GhostofMeanMachine99 1 Posted October 22, 2013 Just caught the story on Philly.com. Source indicates that Vick, although not at 100%, will be declared the starter for Sunday's game against NY. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
packakegger 2 Posted October 22, 2013 I'd like to see Vick make it through a full game with that hammy before putting him in my lineup over red-hot/head Dalton. Vick and Foles are killing me this year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Bag-O-Bones 5 Posted October 22, 2013 CBS has Vick taking first team reps today but neither the OC nor Chip have confirmed he is the starter for Sunday. I'm only carrying Vick and Foles as my QB's and this is #$^#$^#$ killing me... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cruzer 1,992 Posted October 22, 2013 Vick has to play. The Iggs can not afford to fall behind too much further or they can kiss this division race goodbye. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GhostofMeanMachine99 1 Posted October 22, 2013 Vick has to play. The Iggs can not afford to fall behind too much further or they can kiss this division race goodbye. Exactly. Even if he doesn't run and sticks in the pocket as a passer, he's the best option they have. The Giants aren't exactly fielding a vaunted defense. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squintz82 45 Posted October 22, 2013 Exactly. Even if he doesn't run and sticks in the pocket as a passer, he's the best option they have. The Giants aren't exactly fielding a vaunted defense. They tried to force Vick into being a pocket passer in 2012, and it didn't end up well. From what I've seen, he's much better when given the option to run. Although a bigger injury risk. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GhostofMeanMachine99 1 Posted October 22, 2013 They tried to force Vick into being a pocket passer in 2012, and it didn't end up well. From what I've seen, he's much better when given the option to run. Although a bigger injury risk. This Sunday, he's a better option than Matt Barkley is what I'm saying. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squintz82 45 Posted October 22, 2013 This Sunday, he's a better option than Matt Barkley is what I'm saying. Ah, gotcha Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stewburtx8 67 Posted October 22, 2013 Vick has to play. The Iggs can not afford to fall behind too much further or they can kiss this division race goodbye. Division race. It's only a "race" because the division is so bad. The Eagles 3 wins have come against teams with a combined record of 3-16. Honestly I'd rather they don't try to make the playoffs. The QB of the future is not on the roster and that is the most important thing in my opinion. If they win the division, they fall all the way in to the 20's in the draft. I'd rather they bottom out and hopefully get a top 10 pick. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Little Rusty 17 Posted October 22, 2013 This is the Giants game to lose I hope they beat the snot out of each udder Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cruzer 1,992 Posted October 22, 2013 Division race. It's only a "race" because the division is so bad. Agreed - it's like winning first place in a smelly fat contest. But it is what it is and I'm sure Chip would like to say he won a division title in his first year coaching on the big stage. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Little Rusty 17 Posted October 22, 2013 Division race. It's only a "race" because the division is so bad. It shouldn't be a race at all, the Cowboys 3 losses are a combined total 13 lousy points and lost to 2 of the best teams in the League. ( Denver & KC ) Dallas is doing just fine. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JT 137 Posted October 22, 2013 It shouldn't be a race at all, the Cowboys 3 losses are a combined total 13 lousy points and lost to 2 of the best teams in the League. ( Denver & KC ) Dallas is doing just fine. Conversely, they've yet to beat a team with a winning record and their wins are against teams with a combined record of 9-18. Let's check back in in 5 weeks. I could see them losing 3 of their next 4, on the road vs Lions, Saints and Giants. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 5,890 Posted October 22, 2013 It shouldn't be a race at all, the Cowboys 3 losses are a combined total 13 lousy points and lost to 2 of the best teams in the League. ( Denver & KC ) Dallas is doing just fine. Cowboys blowing winnable games with sloppy play and mistakes? No way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
giraldi02 470 Posted October 23, 2013 It shouldn't be a race at all, the Cowboys 3 losses are a combined total 13 lousy points and lost to 2 of the best teams in the League. ( Denver & KC ) Dallas is doing just fine. The Eagles lost to the exact same three teams Dallas did. Dallas couldn't muster any offense for nearly 3 full quarters against a pathetic Eagles defense. Fact of the matter is the entire NFC East doesn't stand a chance against the more physical teams in conference. Seattle/SF/NO will eat any of these teams alive come playoff time. Elaborate more on "fine" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheUsualSuspect 207 Posted October 23, 2013 Didn't Giants go 9-7 as a WC and win a Super Bowl a few years back? Regular Season record means nothing, as long as you make the playoffs. It's just like FF, once the playoffs begin... Anyone can win it all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cruzer 1,992 Posted October 23, 2013 The Eagles lost to the exact same three teams Dallas did. Dallas couldn't muster any offense for nearly 3 full quarters against a pathetic Eagles defense. Fact of the matter is the entire NFC East doesn't stand a chance against the more physical teams in conference. Seattle/SF/NO will eat any of these teams alive come playoff time. I tend to agree with you. And one of the main reasons is bcoz we do not have a running game. Bcoz of that we aren't able to control the clock and keep our already depleted defense off of the field. We have back up of back ups playing on the line and those guys often barely get to the bench by the time they have to helmet back up and head back on it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GhostofMeanMachine99 1 Posted October 23, 2013 Division race. It's only a "race" because the division is so bad. The Eagles 3 wins have come against teams with a combined record of 3-16. Honestly I'd rather they don't try to make the playoffs. The QB of the future is not on the roster and that is the most important thing in my opinion. If they win the division, they fall all the way in to the 20's in the draft. I'd rather they bottom out and hopefully get a top 10 pick. I don't see the Eagle QB of the future coming out of next year's draft. I believe their QB is playing for another team, one that will be out there via FA next year. The reason why I say this? There are teams that will draft in front of them who will be looking for QBs in the draft. A run on QBs should leave talented defenders still on the board. I don't know who that FA QB will be, but I think he'll be there. Additionally, I think they should let Maclin walk and acquire a FA WR to play opposite Jackson. Someone like Hakeem Nicks would be a really good fit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Little Rusty 17 Posted October 23, 2013 Conversely, they've yet to beat a team with a winning record and their wins are against teams with a combined record of 9-18. Let's check back in in 5 weeks. I could see them losing 3 of their next 4, on the road vs Lions, Saints and Giants. of course you could Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Little Rusty 17 Posted October 23, 2013 Cowboys blowing winnable games with sloppy play and mistakes? No way. yes....they usually beat themselves. * butthurt Iggle fans Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stewburtx8 67 Posted October 24, 2013 I don't see the Eagle QB of the future coming out of next year's draft. I believe their QB is playing for another team, one that will be out there via FA next year. The reason why I say this? There are teams that will draft in front of them who will be looking for QBs in the draft. A run on QBs should leave talented defenders still on the board. I don't know who that FA QB will be, but I think he'll be there. Additionally, I think they should let Maclin walk and acquire a FA WR to play opposite Jackson. Someone like Hakeem Nicks would be a really good fit. Hoping to find a "franchise" QB in free agency seems like a HUGE longshot to me. Occasionally it happens when teams end up drafting a successor to their starter (Brees when SD had Rivers, Manning when the Colts had Luck, even Favre when the Packers had Rodgers), but this situation doesn't happen very often. On top of that, I really think Chip Kelly's offense runs much smoother with a certain type of QB. Lesean McCoy is a much bigger threat when Vick is in the game than Foles is. The read option becomes pretty pointless when the QB isn't really an option. So who is the free agent QB that may be available? I just don't see anyone out there. Jay Cutler? After that you got Vick, Freeman, and Henne. I just don't see it. I don't want any more "stop gap" QB's. You are correct that MANY of the bad NFL teams need a franchise QB. If the Eagles finish with 7 or 8 wins, it will push them out of the top 10-15 picks in the draft. It's why part of me wouldn't mind seeing them lose more going forward this season. But because the division is so bad, that is unlikely to happen. They will continue to hang around the division "race." I'd be surprised if the Eagles don't win 6-8 games by default. So I guess it just depends if they have a guy they REALLY want in the NFL draft next year. The QB position is pretty deep. If Mariotta is the guy they HAVE to have, go get him. Make a move like the Falcons did for Julio Jones. Obviously they can continue to draft on defense and try to improve that side of the ball. But ultimately, I have a hard time seeing any team contend for a Super Bowl in THIS current NFL without a franchise QB. They have to find that guy. Every year they don't, is likely another year they don't contend. In a few years, Chip Kelly's contract will be up, and then what direction do they go? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GhostofMeanMachine99 1 Posted October 25, 2013 I don't believe they take a QB in the draft simply for taking a QB. Contrary to what many say, this offense doesn't necessarily need a franchise QB to run it. I honestly believe every team needs to make the necessary moves to go up and get their player. The conversation would be much, much different had they done that with Russell Wilson. Instead they thought they could wait for him. Turned out to be a very big miscalculation on their part. Point being is that their future QBs indentity has yet to reveal itself. The Vikings could give up on Ponder and/or Freeman. And I don't rule out Matt Barkley, whom I feel could be the right guy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
snatchit 108 Posted October 25, 2013 don't expect him to be running very much and understand he could tweak it again in the 1st quarter.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JT 137 Posted October 25, 2013 I don't believe they take a QB in the draft simply for taking a QB. Contrary to what many say, this offense doesn't necessarily need a franchise QB to run it. I honestly believe every team needs to make the necessary moves to go up and get their player. The conversation would be much, much different had they done that with Russell Wilson. Instead they thought they could wait for him. Turned out to be a very big miscalculation on their part. Point being is that their future QBs indentity has yet to reveal itself. The Vikings could give up on Ponder and/or Freeman. And I don't rule out Matt Barkley, whom I feel could be the right guy. I don't know if a franchise QB is a necessity (though if you're talking long term success, doesn't the guy running it become a franchise guy by default?). But you do have to have a mobile QB. Otherwise, it negates the entire premise of the offense: that defenders have to remain accountable for the QB. Without that threat it becomes what we saw last week: marginal success between the 30's, no chance in the red zone, and you allow defenses to take your best player, McCoy, out of the equation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JT 137 Posted November 11, 2013 Conversely, they've yet to beat a team with a winning record and their wins are against teams with a combined record of 9-18. Let's check back in in 5 weeks. I could see them losing 3 of their next 4, on the road vs Lions, Saints and Giants. Bump for Rusty and his cowgirls. Two down. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
