Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

2012 News & Info Thread II
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 96, 97, 98, 99  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Philadelphia Eagles
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Phire


Moderator
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 48796
Location: #championchip #2012BirdsHoF #2012GoldStnd #YAKtoseIntolerant #Merica #TrollyRangers #Danes #BirdGang
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 6:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RainbowCarebear wrote:
Remixxxxxxx wrote:
A key component to the wide nine is a dominant defensive tackle


Patt and Cullen was nice last year, but hardly dominant.

The chipping of Ends in the wide 9 makes sense to be a good counter, but why haven't teams the past decade not done that against Titans?


Their only good years they had Chris Johnson and Albert Haynesworth in their prime.

Every other year they were mediocre.

For all the crap we give Haynesworth, if you weren't triple-teaming him he was probably collapsing the pocket.
_________________
theuntouchable wrote:
Think about this phire. I am the real chow.

RainbowCarebear wrote:
Only for the quick and lucky.

Danish proverb 3:69
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Remixxxxxxx


Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 12321
Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RainbowCarebear wrote:
Remixxxxxxx wrote:
A key component to the wide nine is a dominant defensive tackle


Patt and Cullen was nice last year, but hardly dominant.

The chipping of Ends in the wide 9 makes sense to be a good counter, but why haven't teams the past decade not done that against Titans?


My points was more to say that we're missing the key component[see Haynesworth, Albert; Suh, Ndamukong] to the wide nine. It wasn't very good last year and now with this loss of Patterson and the downgrade in play from Jenkins, it's gotten worse.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Phire


Moderator
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 48796
Location: #championchip #2012BirdsHoF #2012GoldStnd #YAKtoseIntolerant #Merica #TrollyRangers #Danes #BirdGang
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The funny thing is, despite how bad the wide-9 has been for us Castillo lost his job over it Laughing Laughing



#4Juan
_________________
theuntouchable wrote:
Think about this phire. I am the real chow.

RainbowCarebear wrote:
Only for the quick and lucky.

Danish proverb 3:69
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RainbowCarebear


Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 35806
Location: "Are you hungry, child?" Yes, she thought, but not for food.
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Phire wrote:
RainbowCarebear wrote:
Remixxxxxxx wrote:
A key component to the wide nine is a dominant defensive tackle


Patt and Cullen was nice last year, but hardly dominant.

The chipping of Ends in the wide 9 makes sense to be a good counter, but why haven't teams the past decade not done that against Titans?


Their only good years they had Chris Johnson and Albert Haynesworth in their prime.

Every other year they were mediocre.

For all the crap we give Haynesworth, if you weren't triple-teaming him he was probably collapsing the pocket.


That's not true at all. They had good run defense prior to Haynesworth, I'm not going to look up the sacks, but I'm going on a limp and say they were good probably 35-40 +

We led the league in sacks, how wasn't the wide 9 good last year?
_________________

"Do you imagine Whoresbane loves you any better? If you did not hold the ..., he would pull out your entrails and make you eat them"
"In return, we swore that we should always be their men"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eagles_808


Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 27814
Location: California
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Phire wrote:
The funny thing is, despite how bad the wide-9 has been for us Castillo lost his job over it Laughing Laughing

...

#4Juan


I know feel bad for Juany boy. He didn't deserve to be the scapegoat.
_________________
2013 Eagles Forum HOF
[quote="Leon Sandcastle"]Chip Kelly's system is college material...that stuff doesn't fly in the NFL[/quote]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Remixxxxxxx


Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 12321
Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
We led the league in sacks, how wasn't the wide 9 good last year?


Our run defense was freaking awful last year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Phire


Moderator
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 48796
Location: #championchip #2012BirdsHoF #2012GoldStnd #YAKtoseIntolerant #Merica #TrollyRangers #Danes #BirdGang
PostPosted: Wed Nov 07, 2012 7:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RainbowCarebear wrote:
Phire wrote:
RainbowCarebear wrote:
Remixxxxxxx wrote:
A key component to the wide nine is a dominant defensive tackle


Patt and Cullen was nice last year, but hardly dominant.

The chipping of Ends in the wide 9 makes sense to be a good counter, but why haven't teams the past decade not done that against Titans?


Their only good years they had Chris Johnson and Albert Haynesworth in their prime.

Every other year they were mediocre.

For all the crap we give Haynesworth, if you weren't triple-teaming him he was probably collapsing the pocket.


That's not true at all. They had good run defense prior to Haynesworth, I'm not going to look up the sacks, but I'm going on a limp and say they were good probably 35-40 +


How could you possibly tell me "that's not true at all" without looking up stats or giving me something to look at?

Washburn was hired as DL coach in Tennessee in 1999.

Top 5 defenses in PTS: 2000, 2008
Top 6-10 defenses in PTS: 2007
Top 11-15 defenses in PTS: 1999, 2002, 2003, 2010
Bottom 16-20 defenses in PTS: None
Bottom 20-25 defenses in PTS: 2001
Bottom 26-32 defenses in PTS: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2009

His defense against yardage is even worse.
Top 10 finishes: twice (Haynesworth)
Middle 10 finishes: 3 times
Bottom 12 finishes: 6 times

Not sure if completely accurate on the years.

His defense was good when he had the best defensive player in the league on his roster, ala Jevon Kearse and Albert Haynesworth.

Without them, his defenses have been lackluster. That's why Tennessee hasn't been a dominant team in the last decade...

Quote:
We led the league in sacks, how wasn't the wide 9 good last year?


And we still finished 8-8.

a) looking just at sack totals is pulling a "PE".
b) I never said the wide-9 wasn't good last year, I felt they had good pressure on the quarterback.
c) I don't know what Tennessee's run defense was prior or after Haynesworth, all I know is that Washburn had some good defensive players in Tennessee for his entire tenure and that helped him look good, although their defenses had way more mediocre defenses than good ones.

It should be noted that I DO NOT BELIEVE defensive stats should be directly attributed to the defensive line coach.
_________________
theuntouchable wrote:
Think about this phire. I am the real chow.

RainbowCarebear wrote:
Only for the quick and lucky.

Danish proverb 3:69
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RainbowCarebear


Joined: 31 Aug 2011
Posts: 35806
Location: "Are you hungry, child?" Yes, she thought, but not for food.
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 6:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Phire wrote:
a) looking just at sack totals is pulling a "PE".
b) I never said the wide-9 wasn't good last year, I felt they had good pressure on the quarterback.
c) I don't know what Tennessee's run defense was prior or after Haynesworth, all I know is that Washburn had some good defensive players in Tennessee for his entire tenure and that helped him look good, although their defenses had way more mediocre defenses than good ones.


a) Was just me being lazy, Washburn have always gotten a good amount of sacks, regardless of 1st rounders or UDFA's.
b) wasn't talk to you, was talking to someone else.
c) 2000 and 2001 they had top 5 run defenses, both prior Haynesworth. 2000 55 sacks, 2001 32 sacks.

And are you seriously judging the overall defense based on the Dline? Sacks and run defense are probably the best way to judge that unit.

The fact you need a "dominate" DT in the wide 9 is bs. It's a good thing, but not a need at all.

Are we going to forget we had a short off season and bad Linebackers and blame the wide 9 on our not very good run defense last year?
_________________

"Do you imagine Whoresbane loves you any better? If you did not hold the ..., he would pull out your entrails and make you eat them"
"In return, we swore that we should always be their men"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marky_b27


Joined: 16 Mar 2007
Posts: 21336
Location: Nottingham, England
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 6:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RainbowCarebear wrote:
Phire wrote:
a) looking just at sack totals is pulling a "PE".
b) I never said the wide-9 wasn't good last year, I felt they had good pressure on the quarterback.
c) I don't know what Tennessee's run defense was prior or after Haynesworth, all I know is that Washburn had some good defensive players in Tennessee for his entire tenure and that helped him look good, although their defenses had way more mediocre defenses than good ones.


a) Was just me being lazy, Washburn have always gotten a good amount of sacks, regardless of 1st rounders or UDFA's.
b) wasn't talk to you, was talking to someone else.
c) 2000 and 2001 they had top 5 run defenses, both prior Haynesworth. 2000 55 sacks, 2001 32 sacks.

And are you seriously judging the overall defense based on the Dline? Sacks and run defense are probably the best way to judge that unit.

The fact you need a "dominate" DT in the wide 9 is bs. It's a good thing, but not a need at all.

Are we going to forget we had a short off season and bad Linebackers and blame the wide 9 on our not very good run defense last year?


I judge a defense by:

Points per game
Third down percentage
Turnovers
_________________



RainbowCarebear wrote:
Marky > Foles
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Remixxxxxxx


Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 12321
Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 9:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The fact you need a "dominate" DT in the wide 9 is bs. It's a good thing, but not a need at all.


There's nothing that proves this is true. I've seen Detroit have success with the wide nine and they have one of the most dominant defensive tackles in the league. You've also seen Tennessee's best years coming when Haynesworth was being a man child, dominant.

....and then there's us, who've struggled with this for two years. Let's look at what we don't have on ur defensive line; a dominant defensive tackle. I don't really think there's anyways you can prove that you don't need a dominant defensive tackle to have decent success with the wide nine.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oland11


Joined: 15 Jul 2011
Posts: 7702
Location: "This game is over!" - Chuck Bednarik
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 10:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So pretty much we're coming o the conclusion/argument that we need a dominant NT to eat up blocks and free up one on ones for the other guys and this will help our DL be more dominant?
_________________
NCAA Division III WLAX Event Supervisor
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Phire


Moderator
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 48796
Location: #championchip #2012BirdsHoF #2012GoldStnd #YAKtoseIntolerant #Merica #TrollyRangers #Danes #BirdGang
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 10:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

We need to abandon the wide-9 the same way the wide-9 abandons discipline.
_________________
theuntouchable wrote:
Think about this phire. I am the real chow.

RainbowCarebear wrote:
Only for the quick and lucky.

Danish proverb 3:69
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Remixxxxxxx


Joined: 06 Mar 2009
Posts: 12321
Location: E808 on the avi; P90 on the sig
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 11:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Phire wrote:
We need to abandon the wide-9 the same way the wide-9 abandons discipline.


pretty much this; I can't wait until this clown Washburn is gone.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Phire


Moderator
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Posts: 48796
Location: #championchip #2012BirdsHoF #2012GoldStnd #YAKtoseIntolerant #Merica #TrollyRangers #Danes #BirdGang
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another week, another Curry article.

http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles/20121108_Eagles_rookie_defensive_end_Curry_itching_to_get_on_the_field.html
_________________
theuntouchable wrote:
Think about this phire. I am the real chow.

RainbowCarebear wrote:
Only for the quick and lucky.

Danish proverb 3:69
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eagles_808


Joined: 12 Mar 2008
Posts: 27814
Location: California
PostPosted: Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Phire wrote:
Another week, another Curry article.

http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles/20121108_Eagles_rookie_defensive_end_Curry_itching_to_get_on_the_field.html


Might as well give him a chance. It's not our ends are lighting the world on fire this season.
_________________
2013 Eagles Forum HOF
[quote="Leon Sandcastle"]Chip Kelly's system is college material...that stuff doesn't fly in the NFL[/quote]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Philadelphia Eagles All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 96, 97, 98, 99  Next
Page 97 of 99

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group