| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
skatebeanz
Joined: 13 Apr 2009
Posts: 18458
Location: Jamison. on the Sweet-sig.
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 9:11 am Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| rememberthevet wrote: | | thebeyonder wrote: | Can anyone tell me why Chip brought Dixon in if the former isn't going to implement an Oregon-like scheme?
The denial here is delicious. |
LOL, so you are saying that Chip is going to build his new offense around Dixon then? You do realize he was a practice squad player last year, right? I like Dixon, I really do, but acquiring him has absolutely no bearing on what the main offense is going to look like. He could be here for gadget plays. Who knows? Dixon's signing carries very little weight, I don't think anyone is in denial. Actually, you are delusional if you really think Dixon's signing had that much of an impact. |
WHy does he have to build around Dixon instead of using Dixon as a style of QB he wants for a backup? He brought Dixon in because he wants a mobile QB to take over if Vick /Geno get hurt so he doesn't have to change his RO offense.
_________________
Sig bet |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
killdawabbit
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 5583
Location: Somewhere you're not.
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 15, 2013 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| skatebeanz wrote: | | rememberthevet wrote: | | thebeyonder wrote: | Can anyone tell me why Chip brought Dixon in if the former isn't going to implement an Oregon-like scheme?
The denial here is delicious. |
LOL, so you are saying that Chip is going to build his new offense around Dixon then? You do realize he was a practice squad player last year, right? I like Dixon, I really do, but acquiring him has absolutely no bearing on what the main offense is going to look like. He could be here for gadget plays. Who knows? Dixon's signing carries very little weight, I don't think anyone is in denial. Actually, you are delusional if you really think Dixon's signing had that much of an impact. |
WHy does he have to build around Dixon instead of using Dixon as a style of QB he wants for a backup? He brought Dixon in because he wants a mobile QB to take over if Vick /Geno get hurt so he doesn't have to change his RO offense. |
There is nothing that proves or guarantees Kelly will use the read option based offense. Of course that isn't the same as saying he won't use it or at least incorporate parts of it it into whatever he uses. Signing Dixon literally points to nothing in particular other than he is a QB that has played in the NFL that Kelly is familiar with. That's it.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
skatebeanz
Joined: 13 Apr 2009
Posts: 18458
Location: Jamison. on the Sweet-sig.
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| killdawabbit wrote: | | skatebeanz wrote: | | rememberthevet wrote: | | thebeyonder wrote: | Can anyone tell me why Chip brought Dixon in if the former isn't going to implement an Oregon-like scheme?
The denial here is delicious. |
LOL, so you are saying that Chip is going to build his new offense around Dixon then? You do realize he was a practice squad player last year, right? I like Dixon, I really do, but acquiring him has absolutely no bearing on what the main offense is going to look like. He could be here for gadget plays. Who knows? Dixon's signing carries very little weight, I don't think anyone is in denial. Actually, you are delusional if you really think Dixon's signing had that much of an impact. |
WHy does he have to build around Dixon instead of using Dixon as a style of QB he wants for a backup? He brought Dixon in because he wants a mobile QB to take over if Vick /Geno get hurt so he doesn't have to change his RO offense. |
There is nothing that proves or guarantees Kelly will use the read option based offense. Of course that isn't the same as saying he won't use it or at least incorporate parts of it it into whatever he uses. Signing Dixon literally points to nothing in particular other than he is a QB that has played in the NFL that Kelly is familiar with. That's it. |
He knows Dixon but Oregon's offense under Chip as HC was different then when he was OC. Vastly different.
_________________
Sig bet |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
killdawabbit
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 5583
Location: Somewhere you're not.
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| skatebeanz wrote: | | killdawabbit wrote: | | skatebeanz wrote: | | rememberthevet wrote: | | thebeyonder wrote: | Can anyone tell me why Chip brought Dixon in if the former isn't going to implement an Oregon-like scheme?
The denial here is delicious. |
LOL, so you are saying that Chip is going to build his new offense around Dixon then? You do realize he was a practice squad player last year, right? I like Dixon, I really do, but acquiring him has absolutely no bearing on what the main offense is going to look like. He could be here for gadget plays. Who knows? Dixon's signing carries very little weight, I don't think anyone is in denial. Actually, you are delusional if you really think Dixon's signing had that much of an impact. |
WHy does he have to build around Dixon instead of using Dixon as a style of QB he wants for a backup? He brought Dixon in because he wants a mobile QB to take over if Vick /Geno get hurt so he doesn't have to change his RO offense. |
There is nothing that proves or guarantees Kelly will use the read option based offense. Of course that isn't the same as saying he won't use it or at least incorporate parts of it it into whatever he uses. Signing Dixon literally points to nothing in particular other than he is a QB that has played in the NFL that Kelly is familiar with. That's it. |
He knows Dixon but Oregon's offense under Chip as HC was different then when he was OC. Vastly different. |
So what's your point?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr. Philly
Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 30442
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
5 QB option.
_________________
| simonwayne wrote: | | LeBron has done for the NBA what Teen Mom has done for teenage pregnancies |
#JDI |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
skatebeanz
Joined: 13 Apr 2009
Posts: 18458
Location: Jamison. on the Sweet-sig.
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| killdawabbit wrote: | | skatebeanz wrote: | | killdawabbit wrote: | | skatebeanz wrote: | | rememberthevet wrote: | | thebeyonder wrote: | Can anyone tell me why Chip brought Dixon in if the former isn't going to implement an Oregon-like scheme?
The denial here is delicious. |
LOL, so you are saying that Chip is going to build his new offense around Dixon then? You do realize he was a practice squad player last year, right? I like Dixon, I really do, but acquiring him has absolutely no bearing on what the main offense is going to look like. He could be here for gadget plays. Who knows? Dixon's signing carries very little weight, I don't think anyone is in denial. Actually, you are delusional if you really think Dixon's signing had that much of an impact. |
WHy does he have to build around Dixon instead of using Dixon as a style of QB he wants for a backup? He brought Dixon in because he wants a mobile QB to take over if Vick /Geno get hurt so he doesn't have to change his RO offense. |
There is nothing that proves or guarantees Kelly will use the read option based offense. Of course that isn't the same as saying he won't use it or at least incorporate parts of it it into whatever he uses. Signing Dixon literally points to nothing in particular other than he is a QB that has played in the NFL that Kelly is familiar with. That's it. |
He knows Dixon but Oregon's offense under Chip as HC was different then when he was OC. Vastly different. |
So what's your point? |
My point is how comfortable is he with Dixon in reality if he isn't running an option based offense? He knows Dixon is nifty and can throw. While leaving 1 statue on the roster. I don't see how anyone can look at these QBs and think they are not going to run a read option based offense, using Shurmur as an adviser to help with complex route tree and QB development.
_________________
Sig bet |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AZ_Eaglesfan
Joined: 03 Jan 2013
Posts: 3738
Location: Arizona
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| skatebeanz wrote: | | My point is how comfortable is he with Dixon in reality if he isn't running an option based offense? He knows Dixon is nifty and can throw. While leaving 1 statue on the roster. I don't see how anyone can look at these QBs and think they are not going to run a read option based offense, using Shurmur as an adviser to help with complex route tree and QB development. |
How do you know though? Vick has run a pro style offense ever since he has been in the league. Same with Foles and Edwards. Dixon was a backup for the Steelers... another pro style offense. Just because these guys can run, doesn't necessarily mean we are running a read option offense. Will there be read option plays and formations that involve it? I am sure, but that doesn't mean that we are running an offense based off the read option. Everything your saying is just as much speculation as anyone's opinion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
birdman0069
Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 6264
Location: Key West, FL
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
The fact that we have 5 QB's on the roster, and very well may add another in draft, pretty much verifies Kelly doesn't think he has a QB that will be able to run is offense effectively.
_________________
Props to Eagles _808 on the sig.
PE, the new poster child for birth control.
Birdman, slowest to 10K
Eagles Watch-Brandon Boykin
5 tackles, 2 Asst., 2 Pass defended, 1 Int.
0 KO return, yards |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
killdawabbit
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 5583
Location: Somewhere you're not.
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| birdman0069 wrote: | | The fact that we have 5 QB's on the roster, and very well may add another in draft, pretty much verifies Kelly doesn't think he has a QB that will be able to run is offense effectively. |
Or it verifies that he wants his QB to win the job, not be handed it. Particularly because the Eagles were not going into the season with the starter established regardless of who was coach.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
killdawabbit
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 5583
Location: Somewhere you're not.
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| skatebeanz wrote: | | He knows Dixon but Oregon's offense under Chip as HC was different then when he was OC. Vastly different. |
So what's your point?[/quote]My point is how comfortable is he with Dixon in reality if he isn't running an option based offense? He knows Dixon is nifty and can throw. While leaving 1 statue on the roster. I don't see how anyone can look at these QBs and think they are not going to run a read option based offense, using Shurmur as an adviser to help with complex route tree and QB development.[/quote]
Your previous statement doesn't do anything to make this point, though. At all. You're jumping all over the place.
AZ handled the rest of the response well enough for me.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oland11
Joined: 15 Jul 2011
Posts: 7530
Location: "This game is over!" - Chuck Bednarik
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 7:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Assuming we don't draft a QB this year, the three QBs will be Vick, Foles and Dixon.
Most likely in that order until Chip realizes how much Vick sucks and cuts him.
_________________
2013 Eagles Birdwatch: Trent Cole - Tackles:39 Sacks:3 Forced Fumbles:2 Int:0 Safeties:1 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
birdman0069
Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Posts: 6264
Location: Key West, FL
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| killdawabbit wrote: | | birdman0069 wrote: | | The fact that we have 5 QB's on the roster, and very well may add another in draft, pretty much verifies Kelly doesn't think he has a QB that will be able to run is offense effectively. |
Or it verifies that he wants his QB to win the job, not be handed it. Particularly because the Eagles were not going into the season with the starter established regardless of who was coach. |
When you have 5 below average players on the roster, does it really matter who wins the starting job? Of all the QB's on this roster only Vick could start for another team in this league and then he could only start for maybe 3 teams.
Great, competition between 5 below average QB's. Sorry if I can't get excited over that.
People that think Kelly's scheme is going to somehow make bad players good are in for a long, long season.
_________________
Props to Eagles _808 on the sig.
PE, the new poster child for birth control.
Birdman, slowest to 10K
Eagles Watch-Brandon Boykin
5 tackles, 2 Asst., 2 Pass defended, 1 Int.
0 KO return, yards |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FootballProdiG
Joined: 16 Sep 2012
Posts: 5965
Location: The Film Room
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| birdman0069 wrote: | | killdawabbit wrote: | | birdman0069 wrote: | | The fact that we have 5 QB's on the roster, and very well may add another in draft, pretty much verifies Kelly doesn't think he has a QB that will be able to run is offense effectively. |
Or it verifies that he wants his QB to win the job, not be handed it. Particularly because the Eagles were not going into the season with the starter established regardless of who was coach. |
When you have 5 below average players on the roster, does it really matter who wins the starting job? Of all the QB's on this roster only Vick could start for another team in this league and then he could only start for maybe 3 teams.
Great, competition between 5 below average QB's. Sorry if I can't get excited over that.
People that think Kelly's scheme is going to somehow make bad players good are in for a long, long season. |
I don't think anyone disagrees with you. We all know they are below average QB's. But in certain schemes, certain C level players can become B level players. While other C level players become D level. I wouldn't ask Tom Brady to run the read option because he runs like a 6.0 40. It would make an A level QB turn to like a D level QB. However, if you make a scheme around the talent of your players it will make them better. That's why Kelly was so well regarded at Oregon. He helped his players succeed. He wasn't "forcing schemes" on him like some other teams do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
killdawabbit
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 5583
Location: Somewhere you're not.
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| birdman0069 wrote: | | killdawabbit wrote: | | birdman0069 wrote: | | The fact that we have 5 QB's on the roster, and very well may add another in draft, pretty much verifies Kelly doesn't think he has a QB that will be able to run is offense effectively. |
Or it verifies that he wants his QB to win the job, not be handed it. Particularly because the Eagles were not going into the season with the starter established regardless of who was coach. |
When you have 5 below average players on the roster, does it really matter who wins the starting job? Of all the QB's on this roster only Vick could start for another team in this league and then he could only start for maybe 3 teams.
Great, competition between 5 below average QB's. Sorry if I can't get excited over that.
People that think Kelly's scheme is going to somehow make bad players good are in for a long, long season. |
You sure made an effort to put words in my mouth and throw out a lot of pure opinion/speculation didn't you?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
McNabbMcFadden
Joined: 25 Feb 2007
Posts: 31632
Location: State College, PA
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 2:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| oland11 wrote: | Assuming we don't draft a QB this year, the three QBs will be Vick, Foles and Dixon.
Most likely in that order until Chip realizes how much Vick sucks and cuts him. |
Agreed except benches for either Foles or Dixon.
_________________
Sig by Kiltman
| Bleedin_Green36 wrote: | | Normally when you hold someone, it's considered holding. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
