Our safeties were nothing less than a disgrace today...

[Vintage]

There is two ways we can do this:

1. We can turn it around like Pittsburgh did when everyone thought they were finished.

or

2. We can pack it in.

I prefer the latter. 4 games is enough to make a statement in how a team will play out its remaining 12 games.

 

[wileedog]

being .500 year after year "Drama much" ?

it isnt just the loss today...its year after year of the same thing

David

We're rebuilding from a perennial 5-11 team that wasn't even that good because two other teams in the division stunk worse at the time. Using the overall record as a barometer is pointless.

If you don't think this team is better than the 2002 version you need your head examined.

I'm sorry Bill doesn't play the "complex blitzing schemes" you prefer, but the fact is outside of 3 safety breakdowns today, the Eagles did almost nothing on offense today. Nada.

But feel free to keep repeating "no pass rush" until you are blue in the face. If Roy or Watkins do their job, the pass to LJ never gets thrown. If Roy takes the right angle on the ball, the flea flicker does not get completed (although in fairness, it was a perfect pass by McNabb, not sure there is much any defense could have done about that.).Other than that, Ellis just missed a tackle sack and Watkins the rookie bit on a double move. Big deal.

But by all means keep chanting your "no pass rush" mantra - despite the Ellis sack and Ware pick that led to 7 points today.

 

[Deep_Freeze]

I don't know, maybe it is just me. I would rather have a defense with a dominating front 7, so that you don't have to bring the safety up. Then have the secondary cover.

Not a difficult concept. I'm just not sure Roy can do that for us. He is great near the line of scrimmage, sure, but with him there, it being an 8 man front, you just can't do that against everyone.

But I will say, I have seen some improvement this year. But today was really disappointing.

 

[dbair1967]

We're rebuilding from a perennial 5-11 team that wasn't even that good because two other teams in the division stunk worse at the time. Using the overall record as a barometer is pointless.

If you don't think this team is better than the 2002 version you need your head examined.

I'm sorry Bill doesn't play the "complex blitzing schemes" you prefer, but the fact is outside of 3 safety breakdowns today, the Eagles did almost nothing on offense today. Nada.

But feel free to keep repeating "no pass rush" until you are blue in the face. If Roy or Watkins do their job, the pass to LJ never gets thrown. If Roy takes the right angle on the ball, the flea flicker does not get completed (although in fairness, it was a perfect pass by McNabb, not sure there is much any defense could have done about that.).Other than that, Ellis just missed a tackle sack and Watkins the rookie bit on a double move. Big deal.

But by all means keep chanting your "no pass rush" mantra - despite the Ellis sack and Ware pick that led to 7 points today.

well there basically was no pass rush (again) today...its an every week thing...its like the movie Groundhog Day

as for the comparisons between 2002 and now...1) w have ALOT more talent than 2002, I give Parcells a huge amount of credit for that 2) with the huge upgrade in talent, we should be better than a .500 team now...this is his 4th yr here, not his first...if Parcells were dave Campo or Switzer the results we're seeing now would be fine, but he gets paid an enormous sum of money and isnt producing...he shouldnt be getting a free pass anymore

David

 

[Deep_Freeze]

I'm sorry Bill doesn't play the "complex blitzing schemes" you prefer, but the fact is outside of 3 safety breakdowns today, the Eagles did almost nothing on offense today. Nada.

I understand where your post is coming from. But I'm just going to point out, ask any old coach, he will tell you that games are usually decided on a few plays.

So those 3, while small in number, were deciding plays for the outcome of the game.

 

[wileedog]

well there basically was no pass rush (again) today...its an every week thing...its like the movie Groundhog Day

So I imagined the 3 sacks and numerous pressures against a very good Oline and mobile QB today? You saying it over and over doesn't make it true.

as for the comparisons between 2002 and now...1) w have ALOT more talent than 2002, I give Parcells a huge amount of credit for that 2) with the huge upgrade in talent, we should be better than a .500 team now...this is his 4th yr here, not his first...if Parcells were dave Campo or Switzer the results we're seeing now would be fine, but he gets paid an enormous sum of money and isnt producing...he shouldnt be getting a free pass anymore

David

WHich is a perfectly legitimate argument in December. Doesn't make much sense in October, especially since the first half of our schedule is considered the hard part.

We lost to Philly and Jax on the road. That's hardly compelling stuff for the full blown panic attack.

If we finish 8-8 I'll go a long way towards your side of the argument, believe me. And if Bledsoe keeps having games like this we just might. BUt I think you would be hard pressed to find any team in the league who could have went into that atmosphere in Philly today, gotten the QB and Safety play that they did, and came as close to winning (or at least tying it up) as we did.

And honestly, I really don't think the pass rush was as bad as your painting it. It wasn't the blitzkreig that was thrown on Drew, but we made McNabb move, and just missed more than once. ANd that is not a bad line they have there at all.

 

[TEK2000]

There is two ways we can do this:

1. We can turn it around like Pittsburgh did when everyone thought they were finished.

or

2. We can pack it in.

I prefer the latter. 4 games is enough to make a statement in how a team will play out its remaining 12 games.

I disagree based on experience. We went 0-4 to start my senior year and then went on a winning streak that led us to the State Finals.

 

[wileedog]

I understand where your post is coming from. But I'm just going to point out, ask any old coach, he will tell you that games are usually decided on a few plays.

So those 3, while small in number, were deciding plays for the outcome of the game.

Of course they were.

BUt they are correctable, which is my point. Watkins is going to get better, and learn not to bite on that double move. He may have been the one who blew the other coverage as well, we don't know.

The flea flicker, honestly I don't even think Watkins had bad coverage on it. McNabb made a damn fine throw, and even Aikman said today "a great throw will beat great coverage every time". SOmetimes you just have to tip your cap to the other guy, even if Roy took a terrible angle.

POint is it wasn't like the D was dominated and the Eagles marched up and down the field, moving the chains at will. Then I would be concerned. That got a few breaks and capitalized on them at home. Good for them.

We fix it practice this week, and move on to the Texans.

 

[Chuck 54]

Watkins and Roy Williams combined to give up no less than three cataclysmic plays today that combined for 21 points to a bush league set of WR's today.

Our safeties in coverage continue to prevent us from becoming a dominant defense.

Roy had looked better in coverage till today...he was pathetic...his man was open for first downs several times when the ball bounced off their chests...he blew the coverage on the TE that set up 1 td and he looked like a little league outfielder on the flea-flicker when he had the play in front of him and just stopped running and misread it for a td.

At least Watkins is a rookie and actually had very tight coverage on the fleaflicker but just didn't play the ball well.

Roy will be defended, ad nausium, but he really blew it today.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

But he's distinctly average in coverage.

who's debating that? did I say Roy was better than average in coverage?

look everyone, it's MakestuffupWinicki

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Not glaring?

Maybe when you get a chance you can watch the Dallas/Philly game from 10-08-06.

I think you're going to get schooled.

what about 9-17-06?

 

[dbair1967]

Roy had looked better in coverage till today...he was pathetic...his man was open for first downs several times when the ball bounced off their chests...he blew the coverage on the TE that set up 1 td and he looked like a little league outfielder on the flea-flicker when he had the play in front of him and just stopped running and misread it for a td.
.

didnt they already say something about the LJ Smith thing wasnt RW's guy?

David

 

[Deep_Freeze]

who's debating that? did I say Roy was better than average in coverage?

look everyone, it's MakestuffupWinicki

Here is the problem I speak of, and the reason why I'm upset with Roy. He really had been doing well, and maybe it was just one game.

But if its not, is it acceptable for him to be aveage in coverage??

 

[Bob Sacamano]

That is part of my problem with Roy. I don't really believe in bringing the safety until you have to, cause the front 7 is getting beat. Coverage should be first, if you have a good front 7, for a safety. I just don't see this in Roy, and I really don't want to bring him up. I would rather our front 7 be good enough that we can keep the safeties back, which he isn't good at.

coverage is not 1st for a SS, it's to play in the box, arguing because we don't play Roy back, because it's not his strength, is a useless argument

btw, we play Roy back in coverage alot, sometimes he makes plays, sometimes he doesn't, welcome to the world of an NFL Dback

 

[Bob Sacamano]

is it acceptable for him to be aveage in coverage??

for a SS...yes

being good in coverage for a SS is a bonus, and Roy isnt' exactly chopped liver there

 

[Deep_Freeze]

coverage is not 1st for a SS, it's to play in the box, arguing because we don't play Roy back, because it's not his strength, is a useless argument

btw, we play Roy back in coverage alot, sometimes he makes plays, sometimes he doesn't, welcome to the world of an NFL Dback

Nah, I don't think so. Alot of teams that run a cover 2 with a strong front 7 don't have to bring the SS up in the box as much.

You have to realize with bringing that guy up in the box, you are opening yourself up for the big pass play. Imagine a D against our offense. If you put 8 in the box, and we are able to protect Drew, then you are in deep trouble.

To me, it is real close to 50/50 coverage/run support.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Nah, I don't think so. Alot of teams that run a cover 2 with a strong front 7 don't have to bring the SS up in the box as much.

show me a team that keeps their SS in coverage more than 50% of the time

You have to realize with bringing that guy up in the box, you are opening yourself up for the big pass play.

not if you have a FS capable of holding his own in coverage

until Watkins matures mentally, or we find someone else, we're going to be getting burned

 

[Deep_Freeze]

show me a team that keeps their SS in coverage more than 50% of the time



not if you have a FS capable of holding his own in coverage

until Watkins matures mentally, or we find someone else, we're going to be getting burned

Always demanding someone do some research for you, when you haven't even backed up your thought, lol.

Question, if a team runs half the time, and passes half the time, what is the SS doing on those pass plays?? Picking his nose??

He isn't rushing the QB, he isn't stopping the run on pass plays, sooooo he might be in converage.

 

[Rampage]

everybody was right. we are the most overhyped team in the league

 

[Bob Sacamano]

here you go Deep

Pitt has a strong front 7, and they put Polamalu in the box

idk know why you're *****ing, because ROy is playing back in coverage alot