Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Why the Eagles will beat the pukes...

tr1

By tr1
in Around the NFL

Recommended Posts

tr1

tr1

Posted
Posted

Yes, anything can happen in pukeville...referee-wise, that is...

But, here's why the Eagles will overcome the puke's home field advantage:

- Better quarterback. DM has won some big games, Romo sits to pee has not;

- Better runningback. Barber shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence as Westbrook;

- Better defensive front. Sorry, but that puke front three still isn't settled because none of them are that good. The Eagles know how to bring pressure from their defensive front alone. Romo sits to pee better watch those stitches.

- Better cornerbacks. Only puke fan homers could even think differently;

I hate the Eagles as much as the pukes, but they definitely match up better.

Sorry puke fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robbieac

Robbieac

Posted
Posted
- Better quarterback. DM has won some big games, Romo sits to pee has not.

The game that Romo sits to pee won last year against the Packers for the #1 seed in the playoffs wasn't a "big" game? Also, how does what DM accomplished 4 years ago have anything to do with a game this week? All 32 GMs in the league would take Romo sits to pee over McNabb as their starter hands down. Any football fan with half a brain knows that Romo sits to pee is currently a better QB than DM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tr1

tr1

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The game that Romo sits to pee won last year against the Packers for the #1 seed in the playoffs wasn't a "big" game? Also, how does what DM accomplished 4 years ago have anything to do with a game this week? All 32 GMs in the league would take Romo sits to pee over McNabb as their starter hands down. Any football fan with half a brain knows that Romo sits to pee is currently a better QB than DM.

Um, you're wrong on so many counts, it's difficult to take you seriously.

The pukes be a basically Favre-less GB team last year. They lost to NE. They lost to the Giants in the playoffs.

What's incredible is that you're absolutely right...the pukes haven't been in many big games...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Jones

Mr. Jones

Posted
Posted

Why the Cowboys will beat the Eagles

-Better quarterback. Last year Tony Romo sits to pee threw for more yards (4211 to 3875) and TDs (36 to 31) then McNabb ever has. Romo sits to pee is also more accurate, his worst completion percentage in any year was 64.4 McNabb's best was 64.0.

-Better recievers. T.O. is an elite game changing reciever, the eagles WRs are...not. I don't think any stats are needed to prove this point. Witten is also a better TE in every aspect of the game then L.J. Smith.

-Better defensive front 7. DeMarcus Ware and Greg Ellis are better at getting to the quarterback then anyone on the Eagles. Dallas d-linemen might not get as many sacks as the Eagles but in a 3-4 defense that isn't their job, they tie up blockers and hold the point of attack for the linebackers. Speaking of whom, Dallas linebackers are outstanding. Ware and Ellis are both very good pass rushers who are also strong against the run. Thomas may be old and one blow to the head away from missing the season, but until that happens he is still one of the best in the game at diagnosing a play and being where he needs to be, and the "weak link" Brady James is still probably better then any of the LBs starting for Philly this year.

-Better offensive line. Dallas' offensive line is huge and dominant. Flozell, Davis and Gurode (when not snapping the ball over Tony's head) are among the best in the game. Andrews for the Eagles is a great player, but on the whole the Cowboys are just better.

This should be a good game, both teams were outstanding in week 1. The Eagles rolled up better stats, but they also played a much worse team in the bottom feeding Rams at home while the Cowboys played in the Dawg Pound where the Browns were on a 7 game winning streak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tr1

tr1

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Why the Cowboys will beat the Eagles

-Better quarterback. Last year Tony Romo sits to pee threw for more yards (4211 to 3875) and TDs (36 to 31) then McNabb ever has. Romo sits to pee is also more accurate, his worst completion percentage in any year was 64.4 McNabb's best was 64.0.

When healty, McNabb is a guy you want in the clutch. Romo sits to pee, not so much. And please, when a team plays the 'little sisters of the poor' so much, stats really don't mean much. We're talking about BIG GAMES. Romo sits to pee...zero.

-Better recievers. T.O. is an elite game changing reciever, the eagles WRs are...not. I don't think any stats are needed to prove this point. Witten is also a better TE in every aspect of the game then L.J. Smith.

I didn't mention receivers, because it's basically a push. With Jackson, the Eagles receiving corps just improved 50 percent...especially with McNabb. And, BTW, Westbrook catches...Barion wishes.

-Better defensive front 7. DeMarcus Ware and Greg Ellis are better at getting to the quarterback then anyone on the Eagles. Dallas d-linemen might not get as many sacks as the Eagles but in a 3-4 defense that isn't their job, they tie up blockers and hold the point of attack for the linebackers. Speaking of whom, Dallas linebackers are outstanding. Ware and Ellis are both very good pass rushers who are also strong against the run. Thomas may be old and one blow to the head away from missing the season, but until that happens he is still one of the best in the game at diagnosing a play and being where he needs to be, and the "weak link" Brady James is still probably better then any of the LBs starting for Philly this year.

Had to expand to "seven" didn't you ... :rotflmao:

The linebackers are a push. The Eagle's d-line is better than yours.

-Better offensive line. Dallas' offensive line is huge and dominant. Flozell, Davis and Gurode (when not snapping the ball over Tony's head) are among the best in the game. Andrews for the Eagles is a great player, but on the whole the Cowboys are just better.

The o-line is also a push.

You should read my original post. I mentioned the matchups worth mentioning. This is noise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OWUeagleMD

OWUeagleMD

Posted
Posted
All 32 GMs in the league would take Romo sits to pee over McNabb as their starter hands down. Any football fan with half a brain knows that Romo sits to pee is currently a better QB than DM.

Not so sure about this, if we're talking about for a single season. Building a franchise, of course you'd take the young QB over the old. But for one season, I think plenty of GMs would value McNabb over Romo sits to pee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Robbieac

Robbieac

Posted
Posted
BTW, I believe puke fans are really afraid of the Eagles...as evidenced by their non-attendance in this thread.

They should be afraid.

Wow! You sure do have an inflated sense of self-worth. This thread has been up for less than an hour, and you have already received a handful of replys from Cowboys fans. What more do you expect? :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tr1

tr1

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Not so sure about this, if we're talking about for a single season. Building a franchise, of course you'd take the young QB over the old. But for one season, I think plenty of GMs would value McNabb over Romo sits to pee.

A healthy McNabb and Westbrook is the most potent combination in the division.

The problem is, it's difficult to keep both healthy...and as time goes on, even less so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. Jones

Mr. Jones

Posted
Posted
When healty, McNabb is a guy you want in the clutch. Romo sits to pee, not so much. And please, when a team plays the 'little sisters of the poor' so much, stats really don't mean much. We're talking about BIG GAMES. Romo sits to pee...zero.

I didn't mention receivers, because it's basically a push. With Jackson, the Eagles receiving corps just improved 50 percent...especially with McNabb. And, BTW, Westbrook catches...Barion wishes.

Had to expand to "seven" didn't you ... :rotflmao:

The linebackers are a push. The Eagle's d-line is better than yours.

The o-line is also a push.

You should read my original post. I mentioned the matchups worth mentioning. This is noise.

Flaws with your arguments:

McNabb is not clutch in big games. See NFC Championship games and Superbowl 2005. You can say Romo sits to pee chokes in the playoffs, but he's lights out in September and October (check the date this game is being played).

Recievers are in no way a push, even with the emergence of Jackson it really isn't a contest, the Cowboys are better and to think otherwise proves you either a fool or exposes this all for an act.

Westbrook is a better reciever then Barber, thats what makes him a better RB. Between the tackles Barber is tougher to bring down.

I had to expand the defense comparison to front 7 because that is the only way to effectively compare a 4-3 defense to a 3-4, otherwise the individual roles are too dramaticly different.

If linebackers are a push does that mean you're saying that Gaithers, Gocong and Bradly are as good as Ellis, Ware and Thomas? I know you hate Dallas but such a statement would be just ignorant.

Or are you lumping Ellis and Ware in with the linemen since they spend so much time rushing the passer? If that was the case linebacker might be a push, but you would have to say Dallas had the better line because they are both better then Trent Cole, the best player on the Eagles line.

Anyways, I'm off to class for a few hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bulldog

bulldog

Posted
Posted

Eagles aren't going to win this game.

Philly beats up on a tomato can team in St. Louis and their fans think it's 2004 all over again.

The Eagles front seven is hardly intimidating. Who are these linebackers that these fans seem to think are going to challenge memories in the East of Carl Banks, LT and Harry Carson? :laugh:

The Eagles are a solid club but this is no New England in the making.

A good team will limit Westbrook and then we are back to watching all the pressure go back to McNabb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tr1

tr1

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Well since TR1 is sure that Dallas is going to lose I guess this must be a BIG GAME for Romo sits to pee. That is what a QB is suppose to do, win you games that you are slated to lose.....

So I guess if Dallas wins monday night we can put the Romo sits to pee has never won a big game on the shelf

A big game is beating an elite NFL team in a crucial game.

I don't think this game measures up. Maybe the next time they meet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
VA Cowboy fan

VA Cowboy fan

Posted
Posted
A big game is beating an elite NFL team in a crucial game.

I don't think this game measures up. Maybe the next time they meet.

Well maybe you should do a better job a defining what a big game is....

I know your whole theory is making crap up as you go along...you said in your OP that DM was better than TR because he had won big games....care to tell what those games were.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Billy Bullocks

Billy Bullocks

Posted
Posted

- Better quarterback. DM has won some big games, Romo sits to pee has not;

I don't know if I'd agree with that. McNabb has won some playoff games, lost 3 NFC champ games, and choked hard in the SB. Most people would take Romo sits to pee over McNabb.

- Better runningback. Barber shouldn't even be mentioned in the same sentence as Westbrook;

Agree that Westbrook is a better all around back and weapon than Barber. But to say you wouldn't mention them in the same sentence is outlandish.

- Better defensive front. Sorry, but that puke front three still isn't settled because none of them are that good. The Eagles know how to bring pressure from their defensive front alone. Romo sits to pee better watch those stitches.

Yeah Philly generates alot of pass rush from their front 4. They also blitz a hell of a lot.

And what you just said shows your ignorance. You can't compare a font 4 in a 4-3 alignment with the front 3 of a 3-4 alignment.

- Better cornerbacks. Only puke fan homers could even think differently;

I would hardly consider myself a homer, but I do think differently than you do. Brown and Shepphard are good corners, but DEFINATELY better than Newman, Jones, and Henry?

Too bad you don't have any arguments against those I put up...just a snide remark.

Typical.

For someone who is 52 years old, I would at least expect them to know the difference between a solid argument and an OPINION.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tr1

tr1

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Well maybe you should do a better job a defining what a big game is....

I know your whole theory is making crap up as you go along...you said in your OP that DM was better than TR because he had won big games....care to tell what those games were.....

Um, DM made it to a Super Bowl. Romo sits to pee had two chances, and didn't.

Need some more?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...