viman96
Thread Killer
- Messages
- 22,114
- Reaction score
- 23,483
2-2 Tenn doesn't count. They are horrific
Tenn and Miss St are not the ooint of my response. Oregon had 1 bad loss against a SEC team.
2-2 Tenn doesn't count. They are horrific
Chip Kelly's offense is a gambling offense. By that I mean it gambles that it can get first downs consistently and that if they can get a lead on a team, they can get more aggressive on defense.
For example, it's no different than if a team never punted and went for it on 4th down every time no matter the field position. If that team has a game where they convert 8 out of 10 4th down attempts, they come out looking like a dominating offense. If they convert 1 out of 10 4th down attempts, they get exposed and labeled a gimmick offense. It was the same with the old run-n-gun offense. It was high scoring as well long ago, except when it didn't work, and when that happened, it looked really bad.
The problem for Dallas is that it cannot consistently stop other teams on 3rd downs. That plays directly into the Eagles scheme. Dallas can beat the Eagles in Philly, but they can also lose just as easily. No matter the outcome, it's a gamble and whether the Cowboys win or lose next week, it won't make them a better or worse team than they are now. A win will help with their playoff chances of course, but beating the Eagles won't be any real gauge as to how the Cowboys would/will do against other playoff teams.
The bottom line though is the Eagles may beat Dallas and may get into the playoffs, but their gambling offense won't last against good teams over several games.
Stop with the lies. Oregon is 3-2 since 2002 against the SEC. Only one of the loses was a blowout.
Won v. Miss. St., 36-13, in 2002.
Won at Miss. St., 42-34, in 2003.
That was awesome watching him try to convince the refs that throwing a ball out of bounds in the general direction of a receiver is intentional grounding. Despite the fact that has NEVER been ruled intentional grounding, you had to admire his determination! LOL.
Keep the NCAA discussions out this thread please.
100%
To add to this, the strategic downside is that the offense makes no provision for scenarios where it isn't working. There is no in-built risk management system. If it is shut down, it just keeps trying over and over again, hoping that it will go on a run. It's almost injected with the gambler's fallacy. What would concern me more than anything is that if they added just a little more to it. In other words, if they found a way that if the fast pace wasn't working, they could reduce down to a decent traditional offense. I think that if you ever see Kelly with a really talented QB, you will see him start choosing to slow it down with some more wrinkles and additional complexity.
I think it was Kurt Warner who did a segment on the pregame show, that showed the Beagles running the same basic play 4 or 5 times within a couple of minutes.
His conclusion was that their O is pretty basic, but they run it fast and precisely.
Just hope Rod preaches the keys on those basic plays so the D is aware and can react quickly.
Like Tom Brady calling for a flag when he's getting tackled HARD inbounds with the ball in his hands. Good grief!
please don't refer to the eagles as "beagles". The Beagle breed is one of the best breeds of dogs on the planet. Do not disgrace or discredit them like that...
True. But they do bark a lot, much like this Eagles team.
please don't refer to the eagles as "beagles". The Beagle breed is one of the best breeds of dogs on the planet. Do not disgrace or discredit them like that...
Yeah, I find them yappy, annoying and they think they are tougher then they really are, seems like the perfect symbol.
![]()
How many good defenses are left in the NFL? The league wants college type score lines, so is it really surprising that a college type offense is smacking around college style poor defenses?
