Jump to content

Week 17 Games


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Packerraymond said:

Jalen Hurts is not a great QB, but he's clearly a superior one to Nate Sudfield. That's blatantly apparent. 

You think if the roles were reversed and that game decided the fate of their season, that they make that QB switch?

Miami tanked when they replaced Tua w/ Fitzpatrick in Week 16, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, incognito_man said:

Miami tanked when they replaced Tua w/ Fitzpatrick in Week 16, right?

So are we just ignoring what that player has done on the field prior and saying if you replace a QB playing poorly mid-game, it's a move made to go for a win because that QB couldn't be worse? Because we're comparing a top 30 QB in the NFL to Nate Sudfield right now.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

So are we just ignoring what that player has done on the field prior and saying if you replace a QB playing poorly mid-game, it's a move made to go for a win because that QB couldn't be worse? Because we're comparing a top 30 QB in the NFL to Nate Sudfield right now.

duh

this is obvious to everyone, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

duh

this is obvious to everyone, right?

So we should've ignored talent levels and replaced Rodgers with Boyle at half of the Bucs game and our win % would've gone up?

Sorry that's just not how I look at football. Each play is it's own individual entity and you can't use past plays to judge what's going to occur on future ones, take our kickass first half in Indy to probably our worst quarter of the season occuring concurrently.

If you want to win a game, you play your best 11, unless it's an injury that's causing the poor performance and the backup is healthy.

No chance in hell Philly pulls Hurts if that game gets them the division crown. They did it to improve their draft pick. Which was the right call.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

They did it to improve their draft pick. Which was the right call.

Ok. You can believe your informed opinion on this.

I'll believe the Eagles' captain, players, and coach and the obviousness of the move from a rational perspective.

We can move on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Ok. You can believe your informed opinion on this.

I'll believe the Eagles' captain, players, and coach and the obviousness of the move from a rational perspective.

We can move on.

Yup, move on ... who the heck cares about the Eagles ... LOSERS.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Packer_ESP said:

Why play Hurts for 2+ quarters then?

Because that was their plan all along? I read somewhere before the game that Sudfield was going to get snaps. 

They were going to play backups throughout the game, because they didn't want to win that game.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, incognito_man said:

Miami tanked when they replaced Tua w/ Fitzpatrick in Week 16, right?

Honestly, Fitz was the better QB, at least down the stretch...

Tua sucked in Week 17 too, they needed Fitz.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Because that was their plan all along? I read somewhere before the game that Sudfield was going to get snaps. 

They were going to play backups throughout the game, because they didn't want to win that game.

 

This is where people misconstrue the meaning of tanking. It doesn't necessarily mean deliberately trying to lose, it can simply be "not trying to win," which is slightly different but has the same result.

To think about it another way, would Philly have played Sudfeld to "get him snaps" if they could have made the playoffs with the win? The answer is obviously and unequivocally, No. If that's the case, then simply put, they weren't "trying to win" against Wash.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Packerraymond said:

So we should've ignored talent levels and replaced Rodgers with Boyle at half of the Bucs game and our win % would've gone up?

Sorry that's just not how I look at football. Each play is it's own individual entity and you can't use past plays to judge what's going to occur on future ones, take our kickass first half in Indy to probably our worst quarter of the season occuring concurrently.

If you want to win a game, you play your best 11, unless it's an injury that's causing the poor performance and the backup is healthy.

No chance in hell Philly pulls Hurts if that game gets them the division crown. They did it to improve their draft pick. Which was the right call.

Would you have been upset if we had pulled Rodgers for Boyle at the end of the Bucs game?

 

Or would you have been upset if we had already sewn up the 1 seed against the Bears and determined that Love would get to play the 4th quarter of that game?  Or say Rodgers had covid, and Boyle got the start and struggled, would you not want to at least see if Love can right the ship?

 

They wanted to evaluate Sudfeld.  They determined before the game that they would do so.  Hurts stunk out loud, which is a great reason to put in the QB that they wanted to evaluate.  How is it more of a tank to replace a struggling back-up, rookie QB than sticking with him and still losing?  They found out that Sudfeld sucks too.  Wouldn't it have been nice for Philly to find out that they have a Matt Flynn type of player?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Packerraymond said:

Because that was their plan all along? I read somewhere before the game that Sudfield was going to get snaps. 

They were going to play backups throughout the game, because they didn't want to win that game.

What I'm saying is: if, according to you, they didn't want to play the game and Sudfeld is the worse QB that allows them to achieve that, why not just start him?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...