Who's Up and Who's Down after the Eagles game

[supafly]

3 his way. He looked bad on at least 1. I don't see how rating his as "down" should be in any way controversial.

I suppose it's controversial because everyone has a different opinion on it. So far, you and QB12 are in agreement. Most of the others who have commented do not believe that allowing one completion to a WR of Jackson's caliber that came in a broken play should be cause to consider anyone "down." Allowing a catch on 3 balls to DeSean Jackson doesn't really make it a bad night, and there are plenty of other players who could've been listed in the down category instead based on that kind of silly logic.

As I said though, to each his own. I don't have any kind of problem with it at all.

What I do have a problem with is QB12's "assessment" based on the fact that "Moore did not have any passes defended." That's completely asinine.

By that token, Revis has had plenty of "down" games too then since he often plays without defending a pass breakup.

All I'm looking for is an explanation for QB12's assessment that "Moore has regressed" in his eyes, when the high majority of the posters said that the 1st game was pretty good + the positive reports from camp. All he can seem to give me is that "Moore didn't have any breakups last night"

 

[Triumph]

Brace played extremely well last night. What issues did you see with him?

Thats what I saw too.

Its about time as well.

 

[Triumph]

Is zero passes defensed by Moore eough for you?

ESPN showed highlights of Foles at halftime IIRC. 3 consecutive big pass plays and 29 for NE was in the play. It appeared to me that Foles was continually looking in Moores direction.

Moore had a bad game. He gets a D

 

[QB12]

Supafly - please don't take this as a shot, but have you considered the possibility that your 'prediction' about Moore in your signature prevents you from being objective about him?

 

[supafly]

Supafly - please don't take this as a shot, but have you considered th possibility that your 'prediction' about Moore in your signature prevents you from being objective about him?

I'm going to admit that I do want to see more of S.Moore this year, and was impressed by the limited action that we saw last year from a rookie UDFA.

That said, I also realize that he did a lot of poorer things at times too. I do think that he has earned the right to see another season here as a CB4, and also offers versatility as a possible safety too.

While I always try to stay unbiased, it is certainly possible that I have grown a soft spot for wanting to see him achieve more, sure. You would have a point there that would be hard to deny.

I still don't think that he has that bad of a game at all, but I can see why he'd be on the border of a "down" player last night too. I just thing that there was too limited of a sample size personally.

 

[QB12]

Well said Supafly. Peace, bro.

 

[supafly]

Well said Supafly. Peace, bro.

Same to you buddy. Like I said everyone will see things differently, so no big deal to me. Hopefully he rises up and knocks that pass down next time.

 

[The Gr8est]

Just one thing to keep in mind for perspective that I haven't seen mentioned. Isn't it possible that the Pats defenders were suffering from fatigue later in the game since they had to play so much of the game?

Not to be an excuse of anything by any means, I am just pointing out that with all of the Pats players sitting, the Pats reserves started against Philly's top unit, and even Philly's scrubs were fresher when they finally entered the game.

For example, I believe the announcers mentioned that Dowling and Moore played the entire game.

 

[Deus Irae]

I never claimed(or meant to claim) that he made only one bad throw. You were pointing out the int(that wasn't) as the be all and end all. Thats simply not the case. Of course he had some poor throws and I don't know of a QB that hasn't.

Your post:

It was only one throw so it is unimportant

Just check the 3 throws to the near sideline in the first minute and a half of this video, and then the next play on the video which is where he hits the Eagle player in the back:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7Q1E0A7PpU

He follows them by taking a sack when he could have thrown the ball away. That's 5 plays that are bad passes, bad decisions, or both, and that's only in the first half of the video.

There was huge improvement in the areas I talked about which was poise in the pocket, evading the primary pass rush and checking down well.

There was some improvement in some areas, and there were some major problems in others. However, when you're talking about improvement, you're comparing it to a terrible job from the game before.

Wow you are now gloating about calling a couple of QBs. Thats past history and bears no relevance. Anybody can be lucky over such a small sample size.

I wasn't gloating at all. Seriously, you can't grasp the difference between gloating and offering up previous examples to counter your "because you don't know what you are looking at" comment?

Who is backing your side in the media? Which former QB or QB coach is backing what you say?

I'd pop some tweets out but, for some reason, I'm currently having problems with Twitter feeds not going back beyond a few. I can tell you that Felger/Mazz weren't impressed, but I can't pull up quotes. Nonetheless, doing some thing better than last time, but making multiple bad passes that were really bad passes does not get him an "up", sorry.

 

[Deus Irae]

I suppose it's controversial because everyone has a different opinion on it. So far, you and QB12 are in agreement. Most of the others who have commented do not believe that allowing one completion to a WR of Jackson's caliber that came in a broken play should be cause to consider anyone "down." Allowing a catch on 3 balls to DeSean Jackson doesn't really make it a bad night, and there are plenty of other players who could've been listed in the down category instead based on that kind of silly logic.

As I said though, to each his own. I don't have any kind of problem with it at all.

What I do have a problem with is QB12's "assessment" based on the fact that "Moore did not have any passes defended." That's completely asinine.

By that token, Revis has had plenty of "down" games too then since he often plays without defending a pass breakup.

All I'm looking for is an explanation for QB12's assessment that "Moore has regressed" in his eyes, when the high majority of the posters said that the 1st game was pretty good + the positive reports from camp. All he can seem to give me is that "Moore didn't have any breakups last night"

I agree with you on the issue of passes defensed, but when did getting absolutely smoked 1/3 of the time become something other than a bad night?

 

[supafly]

Just one thing to keep in mind for perspective that I haven't seen mentioned. Isn't it possible that the Pats defenders were suffering from fatigue later in the game since they had to play so much of the game?

Not to be an excuse of anything by any means, I am just pointing out that with all of the Pats players sitting, the Pats reserves started against Philly's top unit, and even Philly's scrubs were fresher when they finally entered the game.

For example, I believe the announcers mentioned that Dowling and Moore played the entire game.

I think that's something to consider sure, but those guys also have to be ready for that kind of challenge too. If Moore is going to offer any versatility as a backup safety, and Dowling is trying to win a spot on the outside (which apparently isn't going to happen without an injury to Arrington), then they need to be able to work through that and keep their game legs.

I think there's some validity to your point though, but I don't want to make excuses. I still think that both have potential here, and I still think that we have a much more solidified CB unit than last year. We'll have to see though.

 

[supafly]

I agree with you on the issue of passes defensed, but when did getting absolutely smoked 1/3 of the time become something other than a bad night?

The only thing I would debate would be the smaller sample size, and the fact that although Moore did get beat by DeSean Jackson, one could argue that he didn't necessarily get smoked.

He certainly got beat, but it could go both ways as to how badly that happened.

I suppose it will all depend upon someone's expectation of the CB4 against a WR of Jackson's caliber too.

 

[Deus Irae]

...I suppose it will all depend upon someone's expectation of the CB4 against a WR of Jackson's caliber too.

Why should we have any expectation other than Moore being able to defend the play?

And he got smoked. If the ball had been thrown properly, is there any question as to what happens?


As for sample size, I agree that it's small. However, we're being asked for ups and downs based upon one game. Everyone's getting judged on a small sample size.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I never claimed(or meant to claim) that he made only one bad throw. You were pointing out the int(that wasn't) as the be all and end all. Thats simply not the case. Of course he had some poor throws and I don't know of a QB that hasn't.



There was huge improvement in the areas I talked about which was poise in the pocket, evading the primary pass rush and checking down well.

Wow you are now gloating about calling a couple of QBs. Thats past history and bears no relevance. Anybody can be lucky over such a small sample size.

Who is backing your side in the media? Which former QB or QB coach is backing what you say?

Not that they are always right, but most of the media reporting from camp have noted his continuing struggles and while he showed some improvement last night that has to be put in context as he got multiple do overs via nothing more than undisciplined Eagle defenders stupidity. Take them away and the TD drive never even happens and the INT stands or he's sacked for a substantial drive killing almost Tebowesque loss.

Chris price posted some pre season cumulative stats for the QB's. And a lot more than that will go into the evaluation Bill does. 30 practices since the spring.

Tom Brady: 19 total snaps (all in the preseason opener)
4-for-7 for 30 yards, 1 sack.

Brian Hoyer: 41 total snaps (9 in the preseason opener, 32 on Monday)
13-for-32 for 100 yards, 1 touchdown pass, 2 sacks.

Ryan Mallett: 48 total snaps (14 in the preseason opener, 34 on Monday)
18-for-39 for 194 yards, 1 touchdown pass, 1 interception.

Had the Eagles not gifted Mallett with multiple do overs his stat line would be quite different not to mention total 60 fewer yards, 0 TD, 2 mindnumbing INT, 1 sack.

I've laid it out for you previously courtesy of CNNSE but we'll do it one more time:

Ryan Mallett did not have a good first quarter. Getting the start he threw an interception on a third-and-7 pass intended for Deion Branch. It was a startlingly easy pick for Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie. That was wiped out by a roughing-the-passer penalty. Given a new life, Mallett took a sack on third-and-7 three plays later. That was wiped out by a defensive hold on Nnamdi Asomugha. Given a third life, Mallett eventually got the Patriots downfield and in for a touchdown early in the second. Mallett finished the quarter 6 for 12 for 60 yards. There was a drop by Jeremy Ebert in there but also a throw off the butt of Eagles corner Joselio Hanson and even on some of his completions (a crossing pattern to Julian Edelman) he threw inaccurately.

 

[supafly]

Why should we have any expectation other than Moore being able to defend the play?

And he got smoked. If the ball had been thrown properly, is there any question as to what happens?


As for sample size, I agree that it's small. However, we're being asked for ups and downs based upon one game. Everyone's getting judged on a small sample size.

One completion is pretty harsh though, even if it was 1/3 of the looks.

As far as expectation goes, yeah I do think that comes into it. Especially when you have a probowl caliber top 10 WR against a UDFA CB4 who hasn't seen much time in his entire career. I don't know how many "better" CB's Jackson has beaten in his day, but I wouldn't be surprised to see some good names on there.

If Moore is supposed to be able to hold DeSean Jackson 0 for 3 then he should be starting above Devin McCourty. I would think that tempering expectations for a UFDA who's practically a rookie against a guy like Jackson would be fair, but you may see if differently.

 

[Deus Irae]

One completion is pretty harsh though, even if it was 1/3 of the looks.

As far as expectation goes, yeah I do think that comes into it. Especially when you have a probowl caliber top 10 WR against a UDFA CB4 who hasn't seen much time in his entire career. I don't know how many "better" CB's Jackson has beaten in his day, but I wouldn't be surprised to see some good names on there.

If Moore is supposed to be able to hold DeSean Jackson 0 for 3 then he should be starting above Devin McCourty. I would think that tempering expectations for a UFDA who's practically a rookie against a guy like Jackson would be fair, but you may see if differently.

If Gost had missed a kick and gone 2 for 3, people wouldn't have been singing his praises. You have to judge based upon what you have.

And, no offense, but the UFDA stuff has got to have a kill date. The kid played in 9 games last year, including the Super Bowl. He's a veteran now, and a veteran who got burned. As you pointed out, he's not the first to have that happen as a result of trying to cover Mr. Jackson. He's just the one who had it happen last night.

 

[captain stone]

1) Dowling avoided LATE contact. Not contact at all costs. I can understand how would confuse the two.
Me: I thought that he was hoping that his receiver would go out of bounds, instead of aiming lower
& tackling.

2) Solder was average tonight. Not spectacular. He had two bad plays.
Me: If he's just average again v Tampa, then we have a problem.

3) One of the things that I noticed is that the Refs didn't call Philly once for lining up in the neutral zone, which they did on almost every play.
Me: In agreement. Reminded me of Joe Klecko during the Sack Exchange days w/ the Jesters,
when he always lined-up in the neutral zone.

Wendell was worse than Koppen last night.

In agreement; that's what I meant when I wrote "Replace Koppen w/ Wendell." Sorry for the confusion.

 

[supafly]

If Gost had missed a kick and gone 2 for 3, people wouldn't have been singing his praises.

That would depend on how long the FG attempts were, which is basically the same as fairly judging Moore on his assignment and how he did. If Gost had missed a 50+ yarder and made the other 2 then I'd be sticking up for him too.

At this point though, I'm going to let it go. You have some good thoughts and hopefully we see improvement from holding DeSean Jackson to a 1 for 3 night and allowing that completion.

There's no doubt that Moore has to show improvement, or like I said, he'd instantly be the #1 CB.

 

[Deus Irae]

That would depend on how long the FG attempts were, which is basically the same as fairly judging Moore on his assignment and how he did. If Gost had missed a 50+ yarder and made the other 2 then I'd be sticking up for him too.

At this point though, I'm going to let it go. You have some good thoughts and hopefully we see improvement from holding DeSean Jackson to a 1 for 3 night and allowing that completion.

There's no doubt that Moore has to show improvement, or like I said, he'd instantly be the #1 CB.

Change the bold to "hopefully we see improvement from getting totally smoked on 1 out of 3 passes, regardless of who the receiver is" and we'll be in agreement about Moore. There's a difference between having a completion made against you and getting smoked, after all.

 

[supafly]

Change the bold to "hopefully we see improvement from getting totally smoked on 1 out of 3 passes, regardless of who the receiver is" and we'll be in agreement about Moore. There's a difference between having a completion made against you and getting smoked, after all.

Certainly a fair enough point.