Nick Sirianni - How much credit does he get?

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

3 hours ago, Nabbs4u said:

I love when people use the "Eagles haven't played anybody " excuse to discredit what they've done. As a QB, Defense,  HC and Team.

As if it's the Eagles fault the Cardinals,  Packers and Titans all playoff teams in 2021, sucked and regressed in 2022? That the Vikings and Cowboys,  are who we know they are choke artists? Saints and Colts didn't take the next step based off last years teams barely missing the playoffs? That when Teams like the Giants and WTF get better take the next steps, they too don't count as a quality win despite handling most of their AFC opponents themselves as well? 

Coming into the season most people and pundits had the Eagles finishing at best in 2nd behind Dallas in the 8-10 win range. No one was predicting #1 seed, possible MVP candidate, DPOY candidate, SB birth, offensive and defensive records being set, no one was projecting 16 or 17 wins on the season, ABSOLUTELY NO ONE!!!!

Nick Sirianni has nothing to prove, least of all to that Eagles lockerroom. 

Depending on which site you visit, the Eagles were either middle of the pack, or had the 3rd highest odds of any team to win the Superbowl before the season started. Additionally, Caesars had Jalen Hurts as an MVP candidate before the season started as well.

There's not a single person who's going to believe this narrative that the Eagles weren't among the most hyped teams coming into this season. It was a damn well foregone conclusion they were going to steamroll their schedule once it was released. I remember very clearly having those conversations in that thread here.

Edited February 4, 2023 by AFlaccoSeagulls

[Danger]

39 minutes ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

Depending on which site you visit, the Eagles were either middle of the pack, or had the 3rd highest odds of any team to win the Superbowl before the season started. Additionally, Caesars had Jalen Hurts as an MVP candidate before the season started as well.

There's not a single person who's going to believe this narrative that the Eagles weren't among the most hyped teams coming into this season. It was a damn well foregone conclusion they were going to steamroll their schedule once it was released. I remember very clearly having those conversations in that thread here.

The narrative surrounding the eagles started to shift after the draft and then further so when we signed Bradbury.

One year ago. The majority of people expected us to regress this year.

[Nabbs4u]

1 hour ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

It was a damn well foregone conclusion they were going to steamroll their schedule once it was released.

So people knew the Eagles would beat GB, Tennessee,, Pittsburgh, AZ, Dallas , Colts and the Vikings  before the season started? 

Thats news to me. Especially since most still wondered if Jalen Hurts was capable of being a FQB? Especially after the preseason.  It wasn't until maybe week 8 of the season,  people started to recognize,  oh **** they could run the table.

You remember that narrative first 2 months don't you? I sure AF do. Eagles barely beat Detroit, barely beat Cardinals , barely beat the Jags, only beat a Dakless Cowboys team. They aren't really good. 

Once again NO ONE had the Eagles having this season setting NFL records on both Offense and Defense before the draft/FA. Not buying it.

Edited February 4, 2023 by Nabbs4u

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

58 minutes ago, Danger said:

The narrative surrounding the eagles started to shift after the draft and then further so when we signed Bradbury.

One year ago. The majority of people expected us to regress this year.

Well yeah most of the predictions I remember were made after the draft and major signings started when rosters were more or less concrete and we were about to head into the pre-season. I totally agree that before all of that people expected PHI to regress. Then they signed Bradburry. Then they traded for AJB. Then they had a solid draft. Then the other teams in the division didn't do anything lol

20 minutes ago, Nabbs4u said:

So people knew the Eagles would beat GB, Tennessee,, Pittsburgh, AZ, Dallas , Colts and the Vikings  before the season started? 

Thats news to me. Especially since most still wondered if Jalen Hurts was capable of being a FQB? Especially after the preseason.  It wasn't until maybe week 8 of the season,  people started to recognize,  oh **** they could run the table.

You remember that narrative first 2 months don't you? I sure AF do. Eagles barely beat Detroit, barely beat Cardinals , barely beat the Jags, only beat a Dakless Cowboys team. They aren't really good. 

Once again NO ONE had the Eagles having this season setting NFL records on both Offense and Defense before the draft/FA. Not buying it.

TEN, PIT, AZ, and IND? Uhhhh yes? lol I don't recall any of those teams being thought of as good before the season started but maybe my memory is fading.

Hurts was a leading MVP candidate for like the entire year bruh idk what you're talking about with him. 

What records did the Eagles set and were they just the product of the 17-game season and an extremely laughable schedule?

Edited February 4, 2023 by AFlaccoSeagulls

[Nabbs4u]

5 hours ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

What records did the Eagles set

Total Rushing TD in a season. 

Rushing TD by a QB

First team in NFL History with 4 players with 10 plus sacks

3rd in NFL history in total sacks. Could break 84 Bears record, SB Sunday.

Edited February 4, 2023 by Nabbs4u

[Dr A W Niloc]

1 hour ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

Well yeah most of the predictions I remember were made after the draft and major signings started when rosters were more or less concrete and we were about to head into the pre-season. I totally agree that before all of that people expected PHI to regress. Then they signed Bradburry. Then they traded for AJB. Then they had a solid draft. Then the other teams in the division didn't do anything lol

      More or less, but I wouldn't use the term "regress".  Before kickoff time of Game #1 Philadelphia was regarded as one of two stacked teams and the other, San Fran, had QB issues.  The narrative among the geeks was that, barring injury, Philly would be favored in every game (or less than a 3-point underdog on the road).  They did lose three, but only one with Hurts.

      The narrative was that the Eagles might choke--it has happened before--and, perhaps, let Dallas sneak in, but Sirianni prevented that from happening.  There were surprises in 2022, as in any year, but this team wasn't among them.

[Nabbs4u]

I sure am glad everyone was right and knew GB, TB and the LAR weren't going anywhere this year and the Eagles were  SB bound before the season. 👌

 

Edited February 4, 2023 by Nabbs4u

[Ryan_W]

I knew they were playoff bound ☺️

[Snotbubbles]

19 hours ago, Danger said:

The narrative surrounding the eagles started to shift after the draft and then further so when we signed Bradbury.

One year ago. The majority of people expected us to regress this year.

I don't think even the most loyal fan thought Jalen Hurts would take the leap he took.  Tampa Bay was laughing at the guy saying he couldn't read defenses during last seasons playoffs.  He turned into an MVP caliber player.    

[Snotbubbles]

18 hours ago, Nabbs4u said:

Total Rushing TD in a season. 

Rushing TD by a QB

First team in NFL History with 4 players with 10 plus sacks

3rd in NFL history in total sacks. Could break 84 Bears record, SB Sunday.

Could be the first team to win 10 games against teams with a winning record if they win next Sunday...but they didn't play anybody.

[Soko]

23 hours ago, Nabbs4u said:

I love when people use the "Eagles haven't played anybody " excuse to discredit what they've done. As a QB, Defense,  HC and Team.

As if it's the Eagles fault the Cardinals,  Packers and Titans all playoff teams in 2021, sucked and regressed in 2022? That the Vikings and Cowboys,  are who we know they are choke artists? Saints and Colts didn't take the next step based off last years teams barely missing the playoffs? That when Teams like the Giants and WTF get better take the next steps, they too don't count as a quality win despite handling most of their AFC opponents themselves as well? 

Hear this a lot. 

Not even talking about the Eagles specifically, but yeah, in conversations like this, it absolutely makes sense to take those sort of things into consideration. No, it isn’t their “fault”, Philly didn’t make the schedule, but that doesn’t mean you throw that context out the window, if it applies. 

As for this team, they absolutely have had an easier playoff run than your typical SB team. Especially compared to the recent ones in the AFC. Again, not their “fault”, they played (and beat) the teams in front of them in a brutal fashion. But I think trying to avoid the truth of the last two games at least, is about as delusional as anyone trying to legitimately say the Eagles are fraudulent (which I don’t even think anyone has, honestly).

[Snotbubbles]

25 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

Hear this a lot. 

Not even talking about the Eagles specifically, but yeah, in conversations like this, it absolutely makes sense to take those sort of things into consideration. No, it isn’t their “fault”, Philly didn’t make the schedule, but that doesn’t mean you throw that context out the window, if it applies. 

As for this team, they absolutely have had an easier playoff run than your typical SB team. Especially compared to the recent ones in the AFC. Again, not their “fault”, they played (and beat) the teams in front of them in a brutal fashion. But I think trying to avoid the truth of the last two games at least, is about as delusional as anyone trying to legitimately say the Eagles are fraudulent (which I don’t even think anyone has, honestly).

Before you can even engage in a "the Eagles didn't play anybody" it would be good to define who you think were the "good" teams. 

The Eagles beat 9 teams this season with a winning record.  Were any of those teams "good"?  Were the NY Giants "good"?  They won 9 games then went on the road and won a playoff game.  Same thing with Jacksonville.  Were they "good"?  Won 9 games and a playoff game.  Were the 49ers "good", they had won 12 straight games coming into last week and had the #1 defense in the league when Philly beat them.  Minnesota?  Dallas?  Who were the good teams in the league this year? 

Seriously, if you're going to get into the "Eagles didn't beat any good teams", make sure you also look at who KC beat this season.  Their best win was last week against Cincy.  Before that, they beat a SF team that had just traded for McCaffrey (and before Purdy), and the LA Chargers.  All the other games against "good" teams they lost.  

[Soko]

8 minutes ago, Snotbubbles said:

Before you can even engage in a "the Eagles didn't play anybody" it would be good to define who you think were the "good" teams. 

The Eagles beat 9 teams this season with a winning record.  Were any of those teams "good"?  Were the NY Giants "good"?  They won 9 games then went on the road and won a playoff game.  Same thing with Jacksonville.  Were they "good"?  Won 9 games and a playoff game.  Were the 49ers "good", they had won 12 straight games coming into last week and had the #1 defense in the league when Philly beat them.  Minnesota?  Dallas?  Who were the good teams in the league this year? 

Seriously, if you're going to get into the "Eagles didn't beat any good teams", make sure you also look at who KC beat this season.  Their best win was last week against Cincy.  Before that, they beat a SF team that had just traded for McCaffrey (and before Purdy), and the LA Chargers.  All the other games against "good" teams they lost.  

All things that someone who believes “the Eagles didn’t beat any good teams” would have to consider, sure. Although, I’d highlight that most would agree the Chiefs are more “established” and have less to prove with their strength of schedule.

My post has more to do with it “not being their fault” and subsequently downplaying context, simply because it was out of Philly’s control who they played.

EDIT: And to entertain a part of your post, no, I don’t think anyone would consider the torn UCL Purdy/concussed Josh Johnson 49ers to be “good”, lol. For a large portion of that game they legitimately had no one that could throw a ball, almost literally. Again, not something anyone can control…but it happened.

Edited February 4, 2023 by Yin-Yang

[Snotbubbles]

3 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

All things that someone who believes “the Eagles didn’t beat any good teams” would have to consider, sure. Although, I’d highlight that most would agree the Chiefs are more “established” and have less to prove with their strength of schedule.

My post has more to do with it “not being their fault” and subsequently downplaying context, simply because it was out of Philly’s control who they played.

EDIT: And to entertain a part of your post, no, I don’t think anyone would consider the torn UCL Purdy/concussed Josh Johnson 49ers to be “good”, lol. For a large portion of that game they legitimately had no one that could throw a ball, almost literally,

The UCL Purdy/concussed Johnson didn't come into the game that way.  Philly caused that with their play.  

[Soko]

Just now, Snotbubbles said:

The UCL Purdy/concussed Johnson didn't come into the game that way.  Philly caused that with their play.  

Weird flex, but okay. Props to them for injuring players, lol. 

Again, doesn’t really change the fact that the opposition was largely without a passer for the majority of the game. However it happened, however it came about - for most of the game, hardly anyone could throw. 

But that’s besides the point. For example, are people supposed to be more (or equally as) impressed that Philly beat the 49ers, knowing the complete context of the game and how the QBs got hurt, as they were with KC beating Burrow and Cincy?