Promote your business or product on 700level.com. For
more information about advertising with us CLICK HERE!

This probably isn't thread-worthy, but I couldn't find anywhere else to put this "gem" from Spadaro:

"Good article from Pat Kirwan on NFL.com about teams and their run/pass ratio. His premise is that 2008 could signal a change in philosophy around the league, that a chunk of teams will use the run to set up the pass, rather than use pass to set up the run. Could be. With offenses spreading the field, there is a great chance to bust one through a paper-thin defense. What about the Eagles? I think it's a game-to-game thing with this team. The Eagles, as seen here, should have the ability to beat a team with the running game and with the passing game. I expect a balanced offensive philosophy, to be honest. It doesn't serve the Eagles well to throw the ball 45 times every week."


The article is absurd on so many levels, where do you begin to tear it apart? What an idea.... the run to set up the pass??? No way! Genius!!!

The sad thing is, this team could be so dangerous with a running game that teams would actually have to game plan for and respect during the game. Too bad Reid thinks throwing 40+ times a game to mediocre receivers is the way to go.

Obviously no new thoughts here, but the article makes for a good laugh.

Why is there the continuous mockery of the fans' intelligence? Really? I mean we know Reid isn't happy with even 70/30. Reid starts with 65/35 for the first quarter. Then when the Birds are losing, shifts to his desired 80/20 to "catch up".

ESPN had their little blurb on what "super"stars are on this team other than McMartyr and Westy? Clearly, none on offense.

Now that the Birds have released Sampy that is one less RISING star on offense.

His premise is that 2008 could signal a change in philosophy around the league, that a chunk of teams will use the run to set up the pass, rather than use pass to set up the run. Could be. With offenses spreading the field, there is a great chance to bust one through a paper-thin defense.

A chunk of teams? Isn't that the amount of teams that do it now? Stop the presses.

Without getting too into it, the # of bad QBs forces some teams to rely more on the run, to make passing for the QB easier. Not only that, but good teams find a way to run the football when they need to.

It's all a moot point, because Spuds presenting this article is in the same vein as someone screaming for them to use this idea, and then they repeat the idea and act like it's brilliant because it came from their mouths. We'll see how it goes.

Ugh, I'm not sure what's worse, that this guy putz is still there or that we get to hear the "New! Balanaced attack!" arguement for what the 9th year from him knowing all too well it's going to be 70-30?

And paper thin defenses? I hate to break it to this rocket scientist, but the Eagles get the Giant's and Cowboy's defeneses, which were two of the best in the league last year, 1/4 of their games. Save your paper thin for wiping your ass.

And for the alcohol pumping bidet for the late cleanup.

What a douchetard.

Agreed. But on a serious note, what about Tony Hunt? I know, I know: The organization says he has an "attitude problem". But he doesn't have to be a team leader. Run the kid at the D-line 20 times a game and he might break big on the 21st try. Or line him up in the backfield with Westbrook like they used to do with Charlie Garner and Ricky Watters. We might actually be able to confuse the defense. Since, apparently, we can't seem to run a reverse or put together a decent screen...

But on a serious note, what about Tony Hunt?

High comedy, unintentional or not.

Philly's one of the best (if not THE best) screen-throwing team in the NFL. Witness that brilliant screen that won the game vs. Washington last year.
Hunt's not very good. Those 20 times you give him the ball and he does nothing, AR could be throwing the ball all 20 times. At least we know those passes will be completed to the ground.

Actually, it's hard to say if Hunt's ultimately good or not. He didn't get that much playing time last year and you never know what someone can turn into with a little experience. I'm just saying that since we have this running back, why not use him? If nothing else it frees up Westbrook to be a more creative receiver and God knows we need as much of that as we can get.

As for the screens, you may be right. I don't have a stat on how successful they were last year. I do know that from where I sat, there seemed to be a number attempts that never fully developed. But considering that, for a long time, we never seemed to run screens at all, I suppose this is an improvement.

Actually, it's hard to say if Hunt's ultimately good or not. He didn't get that much playing time last year and you never know what someone can turn into with a little experience. I'm just saying that since we have this running back, why not use him? If nothing else it frees up Westbrook to be a more creative receiver and God knows we need as much of that as we can get.

They got the guy from Miami to free up Westbrook for more passes. Hunt hasn't shown anything in this offense, and it's not as if he's going up against stellar competition. If Hunt were good, then they would feature more West/Hunt packages, but I think they look down on him because his blocking skills aren't that great.

Regardless, unless Hunt has an awesome camp, he won't be sniffing the field for a while, if at all in Eagle green.

And I remember watching some of the games and Fox (or CBS) throwing up a stat that showed the Birds as the best (if not one of the best) screen-passing teams in the NFL, based on yardage gained. True, they have a tendency to run it a lot, and some of them can be sniffed out, but they do run them well.

Regardless, unless (insert draft pick here)has an awesome camp, he won't be sniffing the field for a while, if at all in Eagle green.

There, fixed it for you.

I hate fat Hunt. I think he's actually a pretty good "football player", but he doesn't have the quicks or speed to play in the NFL. JMHO.

But considering that, for a long time, we never seemed to run screens at all, I suppose this is an improvement.

Do you work for the Eagles? If not, then stop saying "we."

Ha ha ha! No, I definitely do NOT work for the organization. Saying "we" is just an old habit I picked up. Suffer in the stands long enough and you almost feel like you're part of the team.

I still have hope for Hunt. He often -- not always -- played well at Penn State. And after Broderick Bunkley's rookie year, not many people gave him much chance of staying on the team but he's come around. Also, I remember, back in the day, an article that said all of the Eagles' problems were epitomized by "fat, foul-mouthed Jerome Brown." Nobody thinks that now.

Maybe I'm just nostalgic for Herschel Walker.

Tony Hunt is no Herschel Walker.

Maybe Tony Hunt is just one of Hershel's many personalities?

Walker was a legit threat. I think he remains the only RB to have a kick return, run and reception for 90+ yards in the same year. I think his 90+ yard run came with the Eagles and, ironically, he didn't break 100 yards for the game.

Here's the box from that game against the Falcons. Doesn't say he didn't break 100 yards, but the Eagles only mustered 115 yards and Cunningham was the QB. I'm almost positive that he somehow didn't get over 100 yards, despite that run.
Yo, click it

Comparing Tony Hunt to Herschel Walker is like comparing Spergeon Wynn to John Elway.

They do need a big back for those short yardage runs, but even then I'm still reminded of that 4th-and-1 call at halftime of the Seahawks game where they couldn't get it, even running to the power side of their line.

I am curious as to if FB will live up to his word and run the ball more this year.

That Seahawks game is exactly the point I'm making. Hunt just happens to be the current big back so, hopefully, he might gain some yardage this year.

But hey, I never said he was the equal of Herschel. There's only one Herschel.

Or five... Or 12... Or...

Pt. 2: Let me also say that if Hunt doesn't benefit from some experience and start producing, then as far as I'm concerned he's the new Antone Davis!

Bad analogy.


Siran Stacey?

sure.

Micheal Haddix?

ABSOLUTELY.


Antoine Davis?

nah, not so much.

Micheal Haddix? A chill just passed over my heart!

When Hunt did get on the field he had trouble with his pass protection .
In one game , the first play in , he got Donovan sacked ; they took him right out again .
He should be ok with a season under his belt , if not Najeh Davenport is still available.....( gulp)

Doubt Hunt makes this team Richie.

1  2