Semi-good news for Giants

[Herc]

Why did the Eagles have the pick before us when they beat us in the Divisional Playoff?

 

it goes by regular season record except the two superbowl teams

[Allstarjim]

the dog disagrees to an extent. first, thomas is no longer on the eagles, so it was a void they needed to fill, and they did so by getting what many feel is the best or one of the best in the business at that position. as he is much younger than thomas, the deal was a significant upgrade. second, the dog isn't so sure they really covet a big time wr, since they seem to be set in their ways with what they have at that position, and the reality is, their offense is effective without a true number one based on the system they employ. if they do want boldin or edwards, they could still offer the picks, so your point is not necessarily accurate....regardless, it matters not. these 4 teams in that division are always going to battle it out to the end regardless of what they bring in during the offseason...

 

 

Doggy, you have obviously not been paying attention to the news. They covet Anquan Boldin. It remains to be seen if they will actually pull the trigger, but it is no secret that they have strong interest in him specifically, and acquiring a big time receiver more generally.

 

Secondly, Peters may be younger, but that doesn't make him better. Thomas is 34. Only 2 left tackles in the entire NFL gave up fewer sacks than the 2 he allowed in 2008 (Ryan Clady, Michael Roos). Peters was dead last in the entire NFL in sacks allowed of all left tackles. In fact, you can throw in all the right tackles in and he would still be dead last, with 11.5 sacks allowed IN ONLY 13 STARTS. And he made the Pro Bowl, which shows you what a joke the Pro Bowl is. So if you call that an upgrade than you are out of your mind, to put it politely.

 

The fact that their offense is effective without a true #1 is completely irrelevant to the topic. If they did acquire a number 1 receiver (something they are trying to do), their offense would be more dangerous, and if they did so prior to the Giants swinging a deal, they would hurt the Giants negotiating position. They still have ability to swing a deal, I only mentioned that they hurt their position A LITTLE, but they can still do it. That is why I said it was only SEMI-good news. Plus I needed a tie-in to the Giants to post it in this forum, as I thought it was newsworthy to bring up.

 

Peters is over-hyped. Thomas PERFORMED. They also let Jon Runyan go and have replaced him with Stacy Andrews. They got younger, but I think most Giants fans would agree that they are happy that Runyan and Thomas are gone. Those guys were horses that always played well against the Giants and the rest of the NFL overall. The Eagles doing this may pay off for them, but they really can't be any BETTER than what Runyan and Thomas have given them, the best they can do is maintain the level of performance of their predecessors.

 

 

 

 

 

[ksm7]

Doggy, you have obviously not been paying attention to the news. They covet Anquan Boldin. It remains to be seen if they will actually pull the trigger, but it is no secret that they have strong interest in him specifically, and acquiring a big time receiver more generally.

 

Secondly, Peters may be younger, but that doesn't make him better. Thomas is 34. Only 2 left tackles in the entire NFL gave up fewer sacks than the 2 he allowed in 2008 (Ryan Clady, Michael Roos). Peters was dead last in the entire NFL in sacks allowed of all left tackles. In fact, you can throw in all the right tackles in and he would still be dead last, with 11.5 sacks allowed IN ONLY 13 STARTS. And he made the Pro Bowl, which shows you what a joke the Pro Bowl is. So if you call that an upgrade than you are out of your mind, to put it politely.

 

The fact that their offense is effective without a true #1 is completely irrelevant to the topic. If they did acquire a number 1 receiver (something they are trying to do), their offense would be more dangerous, and if they did so prior to the Giants swinging a deal, they would hurt the Giants negotiating position. They still have ability to swing a deal, I only mentioned that they hurt their position A LITTLE, but they can still do it. That is why I said it was only SEMI-good news. Plus I needed a tie-in to the Giants to post it in this forum, as I thought it was newsworthy to bring up.

 

Peters is over-hyped. Thomas PERFORMED. They also let Jon Runyan go and have replaced him with Stacy Andrews. They got younger, but I think most Giants fans would agree that they are happy that Runyan and Thomas are gone. Those guys were horses that always played well against the Giants and the rest of the NFL overall. The Eagles doing this may pay off for them, but they really can't be any BETTER than what Runyan and Thomas have given them, the best they can do is maintain the level of performance of their predecessors.

 

no, the dog hasn't really stay too in tuned to the eagle news, but there hasn't been a whole lot of discussion that the dog is aware of specific to them wanting bolden, other than they have shown interest, which in NFL terms means little...and since they haven't ruled it out, who knows.

 

as for peter's sack stats, well, as with all stats, a lot can go into that. the bills were among the top in the league in sacks allowed, so the problem stems from the offensive line in general. the dog would be curious to know how they determine these stats (i.e., does the team submit them after breaking down film and ensuring that each individual lineman was responsible for the sack...etc...). regardless, it seems you and the dog are looking at this from different perspectives - you say they aren't any better by signing these two lineman because they had runyan and thomas...the dog says they didn't have either player, so adding two younger, top players in these respective positions makes them better. if they stayed at the same level, so be it, they beat the giants twice. again, this signing really isn't good news for other nfc east teams, not even semi-good news. the eagles were 6th in the league in passing and 9th in total offense, so the dog isn't sure how actively involved in the wr market they are...we shall see...

[Allstarjim]

no, the dog hasn't really stay too in tuned to the eagle news, but there hasn't been a whole lot of discussion that the dog is aware of specific to them wanting bolden, other than they have shown interest, which in NFL terms means little...and since they haven't ruled it out, who knows.

 

as for peter's sack stats, well, as with all stats, a lot can go into that. the bills were among the top in the league in sacks allowed, so the problem stems from the offensive line in general. the dog would be curious to know how they determine these stats (i.e., does the team submit them after breaking down film and ensuring that each individual lineman was responsible for the sack...etc...). regardless, it seems you and the dog are looking at this from different perspectives - you say they aren't any better by signing these two lineman because they had runyan and thomas...the dog says they didn't have either player, so adding two younger, top players in these respective positions makes them better. if they stayed at the same level, so be it, they beat the giants twice. again, this signing really isn't good news for other nfc east teams, not even semi-good news. the eagles were 6th in the league in passing and 9th in total offense, so the dog isn't sure how actively involved in the wr market they are...we shall see...

 

If you don't understand that signing a guy who allowed the most sacks than any offensive lineman in the NFL last year in only 13 games is not an improvement over one of the most consistently great tackles (Thomas) than I don't know what to tell you. They are replacing Thomas and Runyan. The fact that those players were gone by the time they acquired Andrews and Peters is not relevant to my point, which is they did not upgrade over last year's version of their offensive line. It is not a given that the two players they acquired will perform at the level that Runyan and Thomas provided, not by a long shot.

 

And when you personally are responsible for allowing 11.5 sacks, it seems you are part of the problem on that terrible offensive line. Still wondering how as you said, adding these players makes them better, when, as you noted, the Eagles were 6th in passing and 9th in total offense last year.

 

Osi is going to have Peters for lunch with a side of Campbell's chunky soup that Donovan is personally going prepare for him after Osi makes him his bitch.

[ksm7]

If you don't understand that signing a guy who allowed the most sacks than any offensive lineman in the NFL last year in only 13 games is not an improvement over one of the most consistently great tackles (Thomas) than I don't know what to tell you. They are replacing Thomas and Runyan. The fact that those players were gone by the time they acquired Andrews and Peters is not relevant to my point, which is they did not upgrade over last year's version of their offensive line. It is not a given that the two players they acquired will perform at the level that Runyan and Thomas provided, not by a long shot.

 

And when you personally are responsible for allowing 11.5 sacks, it seems you are part of the problem on that terrible offensive line. Still wondering how as you said, adding these players makes them better, when, as you noted, the Eagles were 6th in passing and 9th in total offense last year.

 

Osi is going to have Peters for lunch with a side of Campbell's chunky soup that Donovan is personally going prepare for him after Osi makes him his bitch.

 

again, the dog is curious how the sack stat is derived...that could speak to the high number. additionally, since the team finished in the top 5 in sacks allowed, you have to look at the QB situation to see how many of those sacks fall on their shoulders as well...the dog knows it is hard to imagine that edwards and jp losman would make any errors at all, but who knows...

 

just like you can't guarentee that these players will perform at a high level, so it is true that you can't guarentee that aging lineman can maintain a high level...that is why teams make moves like this, to get younger and stay productive.

 

you misunderstood the dog's point in citing that the eagles finished 6th in passing and 9th in offense. it wasn't to disprove your argument that the eagles didn't get any better with these signings (by the way, the fact that they didn't have two starting tackles on the roster prior to is actually relevant in arguing that signing two potential top tackles to fill the voids would make the team better), it was to argue that the eagles just may not be so overly concerned with giving up a lot in a trade for a boldin or edwards (the original point of your thread being that a division rival signing a top tackle by everyone's standards but your own to fill an obvious void is semi good news for their division rival)...the dog thinks you may have missed that because you were too busy thinking of funny campbell soup jokes to make...gold. pure gold...

 

as the dog has said, these teams in this division tend to always set themselves up to be in the battle to the final week, so...

[xxi-xxv]

There is no way to diminsh how good a player Peters is and how this helps the Eagles, even off a bad year for Peters.

 

Would anyone be angry and say the Giants are not any better if they get Edwards off a bad year in Cleveland(led the league in drops)and that they were better off with plax, who like Runyan and Thomas is no longer on the Giants roster?

 

 

Aside from the fact I hate the Eagles, I can see nothing but good in this deal for them. They will need it though as the ability for any O line to block the deep, talent laden Giants D line is a difficult task.