the history of the league.
I am on my way to light myself on fire.
Night
This was a horrible loss after a fast start at home to a bad team. No excuse. Bad.
The Giants have the division to lose despite one of the worst defences in the history of the league.
I am on my way to light myself on fire.
Night
It's pretty clear to this outsider that Bradford is not up to remaining healthy in this League. Concussion and a separated shoulder?
Maybe the deal is a wash for both teams, as Foles has been benched. But it looks like the QB search continues.
Maybe the deal is a wash for both teams, as Foles has been benched. But it looks like the QB search continues.
Though both players have been similar in terms of level of play, I wouldn't call the deal a wash. The Eagles spent a 2nd round 2016 pick to get Bradford.
The Giants could very well lose this division anyways. The Eagles have a top 10 defense this year in, arguably, one of the worst divisions in the NFL (second to the AFC south, obviously). Looking at the schedule, I can see the Eagles at 7-7 going into the redskins game in week 16 (they face the bucs, lions, bills, pats, and cardinals). Ditto for the Giants (they face the Panthers, Jets, Dolphins and redskins), except they have to play the Vikings away in week 16.
Redskins could surprise, but I'm skeptical. The Cowboys are too far out of it and have too difficult a schedule to recover.
In other words, the Eagles are still seemingly in control of their own destiny, despite their mediocrity. Sure, they lost to the dolphins which are a mediocre team, but the NFL fields about 14 mediocre teams and about 9 terrible teams.
At present, there are 11 teams with a winning record and 11 teams that are 4-5. That seems crazy to me.
One team is at 0.500, and 9 teams with records worse than 4-5.
It's like the NFL is the anti-Lake Wobegon: where all the teams are below average.
One team is at 0.500, and 9 teams with records worse than 4-5.
It's like the NFL is the anti-Lake Wobegon: where all the teams are below average.
Eric I don't disagree. The Giants d is a tire fire disaster and they keep blowing late leads. And yes the Eagles is a good defense maybe top 5 years even, though injuries are starting to mount.
But the eagles are just a bad sloppy team on offense in particular. Sanchez is going to be interesting to watch but you just expect the back breaking turnover.
But the eagles are just a bad sloppy team on offense in particular. Sanchez is going to be interesting to watch but you just expect the back breaking turnover.
Ok so much for the good defense. The run D has been trending the wrong way but that was just a ridiculously bad performance. 5 TD for Jameis? Really> 240 yards for Martin?? REALLY?
The offensive ineptitude was nto a shock the D falling apart is coming a bit out of nowhere. Was Jordan Hicks really this important!?
Anyway, this is a bad team. They just lost back to back home games to Miami and Tampa Bay who are not good teams. The Miami game was bad. They felt and looked the better team and lost. The Buccs game is worse. They got destroyed by a not very good team.
Chip Kelly is going to get roasted alive by the media - and it's a very short week to Detroit for Thanksgiving.
I don't really know what to say, the offensive failing I've written plenty about, the D I need to rewatch the tape because it really has been a solid D most of the year, though as I say I've been noting a bad trend in rushing against.
The offensive ineptitude was nto a shock the D falling apart is coming a bit out of nowhere. Was Jordan Hicks really this important!?
Anyway, this is a bad team. They just lost back to back home games to Miami and Tampa Bay who are not good teams. The Miami game was bad. They felt and looked the better team and lost. The Buccs game is worse. They got destroyed by a not very good team.
Chip Kelly is going to get roasted alive by the media - and it's a very short week to Detroit for Thanksgiving.
I don't really know what to say, the offensive failing I've written plenty about, the D I need to rewatch the tape because it really has been a solid D most of the year, though as I say I've been noting a bad trend in rushing against.
Early indications seem to point to the answer being "yes". Oddly enough, the same thing happened when he was in college. The Longhorns defense was always much better when he was playing. The second he went down, though, the defense completely fell apart. He seems to be a really heady player that just has a knack for being in the right place. Better still, he knows how to direct his teammates to be in the right place. That's tough to replace.
Seems to me he's Philly's version of Sean Lee: an extremely valuable player who can't stay on the field.
Yeah but I mean he was a rookie who wasn't expected to play! I mean it's not as though he was Sean Lee key from preseason. Surely someone else was planing to lead the d.
Anyhow if he's that good it's nice they got him where they did but not so good that he's critical. Alonso has no played well since his return and Kendricks hasn't been great either. For two borderline all Stars that's a bit odd.
Anyhow if he's that good it's nice they got him where they did but not so good that he's critical. Alonso has no played well since his return and Kendricks hasn't been great either. For two borderline all Stars that's a bit odd.
Rumours rising that Kelly won't be back next year. There were some last year too, so pinch of salt, but I'm not surprised to hear discontent.
I think they give him another year to right the ship, but if it goes like this again I think it's not going to end well.
I think they give him another year to right the ship, but if it goes like this again I think it's not going to end well.
So yeah bad team. No plan. Defense now falling apart and injuries just to rub it in.
Honestly I'd join the tank and hope to get a player that makes a difference.
I have broadly assumed Kelly would be fine despite the noise but after these three abortions they go away to new England. Lol. So free win pats. Three blowouts in a row.
Ugh
Honestly I'd join the tank and hope to get a player that makes a difference.
I have broadly assumed Kelly would be fine despite the noise but after these three abortions they go away to new England. Lol. So free win pats. Three blowouts in a row.
Ugh
How this garbage fire is one game out is a testament to the awful nature of the NFC Least.
At least Foles has sucked balls in St Louis I guess.
At least Foles has sucked balls in St Louis I guess.
Hardest team in the NFL to have a clear view of? Maybe!
So the special teams unit that last year was the best in the NFL showed up. You can never predict or rely on this but Sproles is of course dangerous as a returner so that's not a total surprise, and they blocked two punts for TDs last year so while it's a fluke to see two special teams TDs it's a strength of the team that hasn't showed up much this year.
The key block on the Sproles return is exactly about good coaching, making a play ina smart way, avoiding a penalty etc. I'm sure Chuck will have more on that this week.
The defence. Who knows any more. They were awful for back to back weeks, then suddenly step back up again. Pass rush showed up, though in part I think that's due to Oline injuries on the Patriots, Barwin and Graham had two sacks each and fletcher cox was his usual beastly self. The injuries at the Patriots WR meant rookie Rowe wasn't shown up too much, not talking about him in his first start and vs Brady is good.
The linebacker play inside still isn't great, Alonso made a couple of plays but blew more than he made. The underneath quick running back passes etc ate them alive again, but up big late this became less of a concern, but it's a hole in the D.
Jenkins as mentioned several times is GREAT, but he has awful hands. He has made several plays just like his INT except dropped them. This time Thurmond (who has been some decision to sign and move to safety) tipped it to Jenkins so gently even old cinderblock hands could manage.
The D was a top 5 ish d before the last couple of games, now what is it? It's not a bad unit, but clearly worse without Carroll and Hicks, but still capable.
Now the big stuff. The Eagles O is still not good. But I loved some things Kelly did in this game.
1) didn't dress Miles Austin. Good. Never liked the signing, he's been completely awful. Just cut him already. Anyway better than nothing is not playing him, like at all.
2) Braver than this, was pseudo benching Murray. Again a signing I always disliked. Never had any issue trading McCoy, even though Alonso has been underwhelming, you shouldn't pay RB that much. And certainly not one with Murray's injury history and coming off that carry load last year. That said when you're paying someone that much AND the effective backup more sproles isn't a surprise (and overdue) but barner getting as many carries as Murray pretty shocking. That last minute fumble fortunately wasn't critical, but BARNER was the one making that carry in the crunch on third and short. That's Murray being BENCHED.
From here when Mathews is back you'd think Barner won't dress but Murray is just another back - not the back.
Murray had 8 carries for 24 yards, and 19 of those came on one carry. He just looks slow.
Barner had 9 for 39 and Sproles 15 for 66.
We'll see what happens next game but that's a big deal.
3) Riley Cooper (!) with two huge plays late. The third down conversion (which the block by Peters on was just amazing btw) and dealing with the third (!) onside kick.
4) Bradford was ok again. Three games with no ints in a row. Couple good throws. his accuracy is still weirdly lacking, and he made a few bad throws but the red zone stuff was good.
The offense still isn't good but Bradford is better than Sanchez. And going away from Murray could help the running game.
The NFC East is just an absolute toxic waste dump. The Giants D is just so bad they can't hold any lead. They have to go all out on offense constantly, and any injury to ODJ or a bad game from Eli is a loss. The cowboys sans Romo are... outsiders looking in somehow. The Washington casual racists are leading the division. The Eagles are a bad team with issues, but a team that can beat anyone on any week (or lose to anyone). I think the latter two points are now indisputable. The NFC East is loaded with teams like that.
So the special teams unit that last year was the best in the NFL showed up. You can never predict or rely on this but Sproles is of course dangerous as a returner so that's not a total surprise, and they blocked two punts for TDs last year so while it's a fluke to see two special teams TDs it's a strength of the team that hasn't showed up much this year.
The key block on the Sproles return is exactly about good coaching, making a play ina smart way, avoiding a penalty etc. I'm sure Chuck will have more on that this week.
The defence. Who knows any more. They were awful for back to back weeks, then suddenly step back up again. Pass rush showed up, though in part I think that's due to Oline injuries on the Patriots, Barwin and Graham had two sacks each and fletcher cox was his usual beastly self. The injuries at the Patriots WR meant rookie Rowe wasn't shown up too much, not talking about him in his first start and vs Brady is good.
The linebacker play inside still isn't great, Alonso made a couple of plays but blew more than he made. The underneath quick running back passes etc ate them alive again, but up big late this became less of a concern, but it's a hole in the D.
Jenkins as mentioned several times is GREAT, but he has awful hands. He has made several plays just like his INT except dropped them. This time Thurmond (who has been some decision to sign and move to safety) tipped it to Jenkins so gently even old cinderblock hands could manage.
The D was a top 5 ish d before the last couple of games, now what is it? It's not a bad unit, but clearly worse without Carroll and Hicks, but still capable.
Now the big stuff. The Eagles O is still not good. But I loved some things Kelly did in this game.
1) didn't dress Miles Austin. Good. Never liked the signing, he's been completely awful. Just cut him already. Anyway better than nothing is not playing him, like at all.
2) Braver than this, was pseudo benching Murray. Again a signing I always disliked. Never had any issue trading McCoy, even though Alonso has been underwhelming, you shouldn't pay RB that much. And certainly not one with Murray's injury history and coming off that carry load last year. That said when you're paying someone that much AND the effective backup more sproles isn't a surprise (and overdue) but barner getting as many carries as Murray pretty shocking. That last minute fumble fortunately wasn't critical, but BARNER was the one making that carry in the crunch on third and short. That's Murray being BENCHED.
From here when Mathews is back you'd think Barner won't dress but Murray is just another back - not the back.
Murray had 8 carries for 24 yards, and 19 of those came on one carry. He just looks slow.
Barner had 9 for 39 and Sproles 15 for 66.
We'll see what happens next game but that's a big deal.
3) Riley Cooper (!) with two huge plays late. The third down conversion (which the block by Peters on was just amazing btw) and dealing with the third (!) onside kick.
4) Bradford was ok again. Three games with no ints in a row. Couple good throws. his accuracy is still weirdly lacking, and he made a few bad throws but the red zone stuff was good.
The offense still isn't good but Bradford is better than Sanchez. And going away from Murray could help the running game.
The NFC East is just an absolute toxic waste dump. The Giants D is just so bad they can't hold any lead. They have to go all out on offense constantly, and any injury to ODJ or a bad game from Eli is a loss. The cowboys sans Romo are... outsiders looking in somehow. The Washington casual racists are leading the division. The Eagles are a bad team with issues, but a team that can beat anyone on any week (or lose to anyone). I think the latter two points are now indisputable. The NFC East is loaded with teams like that.
Even within a single game the Eagles were Jekyll and Hyde. They looked listless when they went down 14-0, then went on a tear before nearly falling apart. Weird game for both teams.
The weirdest team man. We can't figure them out either.
I was just reading Fletcher Cox while he had no sacks recorded 14 pressures. That's crazy pants.
I was just reading Fletcher Cox while he had no sacks recorded 14 pressures. That's crazy pants.
How was he not taken out of the game with a concussion?
He took a blow to head and basically collapsed and was back the next series.
so another win. Somehow keeping pace with the somehow division "leading" Washington casual racists.
The D line followed a super performance vs the Patriots with a great game. I don't think I've seen as many not called holding calls, and they had 15 (!) penalties as it was.
There was one shot I'll try to find later than had three blatant holds on three DIFFERENT players in one still shot. Amazing.
Look the refs were AWFUL. The bills are complaining, the Eagles are too.
The pick play which led to the big Ertz play which resulted in the winning FG was clearly a call no one could complain against.
But let's just remember than this was called an INT
This is the best I can find, the video is very clear the ball hits the ground and is still moving when he's out of bounds. They REVIEWED THIS and upheld the call.
I'm sure I'll find a better version later
Anyway Fletcher Cox (of the 14 pressures vs Patriots fame) was so dominant Incognito was quoted as "he ate my lunch today" and Rex Ryan said
The secondary was ok, Rowe did great in his first start last week, and the Bills didn't go after him nor was he talked about a lot, so pending a rewatch I'd say the kid is doing ok.
On the offensive side, Bradford was solid. He's really come on and the injury was a shame. The Int he threw a) wasn't an INT and b) was not remotely on him. The long TD was pretty. He's protecting the ball and missing a bit less. Good eh, bad no longer.
The issue he has is the WR aren't ready (too young not deep enough) and the O line is bad. When Peters or Johnson is hurt (which seems most games for Peters) the O line has no plus starters. Kelce has been awful and the guards have stabilized into below average but not killing you. They are what they are. If Peters and Johnson are healthy it's an ok line, without them it's BAD. This means Bradford doesn't have long and the running game suffers.
Speaking of. Murray was rumoured to not even dress, but actually he was used but very much part of a rotation. That's the way it should go, Mathews Sproles and Murray and I'd say the risk is Mathews back to 100% might really even replace Murray.
Not good for the GM, but kudos to the coach for being so (correctly) aggressive.
In short. The defense is still good, but it's wearing down. The offense is crippled by the oline, even as Bradford improves. WR are not good enough either but the line is the heart of all that is rotten.
Still it's as good a bad team as Washington and less lopsided than the Giants, so they could still somehow host a playoff game. That's likely vs Seattle, so OUCH but still.
The D line followed a super performance vs the Patriots with a great game. I don't think I've seen as many not called holding calls, and they had 15 (!) penalties as it was.
There was one shot I'll try to find later than had three blatant holds on three DIFFERENT players in one still shot. Amazing.
Look the refs were AWFUL. The bills are complaining, the Eagles are too.
The pick play which led to the big Ertz play which resulted in the winning FG was clearly a call no one could complain against.
But let's just remember than this was called an INT
This is the best I can find, the video is very clear the ball hits the ground and is still moving when he's out of bounds. They REVIEWED THIS and upheld the call.
I'm sure I'll find a better version later
Anyway Fletcher Cox (of the 14 pressures vs Patriots fame) was so dominant Incognito was quoted as "he ate my lunch today" and Rex Ryan said
The linebackers are missing Hicks. Kendricks is returning to form but Alonso seems to overrun any play he can. Calm down dude.
The secondary was ok, Rowe did great in his first start last week, and the Bills didn't go after him nor was he talked about a lot, so pending a rewatch I'd say the kid is doing ok.
On the offensive side, Bradford was solid. He's really come on and the injury was a shame. The Int he threw a) wasn't an INT and b) was not remotely on him. The long TD was pretty. He's protecting the ball and missing a bit less. Good eh, bad no longer.
The issue he has is the WR aren't ready (too young not deep enough) and the O line is bad. When Peters or Johnson is hurt (which seems most games for Peters) the O line has no plus starters. Kelce has been awful and the guards have stabilized into below average but not killing you. They are what they are. If Peters and Johnson are healthy it's an ok line, without them it's BAD. This means Bradford doesn't have long and the running game suffers.
Speaking of. Murray was rumoured to not even dress, but actually he was used but very much part of a rotation. That's the way it should go, Mathews Sproles and Murray and I'd say the risk is Mathews back to 100% might really even replace Murray.
Not good for the GM, but kudos to the coach for being so (correctly) aggressive.
In short. The defense is still good, but it's wearing down. The offense is crippled by the oline, even as Bradford improves. WR are not good enough either but the line is the heart of all that is rotten.
Still it's as good a bad team as Washington and less lopsided than the Giants, so they could still somehow host a playoff game. That's likely vs Seattle, so OUCH but still.
Was that a call confirmed or call stands? It could only have been call stands because it certainly wasn't a catch and maybe the whole "not enough definitive" proof (even though that didn't count in the Pats game) was there to say that ball didn't hit the ground (it clearly did) and it then moved in his grasp (it did).
I was unable to see the game yesterday and had to follow it through my phone. This is the first time I've seen any video of the interception.
Given the nature of replay and how the NFL dissects plays in search of any evidence to call a pass incomplete, it is mindboggling that the interception was not overturned. Hell, it's not even close. He did not control the ball to the ground.
Honestly, fuck the NFL.
Given the nature of replay and how the NFL dissects plays in search of any evidence to call a pass incomplete, it is mindboggling that the interception was not overturned. Hell, it's not even close. He did not control the ball to the ground.
Honestly, fuck the NFL.