Fixing Foles

Posted: October 31st, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Philadelphia Eagles | 135 Comments »

Nick Foles will be the starting QB on Sunday in Oakland. That’s good news to me.

Nick looked so good vs Tampa. And so bad vs Dallas. Will the real Nick Foles please stand up…

He needs to show that he can bounce back from a really awful game. This game won’t offer definitive proof of anything, but Sunday’s game will give us a big hint about Foles future. A good showing will give us hope that the Dallas performance was a weird anomaly. A mediocre showing will leave us arguing what to make of him. A bad showing will push people into writing Foles starting QB obituary.

I’m hoping Foles does well. This isn’t because I’m his cheerleader. I just want the Eagles to have a young viable QB option on the roster. It would be nice to have options when May rolls around. If the right guy is available, go get him. If not, Foles could be a legitimate alternative.

Matt Barkley showed some potential, but he’s still a rookie and has a lot of learning left to do. With him and Foles both being young QBs, you’d rather play the one with more experience. He gives you a better chance to win. He also is more likely to give you an indication of whether he can be “the guy” in the future.

You can bet that Chip Kelly, Pat Shurmur and Bill Lazor went over the Dallas tape thoroughly with Foles. There were open receivers all over the field. The plays were there to be had. Foles just didn’t get the job done. If Foles can learn from his disaster and build on it, that will be a good sign. Some players get overwhelmed by a bad game and struggle to get back on track.

There is nothing in Foles past to show that he’s not mentally tough. He took a beating at Arizona, but kept playing and putting up good numbers. He never got down. He never griped about the coaches. Foles just kept grinding, even when things got pretty bad. The team lost 8 of 9 games at one point. The offense was Top 20 in the nation. The defense was in the bottom 10. Arizona couldn’t win shootouts. Their defense was awful. Foles just kept chugging along, putting up yards and points.

The NFL is a different story. It is easy to struggle at this level. It is hard to be successful. Foles has a major challenge ahead of him.

There is also the question of durability. Foles missed the season finale last year with a hand injury. He then started 2 games this year before getting knocked out. If nothing else, Foles needs to show that he can stay on the field. Another injury would give you a whole other set of questions to deal with.

It would be great for Foles to play well from here on out. That would give you the feeling that he could be the starter in the future. I can also live with Foles failing and showing that he’s simply not good enough to start. The only bad outcome for me will be if 9 weeks from now we still don’t have a good feel for Foles future.

* * * * *

I hope everyone had a happy Halloween.

Check out these photos of the Titans cheerleaders in their costumes and you’ll have a happy Halloween.

Group 1

Group 2

I would love the Eagles cheerleaders to embrace this tradition.

As for the female readers…does it get better than this?


135 Comments on “Fixing Foles”

  1. 1 the guy said at 11:56 PM on October 31st, 2013:

    I genuinely do not understand the vitriol aimed at Foles (or Barkley).

    I can understand why someone wouldn’t have faith in them, but they’re both on the roster. They’re both signed for years. Even if you don’t think they will ever be a franchise QB for the Eagles, they still potentially have value. They can help the team, even if they don’t stick around.

    Reading some comments, it feels like there are fans are rooting for them (or Vick) to fail. I think they’ve missed the point.

  2. 2 TommyLawlor said at 12:17 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Yeah, I don’t get all that. I’m an Eagles fan. I just want a good QB. I don’t care who he is. Heck, I even once cheered for Bubby Brister. Those were dark days, my friend.

  3. 3 JJ_Cake said at 1:04 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I’m glad you brought up Nick’s past at Arizona. He was the most talented guy on that roster and was able to win some tough games even with a crappy Oline. The potential problem is like everyone says, he got beat up a lot. He had a concussion in college that took him out of a game, so now he’s had two major concussions… that could be a problem going forward (ref Kevin Kolb).

    I think Nick has the tools to be on par with Alex Smith. Smith had a lot of the same knocks on him as well, “weak arm”, “not mobile”, “held the ball too long” etc… I think Alex is showing that you can win in the NFL with a QB like him, or a Trent Dilfer for that matter. I hope Nick can prove that he can be that guy for us so we can focus on making the team better at other positions.

    Bubby Brister was AWESOME my friend. God I was so pissed at the lack of heart and enthusiasm from the pukes he Replaced (sadly, an older didn’t give a sht Randal Cuningham was the guy he replaced).

    It was great to see a guy who loved playing football, and was pepped up to keep his team positive when he played.

    Dark Days were (in my opinion) the Rich Kotite Days, or when the QB situation was so bad and we had a guy named Kemps and some other guys I can’t even remember throwing.

    Give me a guy with fire and heart like a Jeff Garcia or Bubby Brister any day over goofballs, jackasses, or stiffs.

  4. 4 Sean Scheinfeld said at 9:29 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Alex Smith is very mobile. He ran Urban Meyer’s offense at Utah and ran all over the field. Plus, even if Nick Foles does turn out to be on Alex Smith’s level, he’s not a franchise quarterback, just like Smith isn’t one. The two guys you’ve referenced won only because of historically great defenses, they are just not particularly good at throwing footballs

  5. 5 LeQuan Glover said at 10:11 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    The term “Franchise QB” is such a misnomer and a lie. And even the great ones will tell you that. The O-Line has to play well, you need talented WR’s/TE’S/RB’s. The core truth of it, is that we’re not all that good, QB or no QB. Why are we acting as though Foles didn’t play that Giants game? He did and he did very well in it. And whether Tampa played Zone or not, those players were talented defensively, so to execute against them showed you signs. I agree with Tommy on that we need to evaluate our young players. That’s why Issac was traded. You’re a 3-5 football team, in no blame due to Chip but because we’re a bad team. Foles needs to get starts from hereon end and we need to watch him perform. A couple of games is a POOR way to evaluate a prospect of ANY position. Proof: Kolb.

  6. 6 Sean Scheinfeld said at 11:29 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    It’s just a term to describe a highly effective starter a team can build around for several years. The terminology itself isn’t all that important. The real question is how likely it is that, with a limited physical skillset, Nick Foles is going to elevate his play to a level he has never come close to touching before, outside of two games against the same team

  7. 7 fran35 said at 11:47 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    See, that is where I disagree with you. I think that last year he showed some very strong signs of having special qualities. Was it his mobility or arm strength? No. He obviously is not very mobile and his arm strength is rated as “adequate”. It was his pocket presence and the composure. Those traits can be special. That kid played for one of the most dysfunctional and broken teams in recent memory. The O Line was decimated. Shady was out. DJax was out. Yet he still found ways to move the ball and outperform Vick. In a very small sample size of 8 starts, Foles played 3 outstanding games with passer rating over 95.0. He played 3 decent games with ratings over 85.0 and then 2 absolute stinkers. So he has performed well in 6/8 games. Not bad for a second year player where 6 of the games were with a rookie and lame duck coach. For the record, in his limited paying time the past two years, the stat line is : 60% completion rating, 12 TDs, 5 Ints for 85.0 rating. In my world, that is pretty damn good-especially on a bad team and a rookie starter.

  8. 8 Sean Scheinfeld said at 1:16 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Well, clearly the Eagles and Chip Kelly don’t think as highly of him as you do, since they brought back their starter for the last three years, even though they knew all his faults and advanced age, then drafted another, similar QB. His performance under Andy Reid is inconsequential. Foles could probably be an adequate starter for some teams with traditional offenses, but he’d have to be an elite passer to make up for the fact that defenses totally ignore him as a runner and become a good long term answer for Chip Kelly.

  9. 9 fran35 said at 1:58 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Clearly they thought highy enough of him to turn down a 2nd and 5th round draft pick offer from Chiefs. A 2nd rounder and they turned it down? That is not a pick you turn down unless you think the guy has a chance to be good.

  10. 10 theycallmerob said at 10:28 AM on November 2nd, 2013:

    tough to look at that argument in a vacuum….would have left Vick as the only QB on the roster going into the draft (or was Trent still there?) Either way, that’s asking for trouble; not sure how many fans would be clamoring for Edwards or D. Dixon after the inevitable injury.

  11. 11 Bob Brewer said at 7:44 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    The question you are raising goes to a larger societal trend in debating topics. I’ll keep it in the sports realm but it can apply in all phases. People debating one side of the issue will escalate their position by making absurd statements. The opponents of the issue will then escalate their side and make their own absurd statements. ESPN’s First Take is the epitome of this debating style (LeBron, Tebow, whatever else.)

    In the Nick Foles debate, we have heard from many folks about how he is the guy. Look at him in preseason! Look at how he throws guys open! It just didn’t completely ring true. But then the other side sees this as nuts and makes crazy statements. I heard one person (I forget where) say he has fewer NFL skills than Tebow. That’s nuts too.

    So to conclude I don’t know if it’s vitriol toward Foles, but it’s an escalation of statements in an effort to be right.

  12. 12 eagleyankfan said at 8:25 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    “I genuinely do not understand the vitriol aimed at Foles (or Barkley).” Unless you throw for 300 yards and 3 td’s every game, a certain group of fans here think you’re not the answer. Teams all over the NFL give their young QB’s a couple of years to develop and to get judged. Foles is(unfairly) judged by every throw. You can read the comments above — people are criticizing his td throws.(give me a break). What do you think will happen IF the Eagles draft a QB in the first round? He’s not going 16-0 next year. He’s going to play week1 one, fail and we’ll all hear how he’s not the qb of the future.

  13. 13 GEAGLE said at 11:07 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    EXACTLY!! I’m really starting to believe that we are a terrible fanbase, and that we hurt our team at home…I mean, it’s sucks the life out of me to when Vick comes back at the giants! and STINKS…but come on, the boo birds can’t come out in the middle of the first quarter of a close game..we have lost the right to even complain about losing at home…it’s not like we are providing a Seatle rowdy home environment and our players are sucking it up…like everyone, I’m dejected from these recent years too, but holding the past against guys that are fighting for us now, makes no damn sense and probably isn’t helping anyone…it ain’t always going to be pretty on Sunday…you are going to have to gut out ugly 20-17 games at times even if you go out and get the great Brady….had we taken Ryan Tannehill! a guy who hhe ows promise as a “franchise” guy, and we placed him in FOles exact shoes, I don’t know that Ryan would have looked any better…you reap twhat you so…we haven’t invested in Growing FOles, so why the hell would you expect a flawless stud in his 10 game on a team that’s not that good?…just look at Peyton! he was having a historic video game year, his OT goes out, the pressure starts gettng in his is face and you start seeing the INT, and you don’t see the same video game offense you saw all year…even the greatest QBs need 10 guys around them that are doing their job..1 chink in here armor and it gets exposed in he the NFL..

    first don’t care if you get Marriotta, teddy! the FSU kid next year,if you treat him the way we treated Nick FOles, you will be waking a while to find out if he hi is the answer….Marriotta is going to struggle and have some very bad games next year! and then what? Are the boooo birds just gonna rain down on a shy 1st round kid in his 7th start? I don’t even want the names job, hoying mentioned…they mean NOTHINIG. It SUCKS!! I want to be a great team this year too, but it doesn’t work like that. Andy RUINED us and set us behind the 8ball…nothing to do but be patient, and support the guys as they build and dig themselves out of the he hole Andy created…it was never going to happen over night…..

    FOles has a skill set that has succeeded in this league before. He has more tools than a young chad Pennington who grew to be a pretty nice QB….but the position is SOOO mental that it’s impossible to know how good he becomes or if he can be the answer at this point…nothing to do but shut up, support the kid thru the ups and downs that we are about to go thru, and hope that with experience and seasoning he develops into a guy that saves us from having to mortgage our future going out and getting a 3rd young QB. In as many years, which would stunt the growth of this team considerably…putting Marriotta on a crappy. Team that didn’t have the assets to improve, I can assure you won’t satisfy the impatient dopes who don’t under stand that this is real life and not a video game…unless you get a double digit sack OLB, a safety who is the most talented player in your secondary, maybe another Dlinemen, possibly a OG, and DEFINITELY pass catching weapons then I PROMISE that Marriotta isn’t going to feed the desire for instant gratification….Play FOles the rest of these year, build the team in the draft, give FOles a real offseason as the man, give him half of next season to show what he can do..Midway point of next season you re-evaluate…if he has developed enough you stay with him, if not you take a look at Barkley the final 8 games…and if neither GROW into the ANSWER, then you will have a good roster in place that’s just missing a QB, so you would be in position to give away your entire draft making sure you get the FSU kid

  14. 14 Jerry Pomroy said at 12:02 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    I agree with your points & even your team building strategy. But your punctuation sucks…lol.

    No but seriously, all I want right now is a level of consistency from Foles. He’ll have his ups & downs, but his last game dropped him off the charts & he needs to show that he can do more than bounce back with one good game, but rather build some consistency. I’ll take a string of games w/ 60%comp, 250yds & 2TDs as an average. That’s something you can build around knowing he’s young. To quote Brett Michaels, “just give me something to believe in”. Prove to me that you’re capable of taking that horrific performance & putting it in your review mirror because I want you to succeed. But it’s up to you to do so.

  15. 15 GEAGLE said at 1:47 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Agreed on all counts, even the punctuation 🙂
    It’s important that he flashes some ability this week because of how little people think in him..I believe he is up to the challenge this week, but we shall see,,,60% 250 and 2tds for me, would be enough to hand him the reigns next season, so that we can go get a impact pass rusher or a impact pass catcher in the draft..
    60% 250yards and 2td average for me is enough to dedicate the offseason to building a team around the QB that can be successful…and how FOles does in his 3rd year, is what should dictate his future in my eyes,.by that time we should have a good enough roster in place to where if he hasn’t proven to be the answer, we can trade away our draft to go get a QB

  16. 16 BreakinAnklez said at 4:18 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    What impact pass catcher is there? Cooks is small. Evans is slow. Matthews of Vandy and Richardson of Colorado both have injury concerns. LSU has a talented pair, but I want a receiver over 6’0.

    I don’t know enough about the PSU receiver, or that team in general. Can he take over a game?

  17. 17 GEAGLE said at 9:49 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Yeah I love Allen Robinson, but I also happen to think highly of “slow” Evans so take it for what it’s worth…Sammy Watkins, Marquis Lee and Evans will be the first rounders…

    Right now Allen Robinson is early 3rd, but I could see him moving up to mid 2nd,,,the big 6’5 220lb kid from Rutgers gets mixed reviews, but I haven’t watched him..
    I wouldn’t be opposed to the two TEs: Unc’s Ebron and Washngton Austin Seferian Jenkins.
    Then again, I think it’s foolish to not take advantage of a special OLB class, and grab our double digit sack master in round 1, so That would eliminate Lee,Evans.Watkins,Ebron and possibly Jenkins…

  18. 18 Sean Scheinfeld said at 11:58 PM on October 31st, 2013:

    The problem for Nick Foles is that, for him to be “the guy,” he has to compensate for his utter lack of mobility outside of the pocket, on which Chip’s offense really does depend in an important capacity. He would have to be a Matt Ryan-level pocket passer for him to become the franchise quarterback in light of his lead feet. At this point I think it’s pretty safe to say he’s not that good of a passer.

  19. 19 TommyLawlor said at 12:18 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I agree that he’s got an uphill battle, but I’m hoping he can somehow be the exception who makes it.

  20. 20 Sean Scheinfeld said at 12:49 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I’m with you. Hope is all we really have as Eagles fans. If we stop hoping tears are sure to follow (or at least come earlier and gushing out more than normal)

  21. 21 eagleyankfan said at 8:15 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Just wandering if you think Eli Manning has that mobility outside of the pocket? (that mobility you speak of is highly overrated)

  22. 22 Sean Scheinfeld said at 9:45 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    First of all, Eli Manning himself is highly overrated and having an especially bad season this year. More pertinently, though, he plays in a traditional, drop-back passing offense. In Chip’s shotgun spread with a healthy dose of read-option, functional mobility at the least is a prerequisite. Even Aaron Rodgers or Andrew Luck have the necessary mobility. A guy like Bryce Petty, who’s not thought of as a runner, has it. They don’t need a burner, but they do need someone who can take the easy 15 yard gains made available to them by the offense. In this offense, mobility is not overrated by anyone, except those who think Chip is running QB power on every play and should be doing it with Tebow. There’s a reason the offense (especially the running game) was so much more productive with healthy Vick than with Foles/Barkley/Injured Vick/Barkley again.

  23. 23 Jerry Goldstein said at 12:26 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Well hopefully Chip, the genius, can figure out how to create a scheme that doesn’t involve having the QB run when the QBs he has run 5.0 40s. The read-option fad, like many have predicted, is being figured out fast. For every Russell Wilson, there is an RG3. The successful dual threat QBs are the ones riding the back of a good or great defense. Chip would be wise to be less rigid in his scheme designs.

  24. 24 Sean Scheinfeld said at 1:02 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    What is your point here? You think the read-option has been figured out because RG3 has struggled with his accuracy retuning from a serious knee injury he clearly rushed back from? QBs have more success with great defenses. We can all agree on that. Chip hasn’t been rigid; how many designed runs has he called for Foles or Barkley? The point of his offense isn’t to have the QB run a lot, but without even the threat of it, the rest of the offense suffers by design. This offense was the reason he was hired, and he shouldn’t scrap the entire thing so Foles, almost assuredly a very good career backup, can have a little more success in a season where wins are not the sole priority for the team, like they may have been in years past.

  25. 25 Jerry Goldstein said at 4:06 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    “The point of his offense isn’t to have the QB run a lot, but without
    even the threat of it, the rest of the offense suffers by design.”

    And thus, it is rigid because it relies heavily on the threat of a QB run. Bad scheming when 2 out 3 of your QBs (and 100% of the healthy ones) are not running threats.

    When Kelly first came here he said he should be fired if he runs 20 read-option plays with Nick Foles at QB. So far, he is either unwilling or unable to change the scheme to suit the strengths of a pocket passer. That’s rigid.

    To your other point, the only read-option QB having about equal success as last year is Russell Wilson and he might just be awesome. Kaep has had struggles but might be turning a corner (playing against the Jags will do that), RGKnee we don’t have to talk about. Cam is dual threat but how much read-option do they run? Having Kelly come here with his college scheme and over reliance on a dual threat QB at a time when dual threat QBs are mostly struggling and extremely hard to find and keep healthy is worrisome. Especially considering Kelly lead us all to believe that he isn’t a scheme coach and he can make the offense work by playing to the strengths of the QB running it.

  26. 26 BreakinAnklez said at 4:23 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    It’s more than that. The knee doesn’t help, but anyone who thought the Skins would repeat was kidding themselves. Morris wasn’t gonna put up 1600+ nor were the Skins going to only commit single digit turnovers. RG3 had a phenomenal year, but a repeat performance was unlikely. Some of the INTs this year were dropped last year. The team isn’t THAT talented.

  27. 27 Mitchell said at 12:42 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    A bit off topic but has there been Helmet to Helmet shows that I’m missing?

  28. 28 Ryguy55 said at 12:51 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I’m convinced Foles isn’t the answer. Just doesn’t have the physical tools. Even his so called “good” plays aren’t that great. The TD pass to Cooper in the Tampa game was a duck that Coop had to go get, and Djax was under thrown as well. I’m just not seeing it. Real curious to see who Chip selects next year though.

  29. 29 ACViking said at 12:52 AM on November 1st, 2013:


    Hear, hear.

  30. 30 Weapon Y said at 12:59 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Foles can win me over again, but it will be much harder this time around. He needs to be lights out (not perfect, but very damn good). He needs to look like a franchise quarterback by the end of this season, or I just can’t trust him. Why would I pass up the opportunity to take a franchise quarterback just to let a mediocre 3rd year player get another chance? I will say that I way have WAY more trust in Foles than I do Barkley. At least Foles produced a decent number of scoring drives and had moments where he looked legit both as a rookie and this year. With Barkley, you have to make way more concessions to justify his mediocrity. You can’t wait on guys and mortgage your team on them if you haven’t seen evidence of their ability to succeed. Foles has shown that ability, but he’s also shown abysmal play in one game. Barkley hasn’t shown it at all. For now, I have to say I don’t trust either of them, but Foles still could change my mind.

  31. 31 Jerry Goldstein said at 12:28 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    How high do you think we’ll be drafting that you think we will even be able to draft one of the top 3 or 4 QB prospects?

  32. 32 CrackSammich said at 1:23 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Granted, the guy could protect himself better, but I don’t see how anyone can claim a concussion makes a person not “durable”. A head injury is a head injury, in the same way that a sideways hit on somebody’s knee is going to wreck no matter how durable they are.

  33. 33 shah8 said at 1:44 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Concerned even more about the game with Desean Jackson seemingly limited, which I just found out…

  34. 34 shah8 said at 3:13 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Ok, a quick bit anal on Oakland. I have not watched them for any extended amount of time, so I’m relying on a quick view of the box scores.

    First off, these guys kill bad OLs in terms of sacks, it looks like. They don’t beat good ones, but all year, they’ve actually managed to consistently beat undertalented OLs with some consistency.

    Second, I get the feeling that the Raiders started off the year being conservative and “please don’t hurt my low talented players! You’d like them, HONEST!” playcalling. As the season has gone on, especially with the San Diego game and afterwards, I seem to see more frustrated passing offenses with lower than usual passing yardage. They do seem to do a pretty decent job on the rushing offense. Only Indy has really torched them on yardage in the first game of the year, and Jamaal Charles got a couple of TDs on them.

    So I think this is one of those scrappy defenses that probably focuses on stopping the run first, 2k Ravens style, in order to force third and long passing situations. They must give up a lot of first downs since the defense isn’t rated high in DVOA.

  35. 35 GermanEagle said at 5:59 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Oakland’s D is legit. Just watch the game against the Steelers. I was fairly impressed with their front 7. They have athletic LBs who tackle well, while their secondary is underrated.
    It wouldn’t surprise me if Foles and the offense struggles to score more than 13 points.

  36. 36 Neil said at 12:23 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    The Steelers are terrible, especially at OL. Like 2 guys off the street terrible plus the Cardinals LT from last year.

  37. 37 GermanEagle said at 6:08 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I don’t want to be the party pooper, but I am afraid that the game against the Raiders will be ugly. Maybe not that ugly when AR called 149 pass plays with winds up to 100mph in Oakland a few years back, but everything speaks against the Eagles this week:
    – offense with unstable QB situation is a mess
    – east coat team travelling to play a west coast team
    – oakland’s coming off an impressive win against the steelers
    – Nick Foles coming off an Halloween scary like performance against the Cowboys
    – Desean Jackson banged up

    Oakland 17, Eagles 13.

  38. 38 eagleyankfan said at 8:13 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I think you have that reversed. East teams travel well west. It’s the west teams traveling East. I think Oaklands D is pretty solid. Eagles are in for a tough game.

  39. 39 GermanEagle said at 8:26 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    What’s the AFC West record against the NFC East record this year? Must be something like 12-1…

  40. 40 eagleyankfan said at 8:34 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    LOL. Really? You’re going by this year alone when the AFC is clearly dominant? History my friend…

  41. 41 GermanEagle said at 9:59 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Current trend trumps history, my friend…

  42. 42 Anders said at 10:06 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Small sample size does not however trumps history.

  43. 43 eagleyankfan said at 10:12 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Thanks Anders…commons sense trumps all…

  44. 44 GermanEagle said at 10:51 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I’m not sure about that…

  45. 45 eagleyankfan said at 10:53 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    You’re right … common sense AND knowledge..

  46. 46 GermanEagle said at 11:03 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    THAT. Sounds. Better.

  47. 47 Bob Brewer said at 10:27 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I’d argue this year’s NFC-E sample size is not small.

  48. 48 GermanEagle said at 10:51 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Thank you, sir.

  49. 49 GermanEagle said at 10:50 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I vehemently disagree.
    Or would anyone like to play this year’s Chiefs based upon their recent history of sucking?

  50. 50 Anders said at 11:52 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    That is not what the usually west teams going to East is about.

    Normally west teams lose more games when they go east than they do when they play away team teams on the west. Having nothing to do with individual level of the team

  51. 51 Andy124 said at 10:55 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    The small sample record is due to the current superiority of the AFC west. The long term trend of western teams struggling when traveling east averages out short term talent descrepancies to reveal a general disadvantage in those situations which, by reputation, does not exist when traveling in the other direction presumably due to the direction of the time change.

    I really have no idea if the actual numbers back this up, but that’s the theory and why the short term trend does not dispell it.

  52. 52 TheRogerPodacter said at 9:31 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    i dont think the AFC West has played the NFC East 13 times this season…

  53. 53 GermanEagle said at 10:49 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    It was just a wild guess as I was too lazy to look it up.

  54. 54 Jerry Goldstein said at 12:33 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Otherwise known as: talking out of your ass.

  55. 55 GermanEagle said at 12:36 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Dude, look it up then.

  56. 56 Tom33 said at 1:26 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    9-1. Den 4-0, KC 3-0, SD 2-0, Oak 0-1.

    But you can’t assume Oakland will win based on the performance of the others.

    I actually am predicting a win this week since the game is not at The Linc.

  57. 57 GermanEagle said at 2:33 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Thank you. Guess my wild guess wasn’t that far off then.

    I am predicting a Raiders win who beat the Chargers who beat the Eagles. Lol

  58. 58 Jerry Goldstein said at 4:10 PM on November 1st, 2013:


  59. 59 Bob Brewer said at 10:09 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Here is what gives me belief in an Eagles’ victory. To me, there is no way the Eagles should be road favorites against Oakland. Kapadia just tweeted 80% of the money is on Oakland.

    When a line seems too good to be true and the betting public is overwhelmingly on that side, it probably is too good to be true.

    Ergo, Eagles win by 3 or more.

    Of course, I’m still in the I want the Eagles to tank mode.

  60. 60 Weapon Y said at 10:13 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    The only optimism I’ll provide is that Oakland’s win over the Steelers wasn’t that impressive. The Steelers are REALLY bad. This isn’t the Super Bowl 40 or 43 Steelers team, or the Steel Curtain dynasty we’re used to. Their offense makes ours look like the Montana and Rice 49ers. Pryor isn’t that good of a passer. Stack the box to contain against the run and we might actually have a chance.

  61. 61 GermanEagle said at 10:52 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I agree that this year’s version of the Steelers is not overly impressive. However Oakland’s D will give our struggling offense fits I am afraid.

  62. 62 P_P_K said at 6:37 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    “As for the female readers…does it get better than this?”
    Donnie Jones? I don’t get it.

  63. 63 eagleyankfan said at 8:11 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    um — men got the treat — Donnie Jones was the trick…

  64. 64 jshort said at 8:29 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Group 1 cop, 2 cat woman, showed wife Tommy’s females treat. Said ” What, that’s it, that’s what he put up for women? What an asshole.”

  65. 65 planetx1971 said at 8:32 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Anybody, where does Oaklands run D currently rank? I’d sure love to see Shady get back to ankle devastation nation. Sure would put us a long way towards being back on track. As well as take alot of pressure off #9 I would think anyway. Time to cut up some dimes Lesean!!

  66. 66 Corry said at 8:47 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    #6. Just a shade under 90 yards per game given up.

  67. 67 eagleyankfan said at 8:33 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    OK T-Law — when I said you’re anti-Foles — you asked me — what were your comments to show you’re anti-Foles. Well, you’re whole article above shows it.

    “I’m hoping Foles does well. This isn’t because I’m his cheerleader. I just want the Eagles to have a young viable QB option on the roster. It would be nice to have options when May rolls around. If the right guy is available, go get him. If not, Foles could be a legitimate alternative.”
    You’re not hoping he’s successful. You’re hoping for a “viable QB option” on the roster? Viable option? Really? So you want Foles to do well so the Eagles have options next year? But you don’t want Foles to excel to prove he can be a successful qb?
    I don’t know if Foles has the tools to be a “winner”. However, I want Foles to do well so we know there are no needs for “options” in the spring. I don’t want to go threw this all over again with who the QB will be. I want it to either be Foles or not Foles.

  68. 68 Andy124 said at 9:01 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    T-Law may not have a ton of confidence in Foles, but that doesn’t make him anti-Foles. Anti-Foles are the people who insist the book is written on him already, no need for further evaluation, no chance for hope. They “know” his ceiling. He has been measured, he has been weighed and he has been found, wanting. That is anti-Foles.

    Tommy clearly wants Foles to do well. Clearly thinks it’s possible. That is far from anti-Foles.

    And just because he, like the rest of us, realizes that Kinne is the future of not just the Eagles, but the entire NFL, doesn’t speak ill of Foles either.

  69. 69 eagleyankfan said at 9:02 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    True Andy — very true. I shouldn’t use with words “anti” there…good point…

  70. 70 GermanEagle said at 10:00 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I don’t know if it was you the other day, but your reading comprehension is not one of your strengths either..

  71. 71 eagleyankfan said at 10:11 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I have no idea what you’re talking about or referring to…

  72. 72 GermanEagle said at 10:48 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    See Tony’s reply above.

  73. 73 BreakinAnklez said at 10:34 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    No one likes the internet grammar police. This does nothing to add to the discussion. If you insist on it, atleast try and respond to the original comment so there is some value add.

    Ok…stepping off my soap box.

    I don’t think Tommy is anti-Foles and he also states he HOPES Foles is successful. But he is being cautious and I don’t blame him. I would think everyone would be pleased if Foles turns into the next Joe Montana…only time will tell. I hope he starts the rest of the year so we know if he is a solid back-up or a legit starter.

  74. 74 Tony said at 10:43 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    He’s not talking about grammar. He’s talking about the parent poster not reading and understanding the point the author was trying to make. Also, because the poster didn’t hear the language he wanted to hear regarding Foles (unicorn shitting rainbows), he assumes that Tommy is down on Foles, which is wrong.

    I agree with GermanEagle.

  75. 75 GermanEagle said at 10:48 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Your reading comprehension is one of your strengths, my friend. 😉

  76. 76 eagleyankfan said at 10:48 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Tony – You mis-understood my point(or I wasn’t clear :). I’m no writer :)). I don’t think T-Law is down on Foles. I think T-Law wants Foles to do well. My point is T-Law doesn’t think Foles can be a franchise QB. I labeled that as “anti” Foles – which I shouldn’t do.

  77. 77 Tony said at 11:25 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    No problem, I think people get a little hypersensitive regarding any QB quagmire. Any perception of pro-Vick or pro-Foles will be met with venom by the other group. Tommy is being cautiously optimistic on Foles, which is a lot more positive than most in Philly.

  78. 78 eagleyankfan said at 11:02 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    well stated Breakin….I didn’t mean it as an attack..but apparently I pee’d in someones cereal…

  79. 79 fran35 said at 10:15 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I don’t think Tommy is Anti-Foles. I think he is more agnostic when it comes to Foles. I really think Howie and Kelly made a collosal mistake in bringing back Vick. Maybe they really thought that this team would be competitive? I dunno. It’s not that Vick is horrible, it’s just that he barely beat out a 2nd year guy who we drafted in the third round and actually looked serviceable last year-despite the walls crumbling around him. The true issue is this: we all know what we have in Vick. He is a known commodity and I think everyone agrees that he is not our solution. The problem is, we do not know what we truly have in Foles or Barkley. Anyone who thinks they have a clear idea is just wrong and pushing some type of agenda.
    A side question: Who has a stronger arm, Matt Barkley or Charles Barkley?

  80. 80 eagleyankfan said at 10:18 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    “The problem is, we do not know what we truly have in Foles or Barkley.” — that’s my point. Then I take one step further. I hope Foles is our franchise QB. Why? So we can stop the QB talk and not have to worry about next spring and the Eagles can pay attention to other weak links on the team.

  81. 81 fran35 said at 11:26 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I agree with you. All of what you say. Look, at the end of the day, if Foles were a first round draft pick and had only started 8 games, Tommy(and others) would be saying “Give Foles time, he has started 8 games and looked decent to pretty good in 6 of them.” However, being that Foles is only a third rounder, he is not given as much latitude. He is a young, inconsistent player that flashes brilliance at times. Sounds like…..Mychal Kendricks. But no one is talking about running him outta town. They have faith that he will put it all together and are giving him time to prove himself. This is what Foles, Barkley, or any other young guy needs. And the team should not allowing Vick to use this time to hold us hostage with his injuries and subpar play. I would rather see the young guys fail so we know what we have got for the future..

  82. 82 Andy124 said at 8:50 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    One thing I said going in to what we all thought was going to be a shootout against Dallas is that I thought LeSean woud run the ball well and Chip would stick with it and that would help Foles stay settled throughout the game. That obviously didn’t happen.

    I’m hoping LeSean can help make Foles’ job a little easier this time around.

  83. 83 Corry said at 9:19 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    It’s going to be tough I think. Between Shady hurting himself by dancing too much (or so say a lot of the All-22s I’ve seen) and the Raiders actually being decent at run defense, it could be a long day for #25. Opposing defense also do not respect our passing game at all, so Oakland will likely defend the run first. Foles is going to need to be good this game to take advantage of the holes in the pass defense.

  84. 84 Andy124 said at 9:50 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I’m optimistic that Shady will get back to making the right choices about when to dance and when to take what’s there. When things are clicking I think this team can run on any defense.

    Foles obviously has to play better than he did against Dallas to keep the defense honest as well. It goes hand in hand. We all know that. But as I pointed out to Nah, I have a little more confidence in Shady than in Foles.

  85. 85 Nah__Roots said at 9:22 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I was actually kinda hoping Foles would make LeSean’s job easier this time around.

  86. 86 Andy124 said at 9:26 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    That’d be nice too. But Shady is a proven top-5 back in this league. Foles is all questions and hope. Who would you think needs the help more?

  87. 87 Jerry Pomroy said at 10:11 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I personally am a “show me” type. You want to be the starting QB for this franchise?…Show me you’re worthy. I don’t care who it is, just show you’re worthy. There is no question that Foles was teetering me onto his side of the fence with his performances against the NYG & TB, but that DAL game really had me basically standing on the other side now saying, “you want this, prove it”. That performance against DAL wasn’t just a meh performance, it was brutal. A so-so showing against OAK will not sway my judgement after how bad that DAL game was. A showing like he had against TB will help, but still won’t be enough to get the bitter taste out of my mouth. It’s gonna take a string of 3-4 consistently good games, or 2-3 really impressive games to get me back & believe that DAL was more likely an anomaly.

    I’d also like to hope that our long term answer at QB is on the roster. But after the past 2 games, I’ll admit that I have been watching a ton of the college crop of QBs. Speaking of which, anyone have any thoughts on Devin Gardner? I know he’s only got a handful of games behind center & it’s unlikely he declares eligible for this year’s draft. But man, there seems to be a ton of talent there & I’ve been looking also at some “project” college QBs, just in case b/c last I checked early Monday, the Eagles were picking somewhere between 11-13.

  88. 88 LeQuan Glover said at 10:21 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    We all saw one bad football game. That’s All we saw. Period, we can’t make any evaluation points off of that. I’m more of an NBA guy and Michael-Carter Williams beasted right? I want to see more, that game wants me to watch every game he plays to see. And there are gonna be nights where he stinks the bed. I wanna see if he can rebound from those nights too. Prospect evaluation is much different from team evaluation, where you can watch a team generally. A prospect needs EVERY opportunity to succeed, and so that you can get a general grasp of HIS talent level.

    What we’ve been doing to Foles is a disservice to him. You don’t evaluate a player by his draft status, otherwise many a great players never would’ve gotten a chance for stability. You evaluate them by cold hard talent. Period. Performances in REAL games.

  89. 89 Bob Brewer said at 10:26 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Problem with that theory is sometimes you don’t get more than one shot. That’s the cold reality of professional sports.

    Nick has shown me very little in terms of being a viable 16 game starting QB in the NFL.

  90. 90 ICDogg said at 11:02 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I’m in that position where I still have some hope for Foles, still have some hope for Barkley, but am not sold on either as the solution for this team and think we still probably don’t have the QB we need.

  91. 91 Jerry Pomroy said at 12:24 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Umm, I never said a thing about where Foles was drafted. I’m definitely not against Foles either. I’m just saying in the grand scheme of things, “You’re last performance was not good at all kid. Now go out there and show me that’s not what are. I’m rooting for you & I’ll do whatever I can to help you. But only you can be the one to go out there and perform”. I think I also made the point that he needs to string together some good games, meaning that I’m riding him out to see what he has. But for him to remain in there he cannot go out there & consistently look like he did against DAL over a 2-3 game span.

  92. 92 T_S_O_P said at 10:13 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    He then started 2 games this year before getting knocked out.
    An unfortunate turn of phrase for some one who left the game with concussion symptoms. We should be clear, he didn’t leave the game because he was knocked out. Concussion isn’t necessarily the result of a knock out blow, though of course it can be the result of a single blow. In the 80’s, Foles would have been a good bet to finish that game and probably start the following week simply because he wouldn’t have undergone a concussion test.

  93. 93 GEAGLE said at 10:40 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I was so demoralized..I lost the excitement for the season,..and they did the only thing they could have possibly done to bring my excitement back…JOLLY OL ST NICK TIME!!!! i can’t even explain how pumped up it makes me knowing this kid is finally going to get his opportunity to make a lot of people look foolish. hearing FOles talk yesterday was like a 200cc shot of adrenaline to my NUTS!!! Jeffery Lurie spoke and it was like angels singing from the heavens..
    Finally a real opportunity, no looking over his him run with it…FLY Folesy FLY!!!!

  94. 94 GermanEagle said at 10:56 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Someone can only love your excitement for Foles. Don’t get up your hopes too much though. He may have some Bobby Hoying in him…

  95. 95 GEAGLE said at 11:49 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    I have no delusions of grandeur I don’t even care how he performs…I care that he gets to take his lumps and grow from them. I’m excited that we are finally investing in finding out….we are playing a tough defense at home that’s playing well right now. I don’t know how Deseans ankle will look on Sunday, I don’t know how this Oline is going to play against a good Dline. is I Nick Roach going to body slam peters into the turf? I sure hope not…What Level will Lane play at? Are we getting good Herremans or bad Todd this week? Is shady going to do less dancing. Focus more on moving the chains and less on the Homerun? All these things factor into what we see from FOles in his 10th start…I know we won’t see the Frozen FOles who was so darn inaccurate against Dallas…that’s just not going to happen again….but I don’t know that we will see NFC player of the week FOles who destroyed the Bucs either…FOles played really well against Tampa, but he also got some really solid individual performances from his guys..I’m expecting something in between Tampa and Dallas, but I have no clue what that means…

    I’m not excited at the thought of some great QB play on Sunday. IM excited that we are finally investing in growing a good so that we can have a CHANCE at one day seeing good QB play…THANK YOU Mr. Lurie!!!!!

  96. 96 fran35 said at 11:56 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Dude, I am a believer in Foles too. But man, tone it down some. You are making Foles supporters look like a bunch of zealots. lol

  97. 97 GEAGLE said at 12:16 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Get it thru your head that I’m not a believer in FOles..I’m a fan of HOPE!!! I spent the first half of the season watching us stunt our young QBs growth for a guy that I knew for a virtual fact was NOT the answer. And you expect me not to be excited now? I will take unknown potential with the possibility of growth and improvement over someone who I know just isn’t the answer no matter how many chances we give him all day, every day….I’m also a realist who understands that No one has the slightest clue what FOles will grow into at this point, I’m excited to no longer watch us stunt his growth so that just maybe, we get lucky and he grows into the answer to our problems…

    I will take untapped potential, over HOPELESS anyday, and you can bet you ass I’m excited to finally get off that Hamster wheel and start building for the future….

  98. 98 Jerry Goldstein said at 12:43 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Damn right.

  99. 99 T_S_O_P said at 10:46 AM on November 1st, 2013:

    Tommy, must be good news on the Tom Landry front. I know you are a big admirer, and the recent story on him leaves more reasons to hate on the ‘Girls,(if more reasons were ever needed).

  100. 100 GEAGLE said at 12:01 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    I see no reason why FOles can grow into a chad Pennington type! but that doesn’t mean that he will. He has a skillset that has been successful in the NFL..heck he has a better arm then Pennington. But the position is so mental that’s impossible to know at the stage(because we jerked him around). How he puts it all together and where his potential maxes out at is impossible to know…but to ever have a chance at him growing into our answer, he has to get extended playing time, continuity as the focal point of practice, and a strong supporting cast….it’s exciting to hear Jeffrey Lurie practically close the door on Vick and commit to finding out about Saint Nicholas

  101. 101 Wilbert M. said at 11:15 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    I thought Nicky could be better than Pennington, but the Dallas debacle has made me doubt everything. WTF happened?? Was he on a crack binge the night before? It’s inexplicable. Anyone can have a bad game, but how do you completely forget how to play?

  102. 102 Phyxius said at 12:10 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Interesting read from Brent on Foles..

  103. 103 Andy124 said at 12:22 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Re: Foles physical tools:
    This offseason there was a poll over at BGN asking the BGN staff, then the posters, to pick the 5 most critical QB attributes from a list and prioritize them. Options where things like:

    Arm Strength
    Reading a DefenseDecision Making
    Pocket Presense

    It was a long list and many of the attributes had a lot of overlap. But invariably, Accuracy and Decision Making were in the top 3, Arm strength never cracked the top 3 and often was left out of the top 5 (with the explanation that if you’ve made it to the NFL, you have at least an NFL arm and that’s all you need), and Mobility was nowhere to be found.

    People like to latch on to the arm strength and speed because it doesn’t take time to evaluate. They can judge it right away and make their declarations. But the attributes that are actually important to succeeding as an NFL qb are a little harder to evaluate, and Nick has flashed all of them at times.

    Poopooing him for having an average arm and poor straight-line speed is a serious case of misplaced priorities.

  104. 104 GEAGLE said at 12:38 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Preach brother!! I don’t believe that you win NFC player of the week by accident, especially at THAT position…facts are that he has flashed the makings of a successful NFL QB at times…the question is can he grow and develope into a guy that can play at that level consistently? Maybe, maybe not…but you won’t ever find out by watching 1 game here, another game there….why in the world wouldn’t we want to give him the experience and experienced required to have a chance at one day consistently seeing More Tampa FOles and Less Dallas FOles?
    There is a good chance that he developes into nothing more than a solid back up…but I have no patience for being told that someone knows he can’t be a damn good NFL QB, because I have seen it with my own eyes(in spurts of course)….Barkley shows less hope! and Vick provides NO HOPE since he went on to do exactly what millions of people were convinced he would do…we are not in a good position right now, but FOles provides the most hope (even if it’s the tallest midget in the room type)…until he plays enough in a good situation consistently to where we know what we have, I’m gonna root my ass off for him, support him and hope that if we let him take his lumps now, that he will one day grow into a guy who consistently plays at the level he played against Tampa. If he plays another 12 games and we still don’t see it, then I will be the first tell you that he is nothing but a back up. but Today, there is still some level of hope for the kid, so I’m gonna support the hell out of him and hope we get lucky!!!

  105. 105 Andy124 said at 12:41 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    then I will be the first tell you that he is nothing but a back up.
    WAY too late to be the first to tell anyone that. lol

  106. 106 GEAGLE said at 12:47 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    I LOLed..

  107. 107 ICDogg said at 12:47 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    The question is, how and why did he have such a crappy game against Dallas? Was it a choke? Was it an undisclosed injury? Maybe he already had a concussion? Because that was brutal. And that was a big game for him.

  108. 108 Andy124 said at 1:00 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    We’d all love to know that, but I don’t see how we’ll ever get an answer to that question, so I stopped asking.

    Exception: If time shows him to just plain suck, we may find out that’s the answer.

  109. 109 ACViking said at 12:34 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Re: From 3-5 to the Promised Land?

    Since the ’67 common draft began (AFL/NFL):

    1. The Eagles have had 10 seasons in which they began 3-5 (or 3-5-1).

    2. Not once in any of those 10 seasons did the Eagles turn around the season and qualify for the playoffs.

    3. Only one time did the Eagles finish above .500 (1991).

    4. Twice the Eagles finished at exactly .500 (2007, 2011).

    If the Eagles get to 4-5, things look marginally better (since there are lies, damn lies, and statistics) . . .

    8 times, since 1967, the Eagles have started a season 4-5.

    2 times the Eagles made the playoffs:

    * 1978 at 9-7 (Miracle at the Meadowlands I). Dick Vermeil’s first playoff

    * 1988 at 10-6 (Miracle at the Meadowlands II: Clyde Simmons returns a
    blocked FG for a TD against the Giants on exactly the 10th anniversary
    of MM-I) Buddy Ryan’s first playoff team.

    In ’78 and ’88, the Eagles were building around QBs who were pegged as the future: Jaworski and Cunningham. The got the Eagles to the playoffs by going 5-2 and 6-1, respectively, down the stretch.

    In 1991, when the Eagles had the triple-crown winning greatest defense in NFL history (T-Law?), the QB situation was a mess.

    The Eagles lost Cunningham on the fist play of Q-2 of opening day.

    Then McMahon went down in game 5 on MNF, against Washington, and Kotite gave us Pat Ryan — fresh off the construction site.

    The next week, game 6, the Eagles blew a 13-0 lead against Tampa by knocking starter Vinnie Testeverde out and watching back-up Chris Chandler throw two 4th Q TDs in absolute torrential downpour. The Eagles were led by Kotite’s rookie sensation at QB, Brad Goebel, who went 9-20 for 62 yards, 0 TDs, 2 INTs.

    The following week, game 7, the Eagles lost to New Orleans 13-6 behind a combined 18-34 180 5-INTs by Ryan and Goebel — dropping the Birds to 3-4.

    In game 8, a rusty McMahon returned for a home-game blowout by SF — with 5 more Eagles turnovers — leaving the Birds 3-5. And all but officially eliminated from the playoffs.

    In none of the seasons mentioned above was the NFL/NFC East remotely close to be as bad as this year’s group. In fact, from most of the past 45 years, the NFL/NFC East was THE dominant division in the NFL.

    Now, success seems to be about having a good, stable QB situation.

    Maybe this year will be different, though.

  110. 110 GEAGLE said at 12:46 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    I was going to write “man I wish we weren’t playing the Raiders in Oakland” and then I caught myself and started laughing..
    Is it better to play a raiders team who are 3-1 at home in the black hole? or would it be better to play them at our corporate hell hole where our boooo birds will come out after the first drive? How pathetic is it that this is even a question? It’s sad that I nHey relieved when we leave philly. Something needs to won’t ever win everything if you don’t defend your house and establish a home field advantage

  111. 111 Andy124 said at 12:55 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    I thought when they built the Linc that articles were written about how it was engineered to help keep the sound in and make it a loud stadium. Did I imagine that?

    If engineering isn’t hindering the volume factor, the Eagles just need to start winning. Fans will turn around and get back to providing that 12th man advantage. It’s not going to be the other way around. The wins have to come first. That’s just realilty as I see it.

  112. 112 ACViking said at 12:57 PM on November 1st, 2013:


    Great question.

    Time for a little research . . . .

  113. 113 GEAGLE said at 9:58 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    No Andy you didn’t imagine that. I remember reading that same article about it being engineered for sound…what a crock of shit that was..

    I was at the first game at the corporate hell hole, what a horrible Monday night loss to Tampa to open our season. The place was SOOO fired up, they unveiled the rocky pregame speech on the jumbotron for the first time, the crowd was Wild, and we went on to christen the corporate hell hole with an absolute stinker…I will never forget how crappy that night was for all of us at the Linc…

  114. 114 ACViking said at 12:56 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    It took me a moment to flip my brain around to understand your point — given the native advantage homefield offers in every sport.

    Then the light went on.

    che e stato molto divertente

  115. 115 Tom33 said at 3:02 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    10 home losses in a row makes me hope for a road game every week. And it’s not just the wins and losses, 3 of the 4 road performances were pretty good (obvious exception Denver), whereas the only home game where the offense looked good was SD.

    On the bright side, according the Wikipedia, the Eagles are only 4 games away from tying a record.

    Longest Home Game Losing Streak, 14 games

    Dallas Cowboys: 1988–1989
    St. Louis Rams: 2008–2010

  116. 116 GEAGLE said at 9:59 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    I’m ready to get sent to London 🙂

  117. 117 P_P_K said at 3:32 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    This is a great post. You deserve your new, fancy avatar.

  118. 118 cliff henny said at 3:37 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Cunningham’s injury in ’91, i have never been so depressed as an Eagles fan. 20+ yrs later, 42 yrs old, it still pains me

  119. 119 A Roy said at 1:18 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    So far this year, every time I’ve had my hopes up they’ve been dashed. (SD, Dallas (ugh) and, to a lesser extent, NY) SInce I’ve already written them off this week, they’ll probably win. My expectation at this point is they’ll win enough games to lose out in the QB Of The Future Derby. Cynical realism is being a Philadelphia fan.

  120. 120 anon said at 2:56 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    never want to think we are that team…but maybe it’s what we are becoming

  121. 121 P_P_K said at 3:31 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Dashed hopes is being an Eagles fan.

  122. 122 ACViking said at 1:25 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Attn: Andy124 . . . Crowd Noise at the Linc

    Here’s your answer:

    “We wanted to bring the fans in close, much closer than they were at the Vet, so the noise level would be much higher,” explains owner Jeffrey Lurie. “The theory behind the Eagle winglike roof structures is to keep the sound in and create home-field advantage.”

    Those quotes came from a USAToday article on 9/5/03

  123. 123 Andy124 said at 1:28 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Thank you! Glad to know I actually remembered something right. As the kids like to say,

    You da man!

  124. 124 ACViking said at 1:29 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    You have a great memory.

  125. 125 Jerry Pomroy said at 2:11 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    I would imagine closing out that open corner would help in increasing the overall volume on the field too.

    I would also gather that moving the fans closer to the field would allow the faithful to help demoralize opponents through our constructive wisdom of telling them just how much they suck.

  126. 126 ACViking said at 2:46 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    That was the theory.

    Could you imagine Bill Parcells coming to the Linc now?

    He’d say, “The Vet was a Banana Republic; This place is the Riviera.”

  127. 127 GEAGLE said at 10:00 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Yeah I remembered that as well. Hashtag Crock of shit!

  128. 128 Eagles_Fan_in_San_Fran said at 2:18 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    After viewing the Titan cheerleaders (thanks, Tommy!), I understand what happened to Foles during the Cowboy game – he kept looking for the Cowboy cheerleaders instead of watching his receivers!

  129. 129 A_T_G said at 3:24 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    I guess that is why he needs to be fixed…

  130. 130 bsuperfi said at 2:22 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    I don’t post much, but I read the comments here every day because they’ve been the most nuanced, evidence-based, and civil as I can find about the eagles anywhere on the internet. It’s a real bummer that commenters are starting to lay into each other about being pro or anti Foles (or whatever) as the site has become more popular. Tommy’s still kicking butt, but the sense of community is starting to disappear. Tighten it up, people.

  131. 131 ACViking said at 2:53 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Small group of devotees giving too much voice to their frustrations, maybe?

    Bringing Vick back, putting him in the mix of a new coach, renewed hope, a team in need of more talent, and a couple of young QBs on the bench seems . . . a recipe for strong opinions.

    Regardless, your point is a very good one.

  132. 132 anon said at 2:55 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    feel like it’s chilled a bit since both qbs have been dissapointing

  133. 133 ACViking said at 5:22 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    I think you’re right.

  134. 134 Ark87 said at 8:02 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    The Vick vs Foles talk has cooled, but has given way to an angst that has turned the immense passion of this fan base toxic. I’ve had to cut back on my time here lately. It’s a real downer, I love to come here and talk football with folks, but when those discussions become about what our record is going to be, whose at fault for that, whose going to have to go, who do we need to get… Jesus, try to enjoy a book if every chapter you are predicting the ending, or believe you absolutely know how it’s going to end and that you don’t like it. The point of the metaphor is this, you will hate books if you don’t learn to embrace and enjoy the reading of the book.

    Folks need to remember why we watch football. God knows we didn’t become Eagles fans because the Eagles are sparkling winners.

  135. 135 Michael Winter Cho said at 4:27 PM on November 1st, 2013:

    Sometimes you can be a victim of your own popularity. I feel it was tighter and generally more enjoyable in the off-season. You take things going south and also add a lot of people who aren’t as invested in this place, and it’s not going to be as fun. I’m not sure any of us should use this place to vent… (IMHO) But Tommy is on fire!