>>>At the point Peete was injured, the Eagles had already blown
>>>the 10 point lead and were trailing by 7, 10-17. I see no
>>>evidence from what actually happened in the game that Peete's
>>>playing in the second half would have improved the Eagles
>>Aikman and Dallas had gone three and out on their first possession.
>>Does that mean that you didn't think they would have improved on
>>subsequent possessions? Just because the Eagles offense struggled
>>for a couple series with Peete, that doesn't mean that they would
>>have continued to struggle the remainder of the game.
>Take a look at the Dallas sacks. Replace Detmer with Peete,
>and he gets sacked just as well. The truth is that Detmer wasn't
>to blame for your lack of production, but rather good Dallas
>secondary coverage and a good pass rush, especially by Leon Lett.
>Nothing Peete can do about that.
>>>The Eagles passing offense even with Peete in the game
>>>was already dead. Peete's passing yardage was coming
>>>from short passes to the backs letting them do the work.
>>>With Peete QBing the Eagles passing offense scored
>>>-6 points in the second quarter counting the results of
>>>turnovers, and played like -10 or even -14.
>>No matter where the Eagles passing yardage was coming from, it was
>>getting the job done. If Dallas was going to take away the slants
>>and mid-range balls, the Eagles were more than willing to get the
>>ball to Watters and Turner. It worked early on, and it worked in
>>the fourth quarter as well.
>Well, if it worked in the fourth quarter what are you complaining
>>>The Eagles used their defense and running game to give
>>>them one last chance, but Eagles coach Rhodes refused to
>>>go on 4th and 1 deep in Dallas territory, Leon Lett
>>>blocking the field goal attempt. Oddly enough Rhodes had
>>>in the first quarter gone for 4th and 1 from the Cowboy 2,
>>>and Ricky Watters had scored a touchdown.
>>Two entirely different situations. The first quarter 4th-and-1 was
>>at the Dallas two-yard line. The result of that play was either
>>going to be an Eagles touchdown, or a Cowboys first down on their own
>>two. Dallas' offense had gone three-and-out on their first possession,
>>and the home town crowd was loud at that time and would have made it
>>very difficult for the Cowboys. Either way, it was a good situation
>>for the Eagles and a not so good one for the Cowboys.
>>The second 4th-and-1 with about nine minutes to play was about
>>putting points on the board and getting back into the ball game.
>Being down by six points, you were already in the ball game. What
>does narrowing the lead to three points do for you? At best it
>gives you overtime with an inexperienced QB.
>Here's the scenario:
>Kick the field goal: First you have to make the FG, but it wasn't
>considered to be difficult. Then you have to make another drive,
>with an inexperienced QB to tie it. Then you have to make another
>drive in OT with the same Deter to win.
>Go for it: With only two yards to go, your chances are pretty fair
>of making the first down. That gives you four cracks to make, what,
>ten yards for a TD? And you can still kick the FG.
>Even if Philly failed to make it, they are still down by only six and
>have Dallas deep in their own territory.
>If Philly had been moving the ball consistently, then the FG is the way
>to go. But the way things looked, Rhodes should have made the gamble.
>Playing for the tie isn't usually a bad idea, but Dallas had all the
>advantages going into overtime. A dominating defense and an experienced
>>The Eagles offense had gone, what, forty minutes without scoring?
>>They needed something - anything - to gain some confidence. And
>Confidence? You don't think making a critical fourth down play wouldn't
>give them confidence? Back that up with a TD.
>And wasn't it confidence that Switzer tried to instill in his team
>by going for it last year, and heckled for his actions?
>>putting three points up on the board to draw to within three with
>>plenty of time to play was a good way to do it. Going for the FG
>>at that point was absolutely the right thing to do.
>Again, you still have to score two more times with an in inexperienced
>QB and an offense that was not producing.
>>>Watters knows how to use the stiff-arm, has decent size
>>>for a running back, and is rarely brought down by the
>>>first tackler. (See his touchdown run in the first
>>>quarter.) Sure Watters might have been stuffed, but I've
>>>also seen lots of times in that situation when the back is
>>>able to break through for the touchdown when the defense
>>>goes all-out to try and stop him at the line of scrimmage.
>>Yes, Watters might have been stuffed. Leon Lett did so a few times
>>during the game. If the Eagles went for it and failed, the offense
>>would have no confidence when they got the ball back. Not to mention
>>what the Eagles defense would have been thinking when they came onto
>>the field. If there was only a few minutes remaining, of course the
>>Eagles would have gone for it. But not with about nine minutes left!
>>>Rhodes has crafted an image as a tough guy, and I have no
>>>doubt that in situations other than football the man is
>>>brave and strong, but not having the guts to go for the
>>>touchdown in that situation is, relative to football,
>>>weak and a major flaw as a coach. Will Rhodes learn from
>>>his mistake and start to emulate the example of a real
>>>Super Bowl caliber coach like Bill Parcells when he was
>>>with the Giants? Or will Rhodes and the other NFL coaches
>>>continue to be cowards, disgracing the game, afraid of the
>>>heat Barry Switzer took after he chose to go on fourth down
>>>at Philadelphia last year? Going on 4th and 1 is the
>>>quintessential play in football, and Rhodes robbed all fans
>>>of the game by not even trying the only serious hope to win.
>>>(Did anyone think Detmer was going to get the Eagles into
>>>the endzone passing the ball on the next drive?)
>>You're clueless. The Eagles wouldn't have been going for a TD. They
>>would have been going for a first down on that second 4th-and-1. Do
>>you understand that? They still would have had to move the ball the
>>remainder of the way to put it in the endzone. And that wasn't a
>>given. They still might have had to settle for a FG and wasted a few
>>minutes while doing so. And if you didn't see the end of the game,
>>you'd know that Detmer did get the Eagles into scoring position on the
>>next drive. Had the previous FG attempt not been blocked, the Eagles
>>could have at least tied the game and sent it into overtime with a FG.
>But Dallas had the advantage in overtime.
>>>Rhodes and the Eagles have quite possibly blown their best
>>>opportunity to do some serious damage to the Cowboys chances
>>>this year, and if they don't develop a better QB than Peete
>>>they may never get over the hump to go from pretenders to
>>The Eagles still get another shot at the Cowboys at Dallas in five
>>weeks. It's not a given that Dallas is going to win that one. After
>>all, the consensus was that the Eagles would win last night. There
>>are still eleven games remaining and anything can happen. Peete, 12-5
>>as an Eagles starter, is going to be missed. Hopefully, Detmer can
>>develop into the player many thought he would be coming out of BYU.
>The only thing that bothers me as a Boys fan is their dismal showing
>against teams that are injured or have their starting QBs out. I can't
>explain it, but Dallas doesn't seem to fare well when they are supposed
>to beat a fairly strong, albeit injured, team.
games they should win.
I'd like to add another point to your critique of Rhodes..Detmer as it turns
out was on *** street -- he had a concussion. As a matter of a fact, two
times when they had called time out in the 2nd alf it was because Ty had
forgatten the play. Perhaps rhods didn't want to take the chance with a fuzzy
QB -- put the points on the board and go from there. as it turns out, it was
a good strategy except that the kick was blocked -- credit Lett for that --
the Eagles were in FG position at the end of the game so if they had put three
up earlier, it would have been for the tie.
Furthermore, the Eagles did go for a fourth and 2 in the 1st qtr -- and scored
-- at the time Peete was the QB -- the only difference I see is that Rhodes
didn't have the faith that Detmer could pull it off given his state and then
march the team 10 more yds for a score.
Since your so critical of Rhodes -- ask yourself this question. Who would you
rather have as a coach -- ours or yours.
No need to answer.
See you in a few weeks.