speaking of Eagles from the past, where's Yammer (yeah, I know banging my mom). I haven't seen him around in awhile. I miss his hot takz/trash talk. and from time to time he had a point.
SBLII: Patriots vs. Eagles, the Build-Up
- Thread starter DJnVa
- Start date
- Status
Are you referring to the guy who kept rolling his money into the next game, successfully?
Do you recall his net on that?
Maybe some Eagles fan can fill me in on the complaints about Pederson, because he seems like a terrific HC to me.
You don’t ignore the elephant in the room, and he seems to have addressed it in a B.B. way — efficiently, sensibly, now let’s move on.
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22211944/doug-pederson-philadelphia-eagles-dwell-new-england-patriots-mystique
You don’t ignore the elephant in the room, and he seems to have addressed it in a B.B. way — efficiently, sensibly, now let’s move on.
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/22211944/doug-pederson-philadelphia-eagles-dwell-new-england-patriots-mystique
I haven’t lived near Philly in some time, but I am mystified as to any complaints about Pederson.
I get that he was seen as an uninspiring choice, but, working with Howie Roseman, all he’s done is to turn the franchise around in record time. I cannot fathom any complaints.
Last edited:
He lost a bet about Ohio State,(i forgot what bet exactly) reneged and then disappeared. But he'll be back. He always comes back.
I believe it was Harbaugh to the Colts
Regarding Pederson, what film is he watching?
"Just put on that Jacksonville game. Here's a team that gets down in a game early, and there's no panic. They just stay the course. They execute their game plan," he said. "Defense is creating turnovers. They're getting three-and-outs, they're getting the ball back to their offense, and that's what they're doing."
That's it, Harbaugh. It wasn't Ohio State, but Ohio State adjacent.
Also, turnovers are created in the mind, man.
The two-year turnaround is stunning, almost unprecedented trip from suck to excellence. "Almost" because you also have the Pats circa 2000 to 2002. In both cases finding the QB is key, and I get that, but nonetheless the overall quality of the roster is substantially higher, and you have a complete culture change.
I highly disagree. This was a team that was a 10-6 division champ in 2013, 10-6 in 2014 but missed out, then went 7-9 in both 2015 and 2016. They weren't coming from a bad place.
Totally agree. And their record was hampered by the Mickey Mouse Chip Kelly offense in many ways in '14 & especially '15. There's been talent there, especially on both lines.
This is also a team that wrecked its cap management and shed an incomprehensible number of useful players while picking up Sam Bradford and the corpse of DeMarco Murray. (Taking into account the moves that were made to accommodate the signing, DeMarco Murray alone was a potential franchise crippler.)
There was talent on both lines, but you are radically under selling the destructiveness Of Chip Kelly’s one year in charge of player personnel.
Pederson has done a great job (as has Rosenbaum). No argument from me. But this isn't a 2000 Patriots type of resurrection. Far more talent, IMO.
Chip inherited the cap problems; he didn't create them (well, the Murray acquisition didn't help). By-and-large, whoever was in charge that year was going to have to deal with taking out the trash and it wound up being Chip. It's fair to say that a lot of the players he acquired (Murray, Alonso, Maxwell) didn't fit in later, but I don't think you can blame him for the cap situation.
As far as "an incomprehensible number of useful players," I'm not seeing it. Jeremy Maclin ended up vastly overpaid. Evan Mathis and Todd Herremans were out of the league not long after leaving. Ditto Cary Williams and Bradley Fletcher. Foles failed with the Rams before finding his way back to Philly. LeSean McCoy is still really good, I guess. I don't agree with a lot of the guys Chip brought in, but it's tough to argue with the guys he jettisoned.
Trading Foles and draft picks for Bradford caused quite a bit of cap pain. It also made zero sense, as Foles was a far better fit for Kelly’s offense than the immobile Bradford coming off 2 ACL surgeries. Add in the acquisitions of Murray, Mathews and others and it’s pretty clear that Kelly made a bad cap situation much worse.
That’s fair.
What’s not fair is to imply that the Eagles success this year was built on players acquired by Kelly, because that’s just not true.
Only 6 starters from last Sunday (3 on offense, 3 on defense) were from the 2015 team.
To be fair, I've heard others refer to a 4th down stop as a turnover -- heck, announcers will often say "and they turn the ball over on downs." If Pederson's quote had been "Defense is about getting the ball back to their offense, -- whether it's by creating turnovers or by getting three-and-outs, -- and that's what they're doing." no one would have any problem with it.
I’m sure we’ve discussed this at length here, and it deserves more time, but I’ve often wondered about that. Those 2000 Patriots had a fair amount of talent too, and Belichick and Parcells were responsible for some amount of it — although we all know that player personnel decisions were a source of contention with Grier in the ‘93-‘96 era.
In short, I always marvel at how fortunate the 2001 Pats were, but Belichick did inherit a defense stocked with borderline Hall of Famers (Law, Milloy, Bruschi, McGinest) and another (borderline?) Hall of Famer kicker (Vinateri), plus a few key pieces on offense like Troy Brown and Damien Woody.
Last edited:
This also stats broaching other coaching issues, like, would their talent have been recognized had Belichick never made his glorious return?
Jimmy G will make more money off the Super Bowl than Tom Brady. There's gotta be a conspiracy here somewhere:
https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/01/25/super-bowl-shares-jimmy-garoppolo-tom-brady-new-england-patriots?utm_campaign=themmqb&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social
https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/01/25/super-bowl-shares-jimmy-garoppolo-tom-brady-new-england-patriots?utm_campaign=themmqb&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social
I don't. It won't. It's a system where by design the offense is run at such a break-neck pace so as to not allow for audibles. It doesn't allow for flexibility based on what the QB sees from the defense. That's ridiculous. Additionally it means tons of extra reps for your OL, which leads to their breaking down. And not even just in games but in practice, too. Go dig up quotes from Jason Peters after Kelly got fired. To a man the players couldn't stand it.
I think the fact that nobody else, especially the Pats, are doing it or have that style incorporated into their games tells you all you need to know. It was a gimmick that worked for five minutes but then the wheels came off.
This is where I am. Willie was a fairly disappointing 5th overall pick at that point. A good, not great player (similar to say, Mayo?). Bruschi we had no idea about. He was a converted college DE who originally played special teams then somehow ended up this Pro Bowl WILB in BB's original 3-4. Troy Brown's career high in catches from 1993 to 1999 was 41; in 2000, under BB, he caught 83, then 101 in 2001 and 97 in 2002. Vinatieri was a decent kicker who honked a couple of big kicks in 1999 that cost the Pats a playoff spot (at KC, vs. Buffalo; side discussion - if he makes those kicks and the Pats go 10-6 and make the playoffs, does Pete ever get canned??). Damien Woody, sure, a first round pick, good player, not a Pro Bowl talent though. Ty Law is the exception, we all knew what we had there, and Milloy, while probably overrated by Pats fans, was a pretty good player too. But most, if not all, of these guys achieved their peak performance under BB, and most had been in the league a while before he got there. Willie since 1994, Troy Brown 1993, Bruschi 1996, Law 1995, Vinatieri 1996, Milloy 1996.
Last edited:
Reneged? Really??
Another comp between recent Eagles and Pats circa 2000 was dysfunction and culture rot. That is what Kelly brought to Philly, and as much as we may like him (particularly in college), any fair minded person has to acknowledge that. It is difficult to imagine a poorer fit than Chip and the ethos of that franchise, which is why so many Eagles fans I know were beside themselves.
Ownership brought the quick hook and commendably so.
I've been making this point for years. Two most important kicks of his career right there.
There are a lot of parallels between NE in that time period and PHI now. I think in both cases the intermediate guy (Carroll or Kelly) got put in a very difficult position and the next hire was a lot more in line with what the franchise had been building before. We've seen Carroll go on to great things in Seattle; who knows with Kelly, though I'd be surprised if he winds up back in the NFL. Certainly Chip deserves some of the blame for what you call "dysfunction and culture rot," but it seems to me at least part of the issue was a front office that never really bought in to what he was doing. I am critical of Kelly for some of what he did in Philadelphia but, from the outside looking in, his coaching wasn't the only problem.
=======
Un-related, point-by-point on these:
Statistically, Willie wasn't a lot different under Parcells, Carroll, or Belichick. He certainly had more signature moments with Belichick, but a lot of of that was probably a function of getting to play in bigger games.
Sure, but he was on an upward trajectory before Belichick got there, going from a special teams guy as a rookie under Parcells to a full-time starter in Carroll's last season.
Fair. Nobody uses the slot WR better than Belichick.
I'm skeptical. Belichick didn't change special teams coordinators when he joined NE. I don't know, maybe?
He only played one season under Carroll so this just seems normal.
Carroll is and was a really good defensive coach. The Pats were 7th in points allowed and 8th in yards allowed in 1999; the problem was the offense sucked. His scheme was pretty different than Belichick's or Parcells' so there were definitely guys who fit better in one than another, but overall the defensive units under Carroll performed similar to the units under Belichick's first three seasons (and, for that matter, those in Parcells' last three seasons).
That "out" applies if they were playing this week, not for the Superbowl. It is a theoretical "out" at this point.
Potentially flukey (as they cover later in the article) but this is interesting, as I sort of knew this but didn't realize it was quite that stark:
Since 2001, the year that Tom Brady took over as starting quarterback, the Patriots are 15-0 in the playoffs against a new opponent and 12-9 in a rematch from the regular season. Every playoff exit in the Belichick era was a rematch, including season sweeps at the hands of the 2005 Broncos, 2006 Colts, 2011 Giants, 2012 Ravens and 2015 Broncos. The 2010 Jets also beat the Patriots in the playoffs, despite losing 45-3 in Foxborough just six weeks prior.
Since 2001, the year that Tom Brady took over as starting quarterback, the Patriots are 15-0 in the playoffs against a new opponent and 12-9 in a rematch from the regular season. Every playoff exit in the Belichick era was a rematch, including season sweeps at the hands of the 2005 Broncos, 2006 Colts, 2011 Giants, 2012 Ravens and 2015 Broncos. The 2010 Jets also beat the Patriots in the playoffs, despite losing 45-3 in Foxborough just six weeks prior.
Let me try to rephrase this a bit. The Patriots, having won their division the year before, are 15-0 in the playoffs against teams who didn't win their division the year before (and don't happen to be in a specific division) and 12-9 in the playoffs against teams who are consistently good (or happen to be in a specific division). Makes more sense that way, I think.
I didn't read it that way at all. The point of the article seemed to be focusing on the first or second time playing an opponent within the SAME season. 15-0 when they hadn't seen the opponent that season, and 12-9 when the opponent had already played the Patriots that same season. Trying to address whether familiarity was a benefit when playing the Patriots.Let me try to rephrase this a bit. The Patriots, having won their division the year before, are 15-0 in the playoffs against teams who didn't win their division the year before (and don't happen to be in a specific division) and 12-9 in the playoffs against teams who are consistently good (or happen to be in a specific division). Makes more sense that way, I think.
First Lombardi says that the Eagles are a horrendous matchup for the Pats, and now Curran on WEEI says that the Eagles will definitely cover the current line.
What a difference one game makes. Eagles have been home dogs the last two weeks, but they win big against Minnesota and suddenly a 5.5 point line is an insult.
This is based on nothing but drunken optimism, but this will finally be the SB the Pats win by double figures
The Eagles offense can replicate what Kansas City/Jacksonville did with RPOs, screens, quick passes, etc. is what I keep hearing.
I keep reading that, too. If it's so easy for teams to execute, never turn the ball over, and avoid breakdowns on special teams and defense, then wouldn't the Pats occasionally not win 12-14 games in a season?
Has anyone on here attended a game before? I haven't, and I'm thinking of going. I don't want to try and time the market to much, but the cost of the cheapest ticket on Stubhub has gone from ~$3800 on Tuesday to $2700 right now. I doubt they'll go too much lower, but does anyone have any experience with the SB Ticket market? Should I just buy now, or do ticket prices tend to get lower the closer to the game we get. Wouldn't hate getting in at a lower price point...
I’ve never bought a SB ticket before the game but know people who have and the tickets definitely tend to get cheaper as you get closer but there’s obviously risk there. It’s also going to be cold as shit next Sunday, which may help to depress prices. I would be surprised if entry level prices weren’t closer to 2,000 by next weekend.
That's what some unnamed brokes have been saying in the news. Who knows if they're to be believed...
I saw my buddy play it similarly at the NYC SB. Of course, if you plan on going you can decide whether or not a few hundred is worth the risk.
- Status