HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Philadelphia Flyers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=21)
-   -   OT: Eagles Playoffs Thread (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=123357)

budscweizer16 01-11-2005 07:26 PM

OT: Eagles Playoffs Thread
 
Anyone have any info on how hes doing???? i again heard him saying hes gonig to be ready for the Super Bowl but thats it. any info???

RJ8812 01-11-2005 07:29 PM

well, they have to make it to the super bowl first, but thanks to the "Rocky" curse, i doubt they'll make it there


damn city of philadelphia :cry:

FlyersGuy69 01-11-2005 07:57 PM

heard on the radio that it is still only an outside chance of him dressing for the Super Bowl and he would not be close to 100% even if he did.

Zeus54 01-11-2005 08:00 PM

Without T.O. you guys'll probably do the same thing as what you did last season- lose in the NFC Championship game once again or worse yet Minny could upset you on your own home field and send you home packing early.........

Rex88 01-11-2005 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PJ_26
Without T.O. you guys'll probably do the same thing as what you did last season- lose in the NFC Championship game once again or worse yet Minny could upset you on your own home field and send you home packing early.........

I really don't think Minn would win even without TO in our lineup - the team that is an issue is the Rams in the NFC as S. Jackson and Bulger are very to stop with our current group. Quick timing routes and big back worries me with regards to the Eagles.
Why the Iraq flag PJ 26?

budscweizer16 01-11-2005 10:42 PM

i am more affraid of the Vikings then anyone left. the Rams turn the ball over constantly. and have little defense. I dont fear Atlanta either. Shut down Vick and there done. even though they do have a good d and good rbs. If we win we should go to the Ship, where we will get killed by whoever we play, which i think is gonig to be the Colts.

GKJ 01-12-2005 12:16 AM

Andy Reid has never lost after a bye week. He knows how to have these guys ready to play. Sitting around for a month also he has some tricks up his sleeve too.

JCD 01-12-2005 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by go kim johnsson
Andy Reid has never lost after a bye week. He knows how to have these guys ready to play. Sitting around for a month also he has some tricks up his sleeve too.

Tampa never won when the temp was below freezing, Green Bay never lost in Lambeau and a team has never lost three strait Conference Championships.

Eagles are certainly the better team here, but this is not a gimme game. McNabb hasn't played any meaningful football in a month, you still don't know how the offense will work without Owens and the last game could have easily gone either way.

Vikes are a team that can beat anybody or lose to anybody.

swflyers8* 01-12-2005 08:44 AM

Quote:

Without T.O. you guys'll probably do the same thing as what you did last season
No, I don't think we will this year. The boys are ready to play.

Quote:

worse yet Minny could upset you on your own home field and send you home packing early
It's not going to happen. It's our defense versus Minny's offense, I'll take our defense any time with 5 pro Bowlers in Dawkins, Lewis, Reese, Sheppard and Trotter and the NON-Pro Bowler in the Freak, Jevon Kearse. It's true that Minny has a high powered offense but it's also true that in the NFC, we are the team that allows the fewest points in a game. Just because TO is out doesn't mean our offense goes to hell. We still have Donovan, Brian, Freddie, LJ, Chad and even Todd. We play our game, we will have another chance to try and finally get past the title game.

JCD 01-12-2005 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey25
No, I don't think we will this year. The boys are ready to play.

Based on what? It has been a month since their last meaningful snap. Being flat and/or rusty is a very legitimate concern. Especially when McNabb has shown ZERO confidence in his receivers other than Owens this year and has yet to play a game with Owens gone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey25
It's not going to happen. It's our defense versus Minny's offense, I'll take our defense any time with 5 pro Bowlers in Dawkins, Lewis, Reese, Sheppard and Trotter and the NON-Pro Bowler in the Freak, Jevon Kearse. It's true that Minny has a high powered offense but it's also true that in the NFC, we are the team that allows the fewest points in a game. Just because TO is out doesn't mean our offense goes to hell. We still have Donovan, Brian, Freddie, LJ, Chad and even Todd. We play our game, we will have another chance to try and finally get past the title game.

Vikes marched up and down the field at will last time against that defense. And that was with Wiggins hurt, Bennett out, Adam Haayer starting at RT and before Burleson started. They easily hung 400+ yards on that defense. The Vikes stopped more drives by self-destructing than the Eagles defense did.

Don't underestimate the Vikes offense. Even without Moss for half the year, it was still 6th in scoring and 4th overall. If they can give Culpepper some time, they should have little trouble moving the ball again. Eagles simply don't have the CBs neccesary to cover the Vikes receiving core. Moss, even hurt, demands double coverage (as he proved last week). That leaves Robinson, Burleson and (if healthy) Campbell man-up. Each of those battles favors the Vikes. The 3- and 4-WR packages quite strongly. I would guess the Eagles keep the safeties deep to support their CBs like they did last time, which means the Vikes will move the ball underneath to Wiggns and Bennet/Smith instead. Reid and Johnson clearly respect the ability of the Vikes offense. They played one of, if not their most, conservative game against them this year. Dawkins and Lewis played deep zone >75% of the game and they rarely blitzed to keep more defenders in coverage/contain. Then again, with as bad as the Vikes line was that game, the Eagles got plenty of pressure just rushing 4. Heck, rushing three. They used Kearse as a spy for a good chunk of the game.

Where the Vikings fall well short is their own defense. Losing Owens hurts badly for the Eagles, but they still have enough to march on the Vikes. Winfield and Williams should more than handle Pinkston/Mitchell. Who covers Westbrook and Smith/Lewis will be the challange. As it was the first time they met. Vikes have very poor cover LBs and Safeties. Your TEs/RBs should have a field day against them. Eagles will have trouble going downfield to their WRs, but should be able to dink and dunk at will. Special Teams and Coaching are equally mismatched. Eagles are some of the best in the biz at both while MN is at the other end of the spectrum.

If the Eagles bring their 'A' game, Vikes don't have a chance. Philly is simply the better team. If the Vikes play at the level they did last week and Philly comes in flat/rusty, an upset is possible. Whoever scores first is going to go a long way in deciding the winner. Vikes get on the board and get rolling, they are a very dangerous team. Take the wind out of their sails early, the defense collapses quickly.

MojoJojo 01-12-2005 10:14 AM

Vikings have terrible pass protection. Dont let the four interceptions against green bay fool you, that was mostly the product of miscommunication between the recievers and reckless playmaking by Favre. That was just a sloppy, sloppy game by GB. Even without TO, we have the recievers and the QB to tear their D to shreds. Also I dont see Moss being much of a threat with that ankle. He may still be able to catch the ball, but he wont be the star reciever he was earlier in the season; he wont get open as much, cant run with the ball once he makes a catch, and wont be able to use his great leaping to beat defenders to the ball. The Vikings biggest threat will be Culpepper's running game.

I agree with the poster who predicted we would fall in the NFC championship game. Not unless the team we face has an injury to a star player.

swflyers8* 01-12-2005 10:29 AM

Quote:

Based on what?
Just going on what the players themselves said.

Quote:

Vikes marched up and down the field at will last time against that defense.
Trotter was not in the middle of that defense. When he was moved to the middle, the ability of teams to run the ball on us was limited. It was week 2, Trotter got moved to MLB after the Pittsburgh game.

Quote:

And that was with Wiggins hurt, Bennett out, Adam Haayer starting at RT and before Burleson started
Now Williams is out and Moss is limping around on a bad ankle. Also, with that defense, Moss had 69 yds and 1TD late in the game. Kearse is going to dominate Goldberg and that is going to cause problems for Culpepper.

Quote:

The Vikes stopped more drives by self-destructing than the Eagles defense did.
We stripped Culpepper of the ball near the endzone, good defense by us. Our defense is even better than that now.

Quote:

Eagles simply don't have the CBs neccesary to cover the Vikes receiving core. Moss, even hurt, demands double coverage
Yeah right. :shakehead :lol:

I do agree with the rest of your assessment, should be a good game.

Dr Love 01-12-2005 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey25
Just going on what the players themselves said.

LOL. What do you expect them to say? "We not sure if we'll be ready, but we'll do what we can."

Quote:

Trotter was not in the middle of that defense. When he was moved to the middle, the ability of teams to run the ball on us was limited. It was week 2, Trotter got moved to MLB after the Pittsburgh game.
Yup, but he also has little impact on the pass defense.

Quote:

Now Williams is out and Moss is limping around on a bad ankle. Also, with that defense, Moss had 69 yds and 1TD late in the game. Kearse is going to dominate Goldberg and that is going to cause problems for Culpepper.
Moss looked damn good last week. And Culpepper was putting up big games without Moss.

People are really forgetting how close the game was in Week 2. No TO only makes it that much closer.

JCD 01-12-2005 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MojoJojo
Vikings have terrible pass protection.

If you mean on the offensive line, then I agree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MojoJojo
Dont let the four interceptions against green bay fool you, that was mostly the product of miscommunication between the recievers and reckless playmaking by Favre. That was just a sloppy, sloppy game by GB. Even without TO, we have the recievers and the QB to tear their D to shreds.

Gimme a fricken break. Mitchell and Pinkston don't even scare NCAA teams. Sorry, Pinkston and Mitchell may be THE WORST starting duo in the ENTIRE NFL. AT BEST, the are both 3rd slot receivers. Heck, on the Vikes BOTH of them would be hard pressed to even dress for games.

Winfield is one of the best CBs in the NFC. While a notch below shut-down, he is a top-end cover CB. More to a point, he is arguably the hardest hiting CB in the NFL. Now, think 'Fearless over the middle' Pinkston will beat him? Williams is like Winfield-lite, another heavy-hitting CB good in coverage and as good as virtually any other 2nd CB in the NFL (top-10 among 2nd CBs). Put it this way, Williams was man-up on Pinkston virtually the entire game. Go check out how many catches Pinkston managed on him. I suspect they will use that same match-up and use Winfield on Mitchell (or Westbrook if extra DBs are on the field).

Where these guys have problems is matching up against 6'4 types that can out-jump and out-reach them (Keyshawn Johnson, Javon Walker, etc.). Neither Pinkston nor Mitchel come close.

The match-up of WInfield and WIlliams versus Pinkston and Mitchel favors the Vikes so strongly it isn't even funny. Heck, it might be the biggest mismatch of the entire game.

Where are teams getting their receiving yards on them? It isn't on Winfeild and Williams. Where teams shred the Vikes is in the nickel package or to secondary receivers (TEs, RBs).

[quote=MojoJojoAlso I dont see Moss being much of a threat with that ankle. He may still be able to catch the ball, but he wont be the star reciever he was earlier in the season; he wont get open as much, cant run with the ball once he makes a catch, and wont be able to use his great leaping to beat defenders to the ball. The Vikings biggest threat will be Culpepper's running game.[/quote]

Moss has not been much of a threat since New Orleans. Hasn't stopped the Vikes offense from still being dangerous. Even injured, you need to put either your top-CB or a double team on Moss. What has made the Vikes offense dangerous is their ability to spread it around. Burleson has emerged as a legit threat. Robinson is a quality player. Campbell is a dangerous deep threat. Then you have Wiggins eating up all the stuff underneath.

JCD 01-12-2005 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey25
Just going on what the players themselves said.

Total fluff. What else are they supposed to say? Fact is, the last meanginful snap McNabb played was a month ago. They can pay lip service to being ready, but only Sunday will tell.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey25
Trotter was not in the middle of that defense. When he was moved to the middle, the ability of teams to run the ball on us was limited. It was week 2, Trotter got moved to MLB after the Pittsburgh game.

And if it was Simoneau getting, or even the run defense, getting exposed out there then that change just might matter. Take a guess on how much the Vikes ran on the Eagles last time. 28 yards. That was it from our RBs. We shredded your pass defense, not your rushing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey25
Now Williams is out and Moss is limping around on a bad ankle. Also, with that defense, Moss had 69 yds and 1TD late in the game. Kearse is going to dominate Goldberg and that is going to cause problems for Culpepper.

Williams was out last time as well, so I really don't see how his absence this time is any different. We went into the Eagles game with Larry Ned as our 2nd RB. Now we have Bennett and Moore playing (Moore played a very limited role last time).

Pulling out just Moss' numbers is very misleading. Eagles shifted their entire defense to shutting him down. They rarely blitzed and held Dawkins/Lewis back supporting Sheppard/Brown. Despite all that focus, Moss STILL made catches. What also isn't being shown is the PI calls he drew as well.

With Moss the center of attention and acting as a decoy, the Vikes other receivers racked up 29 catches and nearly 300 yards.

I have little doubt that Kearse will be all over Goldberg. That said, Kearse will still have a tougher time than last time. Last time, Rosenthal went out in the 1st quarter and we didn't have another tackle dressed. We played guard Adam Haayer, a marginal NFL player at best in his place. Unlike Haayer, Goldberg actually shows some ability to play the game (his problem is penalties).

Will this cause problems for Culpepper? Even with Kearse using Haayer as a turnstyle (when he did rush, he played a big chunk of the game in a spy role), Culpepper still was able to move the ball. Vikes self-destruction (especially in the Red Zone) stopped them more than the Eagles defense did. Vikes left 3 TDs on the field, 2 to penalties and 1 to Wayne's strip.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey25
We stripped Culpepper of the ball near the endzone, good defense by us. Our defense is even better than that now.

Huh?!?! It was a good TD-saving PLAY, but to call that good defense just doesn't add up. Eagles looked completely inept at stopping Culpepper on that drive. He went 6-for-6 passing, turned a should-be sack by Kearse into a no-gain run (listed as a sack) and was on his way to capping off a perfect drive when Wayne stripped him at the 1-inch line.

How is the Eagles defense any better now at dealing with that then they were then? Simoneau wasn't a problem last time as the Vikes completely abandoned the run in the 2nd half anyway. Rayburn over Walker/Thomas is a step back as Walker's pass rushing is better suited to face the Vikes anyway. Heck, your defensive MVP for that game Nate Wayne isn't even in the starting line-up anymore.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey25
Yeah right. :shakehead :lol:

Yep, right indeed. Tell me the favored played in each of these match-ups:
Moss v. Sheppard? Even hobbled, Moss is a handful.
Burleson v. Brown? At best, call this even. If there is a fav, it is Burleson.
Robinson v. Hood? OK, starting to get ugly here...
Campbell v. Wynn? This should make you cringe.

Eagles absolutely have to keep their safties back to help the CBs because the CBs simply cannot win 1-on-1 match-ups. They just face more talented receivers. Want to do that? Fine. Vikes will use their RBs and TEs to the tune of 20-some catches or watch Culpepper trot downfield for the easy yards just like they did last time.

I knew some Eagles fans would forget just how close that last game was. Eagles earned the win by playing mistake free and watching the Vikes choke repeatedly in the Red Zone. Vikes had 3-TDs taken away (Culpepper's fumble, 2 penalties) where-as the Eagles had an Owens non-TD. It was a much closer game than the final score indicates.

Now, before people start taking all this out of context, Eagles are the better team and should win. My point is that the Vikes offense is better than the Eagles defense and that the possibility for an upset exists. Your offense is going to have to show up ready to play because you shouldn't pin your victory hopes on shutting the Vikes offense down.

Sum1winachampionship 01-12-2005 12:25 PM

"Winfield is one of the best CBs in the NFC."

No he's not, he's a good corner and very physical, great against the run but I'd take Lucas, Smoot, Trufant, Sheppard, Peterson, Springs, and Brown over him just off the top of my head. Clearly I'm biased towards philly but they are both proving their worth.


"Now, think 'Fearless over the middle' Pinkston will beat him? Williams is like Winfield-lite, another heavy-hitting CB good in coverage and as good as virtually any other 2nd CB in the NFL (top-10 among 2nd CBs). Put it this way, Williams was man-up on Pinkston virtually the entire game. Go check out how many catches Pinkston managed on him. I suspect they will use that same match-up and use Winfield on Mitchell (or Westbrook if extra DBs are on the field)."

This is the argument everyone likes to use but the simple fact is pre-TO (and now without TO) the eagles don't win games with their WR's. They just don't plan that way. The real matchups come with the TE's and RB's out of the backfield, the occassional McNabb run, and McNabb making something happen past the traditional 3-5 step drops that corners are used to covering. Its going to be a great game, but I like the matchup in the eagles favor.

JCD 01-12-2005 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sum1winachampionship
"Winfield is one of the best CBs in the NFC."

No he's not, he's a good corner and very physical, great against the run but I'd take Lucas, Smoot, Trufant, Sheppard, Peterson, Springs, and Brown over him just off the top of my head. Clearly I'm biased towards philly but they are both proving their worth.

Brown and Sheppard over Winfield?!?!? I highlighted the key phrase explaining that one.

Sorry, anybody with even a passing knowledge of football will list Winfield among the top-5 or so QBs in the NFC. If not the top-3. Winfield has a proven track record (not just one quality contract year like some of those you list...). Teams avoid him all year, part because the Vikes were so vulnerable elsewhere but also because of his play.

I very much doubt you can find anybody not wearing Green that would even consider saying Lito Sheppard and Sheldon Brown are better than Winfield.

Dr Love 01-12-2005 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sum1winachampionship
"Winfield is one of the best CBs in the NFC."

No he's not, he's a good corner and very physical, great against the run but I'd take Lucas, Smoot, Trufant, Sheppard, Peterson, Springs, and Brown over him just off the top of my head. Clearly I'm biased towards philly but they are both proving their worth.

You're not just biased towards Philly, you're biased against the Vikes. Winfield is better than Smoot, Lucas, Sheppard, Springs. Will Peterson shouldn't be in this conversation, he's been mediocre for a few years now. Your list is almost laughable, it's #2 guys. Trufant you've got a case, and I think Brown is pretty underrated, but I wouldn't take him over Winfield. Antoine Winfield is one of the best CBs in the NFC, whether you like it or not.

swflyers8* 01-12-2005 01:16 PM

Rather than pick apart everything, this should sum it up a little better

Quote:

Divisional playoff primer: The rematches stop here

REMATCH OF THE WEEK II

Minnesota at Philadelphia. It's funny what a difference a week makes. Before the playoffs, there was talk of how the Vikings "backed in," how Randy Moss was a quitter, and how Daunte Culpepper couldn't win an important game. Now, led by Culpepper and Moss, the Vikings are coming off an impressive romp in Green Bay and have many thinking they can win again this week.

I don't believe, however, that the Eagles suddenly will falter without Terrell Owens. They went 12-4 without him last season -- he can't be the only reason they went 13-3 this season. They still have two of the league's most versatile offensive talents in Donovan McNabb and Brian Westbrook. They also are sending 75 percent of their starting secondary to the Pro Bowl -- and they'll win this game with defense.

The Vikings' running game isn't consistent enough with its committee to wear down Philadelphia's front seven. That means the Eagles won't need to commit a safety to run support, leaving Brian Dawkins and Michael Lewis free for coverage or blitzes to help the front-four pass rush.

Minnesota's other offensive key is the big play off the deep ball -- something the Eagles excel at preventing. With Dawkins and Lewis helping out cornerbacks Lito Sheppard and Sheldon Brown, Moss will be held in check downfield.


Culpepper has enjoyed a great season, but he doesn't quite have the savvy of McNabb that comes with the experience of going to three consecutive NFC championship games. The Eagles' coaching staff will have its well-rested team well prepared, and the veteran team will make fewer mistakes. I don't see the Vikes playing two consecutive flawless games. Eagles 34, Vikings 27.
Playoff Primer

Basically, the Vikings this season have not played consistent football. Wins seem to be hard to come by. I don't think the Vikings offense is going to do to us what it did to Green Bay. I'm also not too concerned about a defense that gave up 30 touchdowns and only had 11 ints. You can talk our secondary down all you want, you will know differently come Sunday. I think Minnesota played their best game this past Sunday and I doubt they can do it again this coming Sunday. Just my thoughts though.

Quote:

Campbell v. Wynn? This should make you cringe.
If Campbell plays...

Quote:

Rayburn over Walker/Thomas is a step back as Walker's pass rushing is better suited to face the Vikes anyway.
Thomas and Derrick Burgess will both be back for the game on Sunday.

Quote:

Brown and Sheppard over Winfield?!?!?
Winfield has 77 tackles to Sheldon's 73.
Sheldon's 5 spots below Wingfield, not that much a difference


All I say is this, I think we have you beat in both aspects of the game, we play like I know we can and we move on.

Dr Love 01-12-2005 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey25
Rather than pick apart everything, this should sum it up a little better

Or not have you actually think out a response.

Quote:

Winfield has 77 tackles to Sheldon's 73.
Sheldon's 5 spots below Wingfield, not that much a difference
Using tackles to determine who is a better defensive back is about as useful as using batting average to determine who is a better pitcher. Surely you'd know that.

paxtang 01-12-2005 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCD
Pulling out just Moss' numbers is very misleading. Eagles shifted their entire defense to shutting him down. They rarely blitzed and held Dawkins/Lewis back supporting Sheppard/Brown. Despite all that focus, Moss STILL made catches. What also isn't being shown is the PI calls he drew as well.


I think th is point is somewhat misleading. It wasn't like the WR's burnt the Eagles DB's all over the field. The corners GAVE the Vike's WR the underneath stuff all game long, because they didn't want to get beat deep. Call that fear, call it whatever, but the Eagles allowed the Vikings the dink and dunk stuff underneath in exchange for not giving up bombs for TD's. The hope was that the Vike's would self destruct at some point on these long drives and settle for no points or FG's more often, and that's just what happened. Will they use the same game plan this time and will it work? I have no clue, because the Vike's WR's are so good. In the passing game, I'm more worried about the Wiggins and the RB's burning Simmy like they did last time.



Quote:

Originally Posted by JCD
How is the Eagles defense any better now at dealing with that then they were then? Simoneau wasn't a problem last time as the Vikes completely abandoned the run in the 2nd half anyway. Rayburn over Walker/Thomas is a step back as Walker's pass rushing is better suited to face the Vikes anyway. Heck, your defensive MVP for that game Nate Wayne isn't even in the starting line-up anymore.

Simmy was a problem last time in pass protection, and I worry about him again this time (if he plays, Adams may start if he is still hurt). Walker is still starting and Thomas will be back. It will essentially be the same DT rotation this game as it was in week two, except that Simon and Walker are both healthy and in shape, unlike back then. That, to me, is the biggest difference in this D is that both of those guys are playing now like they did last year. At the start of the year, they sucked.....hard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCD

Yep, right indeed. Tell me the favored played in each of these match-ups:
Moss v. Sheppard? Even hobbled, Moss is a handful.
Burleson v. Brown? At best, call this even. If there is a fav, it is Burleson.
Robinson v. Hood? OK, starting to get ugly here...
Campbell v. Wynn? This should make you cringe.

Eagles absolutely have to keep their safties back to help the CBs because the CBs simply cannot win 1-on-1 match-ups. They just face more talented receivers. Want to do that? Fine. Vikes will use their RBs and TEs to the tune of 20-some catches or watch Culpepper trot downfield for the easy yards just like they did last time.

I don't know what match ups favor the Eagles or whatever, but, in your opinion, can any secondary match up with the Vikings? Because I think the Eagles secondary is one of the best in the entire league. I know you aren't sold on Sheppard and Brown, but I think they've made massive strides this year. You may not think Sheppard deserved the pro bowl, but it at least shows he's been pretty damn good this year. Hood is up and down, but he can make plays. Wynn, as far as I can tell, has been passed by Matt Ware, who is a pretty talented kid, though he is young.

It's not that I'm trying to pimp the Eagles DB's or put down the Vike's WR's, but if the Eagles can't at least match up close to the Vikes, who can?

JCD 01-12-2005 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey25
Rather than pick apart everything, this should sum it up a little better

Playoff Primer

All that article shows me is that I am glad I cancelled my Sporting News two years ago, because they have clearly gone downhill. Then again, this guy was completely wrong last (well, he did get the Colts right...) so he MUST be right this time.

Going to the ProBowl is a popularity contest. Helped by ballet stuffing. That McNabb is starting there over Culpepper says it all.

Why does the Vikes inconsistent running game become such an issue? It has been inconsistent all year and was downright bad against the Packers. That is like ripping on the Eagles bad running game. Vikes are a pass-first team that win games off the arm of Culpepper, not the legs of (insert-starter-of-the-week-here).

Vikes are more than just a deep ball. You cover them deep, they go to Wiggins/Smith underneath. Why do you think Wiggins ended up leading them in receptions? Did this guy even watch a Vikes game this year? Like I said, too many weapons on the field at once. You can't cover them all.

McNabb has the play-off savvy? Both QBs have taken their team exactly as far. McNabb may have made the last three NFC Championships, but he has also lost the last three looking anything but a savvy leader in them. Both QBs have come up quite small in the most important games of their career.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey
Basically, the Vikings this season have not played consistent football. Wins seem to be hard to come by. I don't think the Vikings offense is going to do to us what it did to Green Bay. I'm also not too concerned about a defense that gave up 30 touchdowns and only had 11 ints. You can talk our secondary down all you want, you will know differently come Sunday. I think Minnesota played their best game this past Sunday and I doubt they can do it again this coming Sunday. Just my thoughts though.

Nope, Vikes have not been consistent at all. Can whup anyone, can lose to anyone.

You diss the Vikes defense based on regular season, but ignore what that same defense did in the post-season. Packers offense is more potent than the Owens-less Eagles beyond any shadow of a doubt, yet you can't fathom them having another good game? We shall see. I don't think they will be as good as Sunday, but they don't have to be because the Eagles offense doesn't scare me nearly as much as the Packers did.

I will keep talking down your secondary because it just isn't that good. Sheppard has emerged as a nice playmaker, but even has quickly become over-rated. Your nickel and dime depth is downright bad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey
Thomas and Derrick Burgess will both be back for the game on Sunday.

If they play...

Then again, who cares if they do? Both are 2nd stringers. Thomas isn't a pass rusher and the Vikes want a shoot-out, not a grind-out. Running has been an afterthought since mid-season.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey
Winfield has 77 tackles to Sheldon's 73.
Sheldon's 5 spots below Wingfield, not that much a difference

I hope that is a joke. Deion Sanders propably didn't have 73 tackles in his career, he must flat-out blow.

Again, if you were not clouded by Eagle-vision, you would realize just how silly Brown > Winfield sounds. Might as well claim that Pinkston is better than Moss because it is just as believable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HungryforHockey
All I say is this, I think we have you beat in both aspects of the game, we play like I know we can and we move on.

Our offense had little trouble marching up and down the field on you last time, why would it be any different this time? Because you are more geared up to stop the Vikes non-existant running game? Fine, how does that slow down the passing attack?

Eagles are a better team, but you ability to win will depend on you offense being able to hum along. If you are expecting to hold the Vikes to <250 yards and 2 scores, you are in for yet another play-off disappointment.

GKJ 01-12-2005 02:43 PM

McNabb was hurt in the last 2 NFC championships. It's pretty hard to play well on a broken ankle and broken ribs. The first time it is safice to say he wasn't ready to win, although it was his best game, because he wasn't hurt.

JCD 01-12-2005 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paxtang
I think th is point is somewhat misleading. It wasn't like the WR's burnt the Eagles DB's all over the field. The corners GAVE the Vike's WR the underneath stuff all game long, because they didn't want to get beat deep. Call that fear, call it whatever, but the Eagles allowed the Vikings the dink and dunk stuff underneath in exchange for not giving up bombs for TD's. The hope was that the Vike's would self destruct at some point on these long drives and settle for no points or FG's more often, and that's just what happened. Will they use the same game plan this time and will it work? I have no clue, because the Vike's WR's are so good. In the passing game, I'm more worried about the Wiggins and the RB's burning Simmy like they did last time.

Agreed. Vikes play a pick-your-poison offense. Culpepper continued his ascension towards greatness by simply taking whatever a defense gave him instead of forcing throws. The results were phenominal.

You nailed why the Vikes lost last time. It wasn't that the Eagles did anything to stop them or shut them down, they just waited for the Vikes to self-destruct. If the Vikes can avoid mistakes, they should have little trouble putting points on the board.

Quote:

Originally Posted by paxtang
Simmy was a problem last time in pass protection, and I worry about him again this time (if he plays, Adams may start if he is still hurt). Walker is still starting and Thomas will be back. It will essentially be the same DT rotation this game as it was in week two, except that Simon and Walker are both healthy and in shape, unlike back then. That, to me, is the biggest difference in this D is that both of those guys are playing now like they did last year. At the start of the year, they sucked.....hard.

Trotter isn't much better in pass protection. Arguably, he is worse. He can't run and cut like he did 3 years ago before the injuries. He has better anticipation (mainly because I think Simoneau's instincts are terrible). Vikes have some very shifty receivers out of the backfield in Smith, Bennett and Moore. Trotter will have a very difficult time keeping up with any of them.

Vikes interior line is good. Simon and Walker didn't do much last time, I don't expect them to have big games this time either. What is very worrisome is the edges. McKinnie has struggled all year while Goldberg is a back-up. Still better than when last time, but I expect the same result: Kearse, Douglas and McDougle harrassing Culpepper all day long.

Quote:

Originally Posted by paxtang
I don't know what match ups favor the Eagles or whatever, but, in your opinion, can any secondary match up with the Vikings? Because I think the Eagles secondary is one of the best in the entire league. I know you aren't sold on Sheppard and Brown, but I think they've made massive strides this year. You may not think Sheppard deserved the pro bowl, but it at least shows he's been pretty damn good this year. Hood is up and down, but he can make plays. Wynn, as far as I can tell, has been passed by Matt Ware, who is a pretty talented kid, though he is young.

I don't think any team runs deep enough at CB to take on 4-quality receivers 1-on-1. Heck, most teams don't even run 3-deep. It forces defenses to keep their safeties back in coverage. Or forces teams to use a zone. If you want to try to zone-cover a good QB (ala Culpepper), god help you. Putting multiple WR sets on the field accomplishes one of two things: 1) It makes coverage packages more predictable. You know that at least one safety is forced back, so you will have room underneath to work with. Or 2) you have a 1-on-1 mismatch somewhere on the field. Johnson likes to gamble that he can get a sack blitzing before a QB can exploit that mismatch, but facing a QB that can run and shed tackles like Culpepper makes that dangerous at best. Johnson tried that last time and it didn't work.

Eagles starting 4-DBs are quite good. Arguably the best in the league, certainly in the top-5. However, it is more due to the quality of your safeties than CBs. Sheppard is a good playmaker, but not a lock-down man QB. IMO, he is ideally suited for a #2 spot and not matching up against top-talent. Brown is a nickel back for most squads. Where the Eagles fall short is depth. Hood, Wynn and Ware are marginal at this point. Against any half-decent slot receiver, they are at a disadvantage.

Eagles know this. Why else do you think Dawkins and Lewis have been back in coverage more this year than any other of their careers? It is to shelter their inexperienced and weaker CBs. Why the Eagles have gotten away with this is because Kearse and crew have done a fantastic job of pressuring the QB.

Quote:

Originally Posted by paxtang
It's not that I'm trying to pimp the Eagles DB's or put down the Vike's WR's, but if the Eagles can't at least match up close to the Vikes, who can?

Nobody. That is the point. Don't be so quick to dismiss the Vikes offense. This isn't the Chargers out of nowhere, this is a proven offensive juggernaut. Hoping the Eagles defense can shut them down isn't how you are going to win this game. If you are going to win, you need to put 25+ points on the board. Against the Vikes defense, that isn't all that hard to do.

Dr Love 01-12-2005 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by go kim johnsson
McNabb was hurt in the last 2 NFC championships. It's pretty hard to play well on a broken ankle and broken ribs. The first time it is safice to say he wasn't ready to win, although it was his best game, because he wasn't hurt.

Agreed on 2001, you can't really fault him. Team exceeded expectations, and lost to the Rams who lost the SB by a FG, and Buckhalter was running all over the Rams in the first half and got hurt in that game too. However that was probably the best Eagles playoff team under Reid. Culpepper and the Vikes got blown out to a lesser opponent. Although that wasn't Culpepper's fault either.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:35 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.