grego Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 I'm not going to pretend I understand what Chip Kelly's doing up there in Philly, but the guy DID go 10-6 both years he's been in the pros. If our team had a coach who managed to produce back-to-back 10 win seasons, we'd believe he could walk on water. Kelly's moves may well blow up in his face, but I think he's earned the benefit of the doubt so far. Kellys offensive system did great his first year. Not so well his second year- despite having the highest scoring special teams and the highest scoring defense in the entire NFL. And, while Kellys teams have mostly feasted on the dregs of the league (including us), they have almost always gotten their ass handed to them by anyone good. Chips team is trending down, and him gaining GM control- thinking system trumps talent - is the best thing that could happen to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mursilis Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Kellys offensive system did great his first year. Not so well his second year- despite having the highest scoring special teams and the highest scoring defense in the entire NFL. And, while Kellys teams have mostly feasted on the dregs of the league (including us), they have almost always gotten their ass handed to them by anyone good. Chips team is trending down, and him gaining GM control- thinking system trumps talent - is the best thing that could happen to us. I can only hope you're right. In the meantime, he's 3-1 against us, and it's been since the 1989-90 seasons that any Redskins coach had back-to-back 10 win seasons. Wow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hail2skins Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 I can only hope you're right. In the meantime, he's 3-1 against us, and it's been since the 1989-90 seasons that any Redskins coach had back-to-back 10 win seasons. Wow. Actually, in 90-91 we were 10-6 and 14-2......but yeah, same difference......25 years (ugh!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhead36 Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Chip's a good offensive coach, no doubt. But defensively he's just another guy, and like most head coaches he looks like a pretty iffy GM at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jflow78 Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 I'll say it again, and again people will just look at his career to date and laugh, but IMHO the Eagles. if they can do what St. Louis failed to do and keep Bradford upright; have just added arguably the most naturally talented QB in the division. (*Cue the ridicule from the ill informed masses.).... I actually agree with you GHH, as far as Bradford's talent goes, but St Louis was heavily questioning whether they should go a different direction even when Griffin was coming out (having lived in St Louis during the time, I thought it was ludicrous even then). However, I don't think the guy can stay upright and he's an injury waiting to happen. About the way I feel about Griffin and Orakpo right now (injury wise). I can't figure this one out. People in Philly are going crazy. At this rate, 4th in the NFCE is a possibility. I don't care what offensive system you have, you still need players to run it. This is looking like Reid 2.0 now, except we don't have a QB, RB, number one WR, or Jim Johnson to run the defense. We'll be kicking you out of the cellar this year. As much as I'd like to join you in this, somehow, every ******* season I think the Eagles are going down and every ******* season they find a way to be #1 or 2 in the division. I would love to jump on the bandwagon and say they're done (and I have in the Bradford Foles trade thread), but in the darkest corner of my heart I have no real faith in it. Sure they've lost their top 2 receivers, their #1 ankle breaking RB, and their only real QB who had an amazing year just a season ago, but because the football gods hate Washington, we will again be #4 in the division and somehow the other 3 teams will find a way to compete. While I'll agree that a QB's performance is affected a whole lot, by the team around him, I'll also point out that this is a team that has got rid of their team's #1, #2, and #3 offensive weapons, in a little over a year. And those positions also have a big impact on how good a QB looks. Ignoring what I just said, Bang! Where is Bang. ~ Bang I'm not going to pretend I understand what Chip Kelly's doing up there in Philly, but the guy DID go 10-6 both years he's been in the pros. If our team had a coach who managed to produce back-to-back 10 win seasons, we'd believe he could walk on water. Kelly's moves may well blow up in his face, but I think he's earned the benefit of the doubt so far. False. I would not believe he could walk on water. He could consume our opponents with fire from his ***. Also, he would carve off his enemies faces and wear them as skin masks (hahaha, that joke never gets old). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Sanchez knows he isn't going to be a starter, I believe. Foles hasn't accepted that yet. Saying Sanchez sucked just as bad doesn't excuse Foles 13 turnovers in 7ish games.... Not trying to denigrate Foles now, as I think he did a lot of good things in Philly, and liked him as a person. Just trying to guess why he was dumped. You alluded to Foles' turnovers playing a real role in Kelly souring on him. I just pointed out that if that were true he would have also soured on Sanchez since he actually had a worse turnover rate than Foles. Instead Sanchez gets a raise and an extension. So I think it's safe to say turnovers played no role in any of this. Suffice it to say, it should take a helluva lot to part ways with your starting QB, your starting RB, and your #1 WR--twice--all within 12 months. That's why so many people have been saying stuff like "look how much cap room the Eagles have now!" and "Bradford is probably gonna be packaged in a deal to get Mariota!"...people are trying to find a way to make sense of these moves as best they can, because at best right now they are head-scratchers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 You alluded to Foles' turnovers playing a real role in Kelly souring on him. I just pointed out that if that were true he would have also soured on Sanchez since he actually had a worse turnover rate than Foles. Instead Sanchez gets a raise and an extension. So I think it's safe to say turnovers played no role in any of this. listening to sheehan and loverro on the sportsfix yesterday, sheehan was drooling over chip kelly, proclaiming that the only reason the eagles didnt make the playoffs is because foles got hurt and sanchez had to step in. i'm not making that up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mursilis Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Actually, in 90-91 we were 10-6 and 14-2......but yeah, same difference......25 years (ugh!) You're right - I read the chart wrong and missed a year. Nice catch. And yeah, you're right about that other part, too - ugh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pointyfootball Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 You alluded to Foles' turnovers playing a real role in Kelly souring on him. I just pointed out that if that were true he would have also soured on Sanchez since he actually had a worse turnover rate than Foles. Instead Sanchez gets a raise and an extension. So I think it's safe to say turnovers played no role in any of this. Suffice it to say, it should take a helluva lot to part ways with your starting QB, your starting RB, and your #1 WR--twice--all within 12 months. That's why so many people have been saying stuff like "look how much cap room the Eagles have now!" and "Bradford is probably gonna be packaged in a deal to get Mariota!"...people are trying to find a way to make sense of these moves as best they can, because at best right now they are head-scratchers. Understand turnovers weren't the sole reason but I think they had something to do with it. My feeling is Kelly feels floes is lacking in getting ball out quickly, turned ball over too much to be a playoff winner, and has nowhere near the athleticism Sanchez does. Sanchez is not a starter but will suffice for a backup even though he might have to be a starter again due to Bradford's health. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taco Bell Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 I'm not sure what it is, maybe it's the combination of us getting a "real" GM this year as well as this year seeming to reveal a shift league-wide about how you should be building your team for the long term, but it's been really interesting watching these Eagles moves. When I talk about a league wide shift in FA/team-building, I don't mean anything too drastic, it just seems like league wide teams have become much smarter and perhaps more "self accepting" about how close they are as a team and therefore seem to make decisions better for the long term rather than be in denial about where you're at and build your team for 1 season instead. I think this years SB had a lot to do with this (not that the writing wasn't on the wall already but that slapped you in the face with it). The two teams in the SB are pretty much the only 2 ways teams should be operating right now. Both are similar and one could just be further along in it's lifecycle, but, like the seahawks, drafting and building your defense for the long term should be your priority at all times while waiting for the right QB to come along. And then the pats are in the situation of having your QB and continuing to keep your defense built while cycling through offensive talent since the QB is capable of absorbing extra offensive responsibility from a cost limitation standpoint. So, this offseason looks like more than any other in recent memory of teams seeing that the band aid approach does not work, and doing things over the long term is the smart way to go. This leads to the eagles (and this trade) finally. I sort of thought no matter what QB they had in mind for the upcoming season that the approach was the same, they wanted to unload their top offensive players because either a "new" QB would not put to use these players during their current contract, or they were going to put the responsibility on foles, and build the defense in either situation. Bradford who is new but not a rookie also fits this bill of not making the most of the skill position players in year 1. This trade is of course the most puzzling of all the eagles moves, since you're essentially paying more for the worse player to pan out from an odds standpoint (at least from the outside looking in). Now, who knows, maybe bradford fits their offense better than Foles does, but I think from a cerebral standpoint Foles is probably further along relative to age and probably even eachother, as well as being the younger one, with less of an injury history. Essentially, there are very few teams that would value Bradford more than Foles as of today, other than literally the Eagles due to Chip being a bit of a wildcard with his system and not getting to flesh it out yet, and then perhaps teams that would prefer a player more accepting of a backup role as of today (so teams like the broncos, pats, GB, etc). But, I could also see what the ideal scenario is here for Chip as well. Maybe he essentially knows next year is a down year, based on how he projects other teams performing, and will start sanchez for long enough for him to pull his "prove it" charade, all the while grooming bradford until say week 10, get under the 2nd round pick contingent, and make the trade seem a lot better heading into year 2. After his presser today that seems unlikely but maybe that's to build the "long term" side of bradford while they can play the "not ready" charade and get their pick back. Either way, it doesn't matter. As a redskins fan, I am much happier that Foles is gone and bradford is in. I thought foles was the 3rd best young qb with a large gap between him and 4th. Luck, Wilson then Foles, and then Kaepernick, after that there's just a blob of nobodies like, our qbs, manziel, ej manuel, geno smith, and pretty much any other QB drafted the last 3 years that are either backups or not far enough along yet like tom savage. Surprisingly, Bradford is actually younger than Kaepernick, which I think puts into perspective some things about the longevity of both styles in that if Kaep keeps "being" a running QB he might only have 5 more years, whereas bradford if he panned out the way he's "supposed to" he could be around 10-12 more years. I don't think it will play out like that necessarily, it's just something to look at. I also think the Rams are in great position this year, not necessarily playoff run type position (but maybe if Foles picks their offense up quickly) but they will finally get out of the NFCwest cellar (although a fine cellar it is) with SF descending, SEA betting on the present, and ARI going as far as their QB's take them. If you were going to tell me Foles was going to be the Rams QB with all the picks they got from us, I'd take their end of the trade as of today easily, as a side note. I mean, Foles is pretty good if he's not injured so that's how you start taking advantage of all those picks they made. Sounds like he's happy to be out of there too so maybe he will push himself extra this offseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Ever try- against your better judgement- to reason with a poster that you really believe to be completely and utterly irrational? Like your having a conversation with somebody but they're obviously only catching about 5% of it? That's what it was like. But it was highly entertaining to see the way he would bend and contort his argument despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. They're wrong, they know they're wrong, but dammit, they going to stick to their guns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westbrook36 Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Kelly's number one traits he looks for in a QB is repetitive accuracy and intelligence. Bradford has both in excess. If he stays healthy, he is going to be great. Top 10 franchise QB potential in Kelly's system. If he doesnt, the trade is obviously a Disaster. Looks like Sammy is bringing his old college roommate Demarco Murray with him so this is about to get interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodriggo Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Sam Bradford sucks. 18-30-1 IN FIVE YEARS. Rams are on the verge of bailing for LA for having picked him as the QB of the future. He couldn't even get a mild sizzle going in a town that would have been happy with buttered toast...total waste of time. Chip Kelly runs a gimmick offense that doesn't work. His team is gassed by midseason. His defense can't get off the field b/c his offense moves too fast even when it's moving the ball. If not for a ridiculous special teams performance last year they would have 2/3 more losses. Chip Kelly is propped up by talking heads, but has in consecutive seasons let Desean just walk, traded away McCoy for a nobody LB coming off an ACL, lost Maclin, is on the short side of a trade for picks and essentially "the same guy" at QB only older and more injured. Is there a worse sports scene for a young QB looking to get right than Philadelphia? Maybe Washington? How many plays into week 1 until he gets booed? The Eagles are unraveling, great for the Skins, not that we're winning any time soon but we have our rival for 3rd place and they're strug..gg..gg..a.ling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Kelly's number one traits he looks for in a QB is repetitive accuracy and intelligence. Bradford has both in excess. If he stays healthy, he is going to be great. Top 10 franchise QB potential in Kelly's system. If he doesnt, the trade is obviously a Disaster. Looks like Sammy is bringing his old college roommate Demarco Murray with him so this is about to get interesting. Where's is this Bradford has good accuracy coming from? He's a career 59% passer. And his accuracy numbers dropped each year in college (granted his final season was only 3 games). What am I missing about his accuracy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 But it was highly entertaining to see the way he would bend and contort his argument despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. They're wrong, they know they're wrong, but dammit, they going to stick to their guns Oh ya. Why did he get banned? (Being a lunatic isn't against the rules is it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Oh ya. Why did he get banned? (Being a lunatic isn't against the rules is it ?) $20 says he was Orgeon Ducks Fan. Maybe one of the cool mods could come in and give us a wink, wink, nudge, nudge, say no more if we are barking up the right tree here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Sam Bradford sucks.... I believe your entire post is 100% correct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westbrook36 Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Kelly looked at every throw he made. He said accuracy is not necessarily equal to completion percentage. He wasn't surrounded with anything. There is a good video going around showing all his pro passes over 15 yards which shows his arm strength and ability to really sling the ball accurately into tight windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chachie Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Looks like Sammy is bringing his old college roommate Demarco Murray with him so this is about to get interesting. Adam Schefter is reporting this. Wow, I just wanted him out of the NFCE and now he'll be right up the pike. Yeesh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Kelly looked at every throw he made. He said accuracy is not necessarily equal to completion percentage. He wasn't surrounded with anything. There is a good video going around showing all his pro passes over 15 yards which shows his arm strength and ability to really sling the ball accurately into tight windows. What year were those from? Because there is very limited tape from the last two years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westbrook36 Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 https://mobile.twitter.com/975TheFanatic/status/576048939281047553 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodriggo Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Man, even the local media is on Chip's jock. Won nothing, flavor of the month coach, don't get it AT ALL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 Man, even the local media is on Chip's jock. Won nothing, flavor of the month coach, don't get it AT ALL. listening to 980 right now? i'm with you. i dont get it. you heard them say the only reason philly didnt make the playoffs was cuz foles got hurt, right? wtf has happened to sports radio? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodriggo Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 listening to 980 right now? Haha! Yes! I swear listening to Loverro & Sheehan just pisses me off every day. They just make up arguments to have something to talk about. Sheehan manages to move to either side of an argument between each commerical break, it's maddening. I'm just killing time until Francesca comes on. Chip Kelly is having a horrible offseason, no way to spin it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted March 12, 2015 Share Posted March 12, 2015 listening to sheehan and loverro on the sportsfix yesterday, sheehan was drooling over chip kelly, proclaiming that the only reason the eagles didnt make the playoffs is because foles got hurt and sanchez had to step in. i'm not making that up. That's about the level of analysis I've come to expect by most of the sports media lol... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.