Who didn't want the Eagles to win? Probably even New Englanders are getting tired of the Patriots and their entitled attitude.
It will be interesting to see what happens to Foles and how he does next year. I could see him being traded to Cleveland for one of their first round draft picks.
In post 1917, T-Bone wrote:It was the correct call. You don't overturn the referee if the play is close.
There's definitive video evidence that shows you it's not a catch., It's precisely the type of play that should be over turned. Ball still moving, no control, foot steps out of bounds. It's textbook no catch.
Except that's not how the rules work. You need clear indisputable evidence to overturn the call on the field. That play was borderline, and when that happens, you defer to the call on the field.
This is a horrible philosophy. Referees need to be focused solely on making the right decision, not sticking w/ their decision unless it's incredibly clear they screwed up.
In post 1928, BROseidon wrote:It's like "oh the ball moved a centimeter in his hands CLEARLY NOT IN CONTROL," and like that's, uh, dumb.
Nick Foles caught a touchdown and was great, definitely MVP
What? You can absolutely be valuable to your team in a loss. Throwing for 500 yards makes somebody valuable to their team and defines them as one of the best players in that game regardless of the outcome. There can be great performances in defeat and poor performances in victory.
In post 1949, Bella wrote:GG Eagles. Bad call on the TD aside, which didn't in the end really impact that result, the bigger difference was special teams mistakes. The 4 dropped points would have changed the approach to the game, I think.
If I'm John Dorsey right now, I'm calling the Eagles and saying "Hey, you want the #4 overall pick in exchange for Foles?". Super Bowl winning backup-QB for a high first round pick is a good deal for both teams.
Why on earth would you give the #4 pick for Nick Foles? He had what? 2 good games? By all means give him some credit for taking over and leading philly to this, but he had an amazing supporting cast as well and there's nothing that tells me that something drastic changed over these past two games that made him worthy of that high of a pick.
In post 1967, drealmerz7 wrote:the value in that quote is referring to the value in relation to being MVP - meaning MOST valuable
you are not the most valuable player in the game if you were on the losing side, it's basic logic
What??? An individual player's value is not directly determined by whether or not their team wins or loses the game. It should be determined solely by their contributions. MVP is an individual award and so by definition you don't give individual awards to the best team or exclude somebody from receiving an individual award because their team doesn't do well.
That was heart-wrenching to say the least. Brady played his heart out and the defense couldn't make just one play in the 4th to help him out. Just one when it actually mattered. Hightower made that play in the 4th against ATL last year and gave Brady a chance. Oh well.
What's o/u on the number of years it takes uzi to be a giants fan after bill and Brady retire? 5? 6? I got the under. Can't trust those new York based "pats" fans.
Forgot to comment on Pederson. That was an amazing show of coaching I never expected when hearing he'd be coming to Philly.
In regards to Foles, he is clearly good with the right game plan and tools around him. These last string of games are not the only time he's played lights out. He had a down year after Chip Kelly shipped away all the talent on the roster. And look who else failed for the Rams under Fischer, Goff and Keenum. But there isn't any way the Eagles can keep both on the roster. I'm guessing they keep him around long enough to see if Wentz is fully recovered, then trade him mid season. Unless Wentz doesn't recover, or they want insurance for next year as most of the team is coming back.
