Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Brown?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Vote for Kalas
    Originally posted by JackieBlue
    He's 6-3... Can't we give'em Mahe... Moats... This could be the year... We have nobody that big... Bucky, Westy, and Brown? Seems good to me- Put Wynn back on PR... I like it- It's gutsy- Maybe Brown gets a woody here and blows up? Just thinking out loud...
    Why do we need a big back?
    Here's rhetorical question for you VFK.
    Why do the Eagles need "small backs"?

    I'd take Steve Jackson over any of the Eagles RBs for short yardage.
    He's fast and strong and runs hard and carries enough momentum to get an extra yard or two in a short yardage situation. This is the kind of guy the Eagles have not had anyone like since Duce or even going way back Herschel. And yes, he's carries a lot more weight than all of the Eagles RBs, except perhaps Tapeh. The point that most of our RBs weigh 20 lbs less than most LBs is important in one-one collisions and the aftermath push for extra yards. Execution is a great paradigm but we need YAC at the RB position for the playoff games on cold days that are coming.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Soaring Eagle
      Here's rhetorical question for you VFK.
      Why do the Eagles need "small backs"?

      I'd take Steve Jackson over any of the Eagles RBs for short yardage.
      He's fast and strong and runs hard and carries enough momentum to get an extra yard or two in a short yardage situation. This is the kind of guy the Eagles have not had anyone like since Duce or even going way back Herschel. And yes, he's carries a lot more weight than all of the Eagles RBs, except perhaps Tapeh. The point that most of our RBs weigh 20 lbs less than most LBs is important in one-one collisions and the aftermath push for extra yards. Execution is a great paradigm but we need YAC at the RB position for the playoff games on cold days that are coming.
      Well who wouldn't take Steven Jackson for short yardage? But would you take him over Westbrook overall? Some would and some wouldn't, but the point is that Jackson is no backup. He was a 1st round pick and the top RB of his draft class. (And even with all his size, he's surprisingly inconsistent as a short-yardage guy. He only scored 8 touchdowns last year, and has but a single one through five games thus far.)

      Anyway, the point is that we don't need 'big backs' or 'small backs'. We need 'good backs', and an extra 15 pounds doesn't by itself make you a better one, even in short yardage.

      Comment


      • #18
        How can we go from the last five or six years of "needing" a short yardage back- To everything is ok now. I'm not being smart. And I'm not on some bandwagon for Chris to be here- I'm going off the consensus that we've always wanted a bit of size for a change of pace- Bucky been hurt 3 outta four seasons- When he goes down (I HOPE NOT) who will we turn too- If westy goes down?- I think hes a nice fit- yet do not disagree with all of your points... Again- Me personally- I'd look into as the coach- Get some info and study it a bit- Thats all. No one can deny we've always gotten by with the backs we've had- I just saw the guy wants out- or to start- and it looked good to me with the history we've had... No biggie
        http://www.myspace.com/r3nj

        Comment


        • #19
          Chris Brown > Reno Mahe

          Howeve - he doesn't know the offense and we have a good thing going so...probably not.
          Carson Wentz ERA


          NFC East Titles:
          Playoff Appearances:
          NFC Title Games:
          Super Bowl Titles:

          Comment


          • #20
            [quote=Soaring Eagle]
            Originally posted by "Vote for Kalas":f9d12
            Originally posted by JackieBlue
            He's 6-3... Can't we give'em Mahe... Moats... This could be the year... We have nobody that big... Bucky, Westy, and Brown? Seems good to me- Put Wynn back on PR... I like it- It's gutsy- Maybe Brown gets a woody here and blows up? Just thinking out loud...
            Why do we need a big back?
            Here's rhetorical question for you VFK.
            Why do the Eagles need "small backs"?

            I'd take Steve Jackson over any of the Eagles RBs for short yardage.
            He's fast and strong and runs hard and carries enough momentum to get an extra yard or two in a short yardage situation. This is the kind of guy the Eagles have not had anyone like since Duce or even going way back Herschel. And yes, he's carries a lot more weight than all of the Eagles RBs, except perhaps Tapeh. The point that most of our RBs weigh 20 lbs less than most LBs is important in one-one collisions and the aftermath push for extra yards. Execution is a great paradigm but we need YAC at the RB position for the playoff games on cold days that are coming. [/quote:f9d12]

            I guess I just do not understand the obsession with short yardage big backs....seems a waste of a roster spot for a not so important situational need...why would I have a player with such a limited value and skill set on my roster?

            Of course I would take Jackson, not over Westy, but as my main RB if I did not have Westy, absolutely....

            But he is NOT a short yardage back...he plays in ALL situations since he is their #1 RB and a major weapon in their arsenal.

            Bucky or Tapeh or McNabb or passing the ball is more than enough diversity IMO for short yardage situations....again, if they execute at a high level, it will not matter how cold it is or what month it is on the calendar...
            Eliminate distractions, create energy, fear nothing, and attack everything.

            -Andy Reid

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by JackieBlue
              How can we go from the last five or six years of "needing" a short yardage back- To everything is ok now. I'm not being smart. And I'm not on some bandwagon for Chris to be here- I'm going off the consensus that we've always wanted a bit of size for a change of pace- Bucky been hurt 3 outta four seasons- When he goes down (I HOPE NOT) who will we turn too- If westy goes down?- I think hes a nice fit- yet do not disagree with all of your points... Again- Me personally- I'd look into as the coach- Get some info and study it a bit- Thats all. No one can deny we've always gotten by with the backs we've had- I just saw the guy wants out- or to start- and it looked good to me with the history we've had... No biggie
              Who would STL go to if Jackson went down?

              Where does the consensus come from that we need a short yardage or big back?

              Are people really making the argument that the lack of a short yardage or big back has kept us from winning at some point? Is this like not having a tall CB?

              I think IMK hits it on the head...we need talented and versatile RB, not ones of some size requirement or because the media/fans or some other consensus driver says we should...IMO
              Eliminate distractions, create energy, fear nothing, and attack everything.

              -Andy Reid

              Comment


              • #22
                We have a big back-Cole!
                Fly EaglesFly!

                Comment


                • #23
                  we don't need him and wouldn't use him anyways

                  also Adam Schefter brought up a good point. Brown will be a UFA after the season and the Titans would get more from a compensation pick for losing them than they have been getting offered in trades

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    [quote=Vote for Kalas][quote="Soaring Eagle":fcb6a]
                    Originally posted by "Vote for Kalas":fcb6a
                    Originally posted by JackieBlue
                    He's 6-3... Can't we give'em Mahe... Moats... This could be the year... We have nobody that big... Bucky, Westy, and Brown? Seems good to me- Put Wynn back on PR... I like it- It's gutsy- Maybe Brown gets a woody here and blows up? Just thinking out loud...
                    Why do we need a big back?
                    Here's rhetorical question for you VFK.
                    Why do the Eagles need "small backs"?

                    I'd take Steve Jackson over any of the Eagles RBs for short yardage.
                    He's fast and strong and runs hard and carries enough momentum to get an extra yard or two in a short yardage situation. This is the kind of guy the Eagles have not had anyone like since Duce or even going way back Herschel. And yes, he's carries a lot more weight than all of the Eagles RBs, except perhaps Tapeh. The point that most of our RBs weigh 20 lbs less than most LBs is important in one-one collisions and the aftermath push for extra yards. Execution is a great paradigm but we need YAC at the RB position for the playoff games on cold days that are coming. [/quote:fcb6a]

                    I guess I just do not understand the obsession with short yardage big backs....seems a waste of a roster spot for a not so important situational need...why would I have a player with such a limited value and skill set on my roster?

                    Of course I would take Jackson, not over Westy, but as my main RB if I did not have Westy, absolutely....

                    But he is NOT a short yardage back...he plays in ALL situations since he is their #1 RB and a major weapon in their arsenal.

                    Bucky or Tapeh or McNabb or passing the ball is more than enough diversity IMO for short yardage situations....again, if they execute at a high level, it will not matter how cold it is or what month it is on the calendar...[/quote:fcb6a]

                    Jackson IS a great back for short yardage situations. Calling him a"short yardage back" is a misnomer.

                    The obsession you mention might be having the capacity to pick up a 3rd and inches easily running the ball. Or it might be the ability to run out the clock in the 4th quarter with a 7 point lead. I don't know.

                    Asserting that oft-injured Buckhalter or Tapeh are enough for picking up crucial short yardage might be true. But I have not seen them succeed in that role this season. McNabb on a QB sneek is our best 3rd and 1 play. What does that say about the Eagles running game? It just shows that our offense has limitations. Observant defensive coordinators have and will take advantage of that.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Soaring Eagle
                      Observant defensive coordinators have and will take advantage of that.
                      Yes they will tell their players to make sure to let the Eagles get those 2-4 extra yards so instead of having 3 and 5 they will have to go to the dreaded 3 and 1
                      Whatcha Gonna Do Brother, When the Eagles run wild on you?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        I would re-read what IMK wrote above in response to your quoted post...he states Jackson actually has been rather inconsistent as a short yardage back and has 1 TD this year while having only 8 all last season...

                        Looking at his splits, Jackson has, in 2006 situations of 3rd and up to 7 yards to go, run a grand total of 6 attempts for 11 yards and 0 TD.

                        We DO have the capacity to pick up a 3rd and inches...just because we failed 1 time does not negate that IMO...McNabb can do it and has, Bucky can do it and has, we can pass for it and have...even, "small" RB Westy and Moats have during their careers...I am not sure Tapeh has yet, but am sure he can if called upon and the play is executed correctly...

                        I think it is more what IMK said, the issue, if anything, is making the run play calls not that we do not have personnel to execute it or that our offense has limitations IMO...

                        We have the #1 offense in the NFL...not sure how we can say they are not doing very well. Those "observant" defensive coordinators must not reside in Houston, Dallas, NY, Green Bay or SF...I doubt they live in New Orleans either...
                        Eliminate distractions, create energy, fear nothing, and attack everything.

                        -Andy Reid

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by IMK
                          Originally posted by Soaring Eagle
                          Here's rhetorical question for you VFK.
                          Why do the Eagles need "small backs"?

                          I'd take Steve Jackson over any of the Eagles RBs for short yardage.
                          He's fast and strong and runs hard and carries enough momentum to get an extra yard or two in a short yardage situation. This is the kind of guy the Eagles have not had anyone like since Duce or even going way back Herschel. And yes, he's carries a lot more weight than all of the Eagles RBs, except perhaps Tapeh. The point that most of our RBs weigh 20 lbs less than most LBs is important in one-one collisions and the aftermath push for extra yards. Execution is a great paradigm but we need YAC at the RB position for the playoff games on cold days that are coming.
                          Well who wouldn't take Steven Jackson for short yardage? But would you take him over Westbrook overall? Some would and some wouldn't, but the point is that Jackson is no backup. He was a 1st round pick and the top RB of his draft class. (And even with all his size, he's surprisingly inconsistent as a short-yardage guy. He only scored 8 touchdowns last year, and has but a single one through five games thus far.)

                          Anyway, the point is that we don't need 'big backs' or 'small backs'. We need 'good backs', and an extra 15 pounds doesn't by itself make you a better one, even in short yardage.
                          I agree we need "good" backs. We have 1 in Westbrook. We could use another as a #2 RB. And that quality #2 should bring something different to the game, not be a scatback IMO. I brought up Jackson for comparison because he was available 2 years ago when we drafted Andrews. Taking Andrews was the right choice. But could we have won a SB with Jackson in 2004 running against the Pats hybrid 2-6 front? Yes, it could have been. Enough old dreams...

                          The point that an extra 15 pounds (of muscle) does not mean anything, all else being equal, in a violent collision fighting for an extra yard does not ring true to me. I've played RB and LB. And when hitting a guy straight up, it comes down to force equals mass times acceleration. A bigger guy accelerating to a tackle at the same speed applies more force than a smaller guy. One could see this in the 4th quarter of Sunday's game. Westbrook runs into a pile at the line He tries for an extra yard and gets nothing more because he's not big enough to fall forward carrying a defender on his back.

                          My bottom line is this. The Eagles do not NEED a powerful RB who is capable of picking up tough yards but they would be BETTER OFF if they had one (and used him). As I said in another post, McNabb on a QB sneak is our best 3rd and 1 play right now. That's OK but the Eagles could do better. Hopefully Tapeh will be able to fill this role as the season progresses. After Bucky's fumbles, he is a question mark IMO.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by leifdawg
                            Originally posted by Soaring Eagle
                            Observant defensive coordinators have and will take advantage of that.
                            Yes they will tell their players to make sure to let the Eagles get those 2-4 extra yards so instead of having 3 and 5 they will have to go to the dreaded 3 and 1
                            That's pretty silly

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              "After Bucky's fumbles, he is a question mark IMO."

                              Using that assessment, Westy should be also!

                              Bucky has one fumble and he and Dmac share a 2nd, Westy has two already all by himself.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                [quote=Soaring Eagle]
                                Originally posted by leifdawg
                                Originally posted by "Soaring Eagle":95b15
                                Observant defensive coordinators have and will take advantage of that.
                                Yes they will tell their players to make sure to let the Eagles get those 2-4 extra yards so instead of having 3 and 5 they will have to go to the dreaded 3 and 1
                                That's pretty silly [/quote:95b15]I gave a silly response to a silly argument.
                                Whatcha Gonna Do Brother, When the Eagles run wild on you?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X