Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 179
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    44,227
    vCash
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by BrianWestKins View Post
    Gruden would definitely be better than Kelly, not to mention the many other potential candidates who would be better than both
    Again I ask, who?

    Let me clarify too, I'm not saying Kelly is the answer either.
    To some, he was just a boy. A boy who played football, a football player that grew to be a man. A man that took over a city, a city that he made his own, a city that stands behind him in hopes of becoming one of that cities all-time greats. To some, 2013 was a fluke. To some, he can't do it again. To some, he got lucky.

    To us though, to the Philly faithful, that QB is Nick Foles. To us, that's our QB.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    44,227
    vCash
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by Illa215 View Post
    Foles is our starting QB next year? That's news to me. Yikes. Talk about setting a team back years... He's going to have to make major strides in the next 7 weeks if he's starting next year.

    I love when someone says "8 times out of 10, Kelly will fail." Come on man, don't pull **** out of your ***. That's disrespectful. Go do some research at least... Nothing personal, it's just that you made up a percentage to prove your point.
    Obviously Foles is going to be considered I'm sure, but nothing is definite, yet.
    To some, he was just a boy. A boy who played football, a football player that grew to be a man. A man that took over a city, a city that he made his own, a city that stands behind him in hopes of becoming one of that cities all-time greats. To some, 2013 was a fluke. To some, he can't do it again. To some, he got lucky.

    To us though, to the Philly faithful, that QB is Nick Foles. To us, that's our QB.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Downingtown PA
    Posts
    797
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Illa215 View Post
    Foles is our starting QB next year? That's news to me. Yikes. Talk about setting a team back years... He's going to have to make major strides in the next 7 weeks if he's starting next year.

    I love when someone says "8 times out of 10, Kelly will fail." Come on man, don't pull **** out of your ***. That's disrespectful. Go do some research at least... Nothing personal, it's just that you made up a percentage to prove your point.
    Please read the whole posts. If you had, you would have seen the research. Jack***...no disrespect.

    I didn't say something that general. If I were being so flippant and general, then sure...but I provided good evidence (and then more) that history shows gimmick offenses don't work in the NFL. My exact quote was "and for every 1 that does work, there are 3 that don't." Not coaches but offenses. Point being, it's WAY too much of a gamble when the overwhelming evidence shows that type of offense can't sustain itself. That's not an irresponsble use of numbers. I gave a good comparable example. You go ahead and do the research to debunk it if you want.

    Why is it news that Foles is the starter next year? There's no QB worth pursuing in FA, unless the Eagles make cuts they won't have any salary cap room to speak of anyway. There's no stud in this upcoming draft. Foles is the guy for another year or two. So lets get a coach that can work with the talent he has. Kelly's offense is not for Foles.
    Last edited by IBleedRed(duh); 11-16-2012 at 08:49 AM.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    624
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by BDawk4Prez View Post
    Who, Gruden? Bwahahahaha!

    Dude, go do some research on Gruden, seriously, any of you who think he should be our next head coach. The guy is awful. You'll see, just go do some research.
    He put together the Raiders offense that should have gone to the Super Bowl (tuck rule) then the next year goes to a Tony Dungy assembled team that couldnt win and beat the team he assembled to win a Super Bowl. If thats awful, whats the make Reid?

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    City of Brotherly Love
    Posts
    2,284
    vCash
    500
    I have a question. Why doesn't anyone think that Chip Kelly can adjust his offense for the NFL? Why is it that everyone just thinks he's going to attempt to keep doing the exact same thing that he's doing now? Is it that we're all so used to Andy Reid's arrogance and stubbornness that no one thinks Kelly will adapt his offense to a more suitable NFL offense?

    Chip Kelly doesn't have to coach less aggressively. For you statheads, it's statistically proven that his aggressiveness wins more games then it loses. Going for it on 4th and 2 from the opponents 20 instead of taking the field goal wins more games then it loses. "Surprise" onside kickoffs also win more games. Obviously there's more to it than just always going for it, but it's the idea of playing that aggressively. Bill Belichick and Sean Payton currently coach under this philosophy and I'd say they're doing ok, so why is it that Kelly won't be able to do it?

    Kelly can still run an up-tempo, no-huddle offense without calling QB runs. It would just take more of an intelligent quarterback than an overly mobile quarterback. Denver and New England are both doing it right now, and while both of the quarterbacks are all-time greats, they are both like statues when it comes to mobility. Jim Kelly ran a no-huddle for years and he wasn't exactly a champion sprinter. Chip Kelly can follow these models, and he's going to do it somewhere. If he bombs, then so be it, but in my opinion, those are the most exciting offenses in the NFL right now. I won't be upset if he doesn't come here, and it may take a year or two, but I'm interested to see if he can adapt.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Southampton, Pa
    Posts
    781
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by delfinko View Post
    I have a question. Why doesn't anyone think that Chip Kelly can adjust his offense for the NFL? Why is it that everyone just thinks he's going to attempt to keep doing the exact same thing that he's doing now? Is it that we're all so used to Andy Reid's arrogance and stubbornness that no one thinks Kelly will adapt his offense to a more suitable NFL offense?

    Chip Kelly doesn't have to coach less aggressively. For you statheads, it's statistically proven that his aggressiveness wins more games then it loses. Going for it on 4th and 2 from the opponents 20 instead of taking the field goal wins more games then it loses. "Surprise" onside kickoffs also win more games. Obviously there's more to it than just always going for it, but it's the idea of playing that aggressively. Bill Belichick and Sean Payton currently coach under this philosophy and I'd say they're doing ok, so why is it that Kelly won't be able to do it?

    Kelly can still run an up-tempo, no-huddle offense without calling QB runs. It would just take more of an intelligent quarterback than an overly mobile quarterback. Denver and New England are both doing it right now, and while both of the quarterbacks are all-time greats, they are both like statues when it comes to mobility. Jim Kelly ran a no-huddle for years and he wasn't exactly a champion sprinter. Chip Kelly can follow these models, and he's going to do it somewhere. If he bombs, then so be it, but in my opinion, those are the most exciting offenses in the NFL right now. I won't be upset if he doesn't come here, and it may take a year or two, but I'm interested to see if he can adapt.
    Because you don't hire someone to learn on the job, See Juan Castillo... You hire someone because you want their system/style/ability and other intangibles.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    City of Brotherly Love
    Posts
    2,284
    vCash
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by Gorgon2k View Post
    Because you don't hire someone to learn on the job, See Juan Castillo... You hire someone because you want their system/style/ability and other intangibles.
    First of all, that's a ridiculous comparison.

    Second, Kelly has style, ability and other intangibles already. He wouldn't be learning any of that on the job, he already knows how to be a head coach. He knows how to get the best of the players he has. He would just need to tweak his system, it's not like he needs a complete overhaul, it just needs an adjustment.

    This all leads me back to my original question, why don't people think Kelly can adjust his offense for the NFL?

    Coaches have made adjustments before. We can start with last week's Eagles game. When Foles went into the game we started seeing wide receiver screens for the first time this season. It looked like Reid was trying to make it easier for Foles to succeed with some of the play calling. Look what Denver did last year, mid-season mind you, when Tebow was promoted to the starting quarterback. They were a pass happy team with Orton and then completely changed the entire offensive philosophy to a run heavy game when the change was made. John Fox came out and said "we can't run a conventional offense with Tebow under center" and look what they did. Belichick has changed the way people think about the use of 2 and 3 tight end sets over the past few years. And then when Hernandez got hurt this year, he switched to a 3 receiver, single back set. Good coaches make adjustments all the time.

    So is it just that people don't think Chip Kelly is a good coach?

    To avoid any confusion, I'm not trying to fight for or against Kelly coming here. In the end, we have nothing to do with it anyway. I actually prefer that the Eagles go after a defensive minded coach, and bring in a top flight OC candidate. I'm just saying I'd be ok with them hiring Kelly because I think his "numbers approach" to coaching is the future of football.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Southampton, Pa
    Posts
    781
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by delfinko View Post
    First of all, that's a ridiculous comparison.

    Second, Kelly has style, ability and other intangibles already. He wouldn't be learning any of that on the job, he already knows how to be a head coach. He knows how to get the best of the players he has. He would just need to tweak his system, it's not like he needs a complete overhaul, it just needs an adjustment.

    This all leads me back to my original question, why don't people think Kelly can adjust his offense for the NFL?

    Coaches have made adjustments before. We can start with last week's Eagles game. When Foles went into the game we started seeing wide receiver screens for the first time this season. It looked like Reid was trying to make it easier for Foles to succeed with some of the play calling. Look what Denver did last year, mid-season mind you, when Tebow was promoted to the starting quarterback. They were a pass happy team with Orton and then completely changed the entire offensive philosophy to a run heavy game when the change was made. John Fox came out and said "we can't run a conventional offense with Tebow under center" and look what they did. Belichick has changed the way people think about the use of 2 and 3 tight end sets over the past few years. And then when Hernandez got hurt this year, he switched to a 3 receiver, single back set. Good coaches make adjustments all the time.

    So is it just that people don't think Chip Kelly is a good coach?

    To avoid any confusion, I'm not trying to fight for or against Kelly coming here. In the end, we have nothing to do with it anyway. I actually prefer that the Eagles go after a defensive minded coach, and bring in a top flight OC candidate. I'm just saying I'd be ok with them hiring Kelly because I think his "numbers approach" to coaching is the future of football.
    I'm also not necessarily for or against him but adjustments for a QB are different than adjusting for a new level of play. He runs a spread offense, SO not NFL capable. His QB's now run 200+ times a year, and take a beating. Foles would be horrible in that style of offense. Now if you want him for his intagibles, fine, got that, but why hire a guy who needs to overhaul his system, AND I DO MEAN OVERHAUL, when there's plenty of pro-level, head-coach ready guys out there.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    40,264
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Gorgon2k View Post
    I'm also not necessarily for or against him but adjustments for a QB are different than adjusting for a new level of play. He runs a spread offense, SO not NFL capable. His QB's now run 200+ times a year, and take a beating. Foles would be horrible in that style of offense. Now if you want him for his intagibles, fine, got that, but why hire a guy who needs to overhaul his system, AND I DO MEAN OVERHAUL, when there's plenty of pro-level, head-coach ready guys out there.
    He doesn't need to completely overhaul his system, though. What he needs to do is tweak it. You can still go with a primary shot gun, quick strike offense. You just take out a lot of the QB reads. You go more straight run/pass, or, in Foles case, completely. The base idea remains - no huddle, lots of shot gun, spreading teams out.

    I'm not the biggest Chip Kelly fan, but I think he translates well to the NFL in terms of scheme. He's got things to obviously tweak, but the more I read about his offense, the more it seems people think it'll work. I wouldn't be against Kelly as this head coach as long as he's able to create a competent staff around him.
    #WhyNot?

    People ask me, "Why here? Why Kentucky?", I said "Why not"? It can be done here. It will be done here. Lay the foundation. Recruit and develop. Prepare to win. Day by day. Play by play. A new era of high performance. Why Kentucky? Why not? -Mark Stoops

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    3,420
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by streetsmarts13 View Post
    That is because he inherited a great defense when he took over the bucs. Like BDAWK said go look up his stats. Gruden isnt as good as people think. I posted stats a while back on him. He would do nothing here.
    I was being sarcastic. Not your fault, just sayin'.

    FIRE ME!


    I dont do five year plans other organizations do, I guess. - Ruben Amaro Jr

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    44,227
    vCash
    785
    Guess whose system never worked, until it did? Everyone.

    I think Chip could be successful, i also think he could fail. Nothing is certain.
    To some, he was just a boy. A boy who played football, a football player that grew to be a man. A man that took over a city, a city that he made his own, a city that stands behind him in hopes of becoming one of that cities all-time greats. To some, 2013 was a fluke. To some, he can't do it again. To some, he got lucky.

    To us though, to the Philly faithful, that QB is Nick Foles. To us, that's our QB.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    3,420
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by BDawk4Prez View Post
    Guess whose system never worked, until it did? Everyone.

    I think Chip could be successful, i also think he could fail. Nothing is certain.
    Exactly. Nobody out there right now is a sure thing, that's why hiring a Chip Kelly who could be a top tier coach in two years is a much wiser investment than say Gruden who has zero untapped potential as an NFL coach.

    FIRE ME!


    I dont do five year plans other organizations do, I guess. - Ruben Amaro Jr

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    3,420
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by IBleedRed(duh) View Post
    Please read the whole posts. If you had, you would have seen the research. Jack***...no disrespect.

    I didn't say something that general. If I were being so flippant and general, then sure...but I provided good evidence (and then more) that history shows gimmick offenses don't work in the NFL. My exact quote was "and for every 1 that does work, there are 3 that don't." Not coaches but offenses. Point being, it's WAY too much of a gamble when the overwhelming evidence shows that type of offense can't sustain itself. That's not an irresponsble use of numbers. I gave a good comparable example. You go ahead and do the research to debunk it if you want.

    Why is it news that Foles is the starter next year? There's no QB worth pursuing in FA, unless the Eagles make cuts they won't have any salary cap room to speak of anyway. There's no stud in this upcoming draft. Foles is the guy for another year or two. So lets get a coach that can work with the talent he has. Kelly's offense is not for Foles.

    The "do some reasearch" comment wasn't even directed at you.

    As for Foles, please for thelove of God, they better not hire a coach based on the needs of Nick Foles. I don't get why everyone thinks that Foles is going to be a winning QB in the next two years? If at all, it's going to take time for him to develop. Why should Lurie cater he needs of a QB who may have no impact on the team's long term future?

    FIRE ME!


    I dont do five year plans other organizations do, I guess. - Ruben Amaro Jr

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    City of Brotherly Love
    Posts
    2,284
    vCash
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by Gorgon2k View Post
    I'm also not necessarily for or against him but adjustments for a QB are different than adjusting for a new level of play. He runs a spread offense, SO not NFL capable. His QB's now run 200+ times a year, and take a beating. Foles would be horrible in that style of offense. Now if you want him for his intagibles, fine, got that, but why hire a guy who needs to overhaul his system, AND I DO MEAN OVERHAUL, when there's plenty of pro-level, head-coach ready guys out there.
    The least you could have done was actually check the stats. Darron Thomas ran 98 times last year, which was about 7.5 times per game. That includes being sacked and scrambles. Marcus Mariota has 78 run this season, again including sacks and scrambles, good for 7.8 carries per game.

    Those numbers need to change, there's no question about that, but it's certainly no indication that his system needs an OVERHAUL. Like I said, it would need to be tweaked.

    Also, to say that the spread offense doesn't work in the NFL, completely disregards New England, Buffalo, New Orleans and Green Bay. Maybe they don't run your traditional college spread offense, but they are running a spread offense.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    New York, New York
    Posts
    12,412
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Illa215 View Post
    Exactly. Nobody out there right now is a sure thing, that's why hiring a Chip Kelly who could be a top tier coach in two years is a much wiser investment than say Gruden who has zero untapped potential as an NFL coach.
    With Gruden you get proven NFL success. Whether you people like it or not, Gruden was a very successful NFL head coach. And what about Bill Cowher? Or Mike Holmgren? Or one of the many great NFL coordinators in the league. Bruce Arians, Ray Horton etc. Kelly is the far bigger unkown in the equation, and no one is saying he can't be a good or even great NFL coach, because he can. It's just that the chances of that happening are very small. Most of the time when a college coach moves to the NFL, he fails. It doesn't even just come down to offensive scheme or whatever, it's just so damn different when you run an NFL team from a college team.
    SPACE


Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •