Week 15: The Good, The Bad and the Ugly Comment/Vent/Rant Eagles Version!

[January J]

17 hours ago, Tru11 said:

what guarantees do you have that the eagles dont use a TO or the ravens dont use 1?

also you seriously think flacco would just sit down in that situation?

the only way he goes down is if he falls or gets brought down.

if he gets brought down what guarantees do you have he does not fumble or does not get injured or even worse both?

seems a lot of risk when he can just throw the ball away .....

 

Making the eagles use a timeout would've been a good thing as well obviously. If that had happened and the same thing played out except weddle makes that tackle on Wentz with 4 seconds left then its game over. This all ties into clock management- which is something we have struggled with for quite some time now.

[ravensnj]

The Good,ahhh....... maybe? : Finally? Maybe? The organization realizes we can utilize our backs rushing and receiving, to control the game. 

REAL UGLY: The attempt by Weddle to tackle Wentz, which resulted in a TD.

 

[Rav'n Maniac]

3 hours ago, ravensnj said:

The Good,ahhh....... maybe? : Finally? Maybe? The organization realizes we can utilize our backs rushing and receiving, to control the game. 

REAL UGLY: The attempt by Weddle to tackle Wentz, which resulted in a TD.

 

Although he's been very good this season, I have to agree with this statement. Why he just stood at the goal line waiting instead of attacking Wentz and saving   2-3 yards is beyond me.

[rmw10]

1 hour ago, Rav'n Maniac said:

Although he's been very good this season, I have to agree with this statement. Why he just stood at the goal line waiting instead of attacking Wentz and saving   2-3 yards is beyond me.

From what I saw, it looks like he was having the debate on whether to leave his zone and open up the passing lane or dare Wentz to run.

[Tru11]

9 hours ago, January J said:

Making the eagles use a timeout would've been a good thing as well obviously. If that had happened and the same thing played out except weddle makes that tackle on Wentz with 4 seconds left then its game over. This all ties into clock management- which is something we have struggled with for quite some time now.

the quickest way to end the game would be to score a TD and make it a 3 score game.
that is why they decided to pass on 1st down rather then run the ball and burn the clock.

with a TD it would have been a 17 point difference which means the eagles would need 3 scoring drives with at least 2 being a TD with less then 6 minutes left.
you will find very little cases of teams that where able to pull it off...

also if you want to score a TD then the worst thing you can do in that situation besides turning the ball over , is taking a sack.

the odds of the ravens scoring a TD when its 2nd and 17 are not that high.
they have a better chance when its 2nd and 10.

situational football when the game plan is to score a TD......

[gooftroop]

6 hours ago, rmw10 said:

From what I saw, it looks like he was having the debate on whether to leave his zone and open up the passing lane or dare Wentz to run.

Well, he was between a rock, and a hard place- not an easy play. I also think Weddle got hurt earlier in the game, and Wentz is 6'5" 240...

[ellicottraven]

It was a W alright, but a W that came away feeling like a blow out L!

[Tank 92]

15 hours ago, rmw10 said:

From what I saw, it looks like he was having the debate on whether to leave his zone and open up the passing lane or dare Wentz to run.

Weddle pretty much just let him score. The only chance he had to stop him was to go after him in the backfield. I bet if you asked Eric he would say that he screwed up big time. Just a horrible decision and play. 

Edited December 21, 2016 by Tank 92

[rmw10]

3 hours ago, Tank 92 said:

Weddle pretty much just let him score. The only chance he had to stop him was to go after him in the backfield. I bet if you asked Eric he would say that he screwed up big time. Just a horrible decision and play. 

I sort of agree.  If you watch the replay though, it's clear that his hesitation was whether or not to abandon his coverage responsibilities.  It wasn't Weddle's best play, but it's not like he just stood there for the sake of standing there.  There was a decision to be made, and he made the wrong one, unfortunately.

[Edgar]

2 hours ago, rmw10 said:

I sort of agree.  If you watch the replay though, it's clear that his hesitation was whether or not to abandon his coverage responsibilities.  It wasn't Weddle's best play, but it's not like he just stood there for the sake of standing there.  There was a decision to be made, and he made the wrong one, unfortunately.

Cool of you to pay tribute to Tray Walker.

[January J]

16 hours ago, Tru11 said:

the quickest way to end the game would be to score a TD and make it a 3 score game.
that is why they decided to pass on 1st down rather then run the ball and burn the clock.

with a TD it would have been a 17 point difference which means the eagles would need 3 scoring drives with at least 2 being a TD with less then 6 minutes left.
you will find very little cases of teams that where able to pull it off...

also if you want to score a TD then the worst thing you can do in that situation besides turning the ball over , is taking a sack.

the odds of the ravens scoring a TD when its 2nd and 17 are not that high.
they have a better chance when its 2nd and 10.

situational football when the game plan is to score a TD......

And like its been said several times...you can still run the ball  and score a TD..Infact I think that was our best chance at putting up 7- just running it down their throat 3 straight times. Maybe a fake reverse to Wallace and another toss to dixon in the opposite direction..they would've likely bit on that. But yeah I don't care how much a sack lowers the odds of putting up 7...I like my odds MUCH more of taking 2 minutes off the clock and going up by 13..forcing them to score 2 TDs in a little over 3 minutes. And that's still not saying we couldn't have punched in a TD after taking a sack either, whether its 2nd and 17 or not..

Anyway  this Convo has obviously run its course.

Edited December 21, 2016 by January J

[GrimCoconut]

Anyone else think Tavon Young is being called for some very very questionable DPI calls? 

[January J]

48 minutes ago, GrimCoconut said:

Anyone else think Tavon Young is being called for some very very questionable DPI calls? 

No question. I think its partially BC his technique makes it look like there's contact when there's not. He uses that second hand a lot on the opponents back and goes in for the swat- but its not like he's pushing or holding the guy- he's just placing his hand there and in real time it looks like contact when its really not. All depends on the referees viewpoint.

[redrum52]

3 hours ago, GrimCoconut said:

Anyone else think Tavon Young is being called for some very very questionable DPI calls? 

I watch other games and swear the refs have a vendetta against our cbs.

[ravensnj]

5 hours ago, GrimCoconut said:

Anyone else think Tavon Young is being called for some very very questionable DPI calls? 

Orr was flagged twice on bogus calls!

[GrimCoconut]

15 hours ago, January J said:

No question. I think its partially BC his technique makes it look like there's contact when there's not. He uses that second hand a lot on the opponents back and goes in for the swat- but its not like he's pushing or holding the guy- he's just placing his hand there and in real time it looks like contact when its really not. All depends on the referees viewpoint.

I definitely think Young is getting veteran bias working against him. It seems referees default that the rookie CB is committing DPI when there's even incidental contact or none at all except only that which looks like contact. If Young was Sherman then I doubt he'd get these calls against him. 

[JoeyFlex5]

On 12/22/2016 at 4:55 PM, January J said:

No question. I think its partially BC his technique makes it look like there's contact when there's not. He uses that second hand a lot on the opponents back and goes in for the swat- but its not like he's pushing or holding the guy- he's just placing his hand there and in real time it looks like contact when its really not. All depends on the referees viewpoint.

and its pathetic that teams and players have to suffer for playing good defense all because the referees cant see what the hell is happening. 

since when is CONTACT pass interference? contact never has been the cause for pass interference, impeding the receivers path to the ball by rerouting him in any way is pass interference. changing his direction or speed by pushing/pulling/tugging/turning a player, locking an arm and preventing them from extending to make the catch, etc. etc. 

a damn hand on the players back is not pass interference and it never has been. its ridiculous, im so sick of refs and their bending of the rulebook to overcome their inabilities. "i have no clue what DPI looks like so i will throw a game breaking flag every single time i question myself".