I've seen enough

Wow, now everybody misses Delhomme...it seems like this time last year everybody hated Delhomme

 

Jake is better than Brady and Manning combined x 1000.

 

At least we're not the Eagles.

 

Yeah, he gets some slack for the circumstances. No QB and I doubt it was his decision to leave #2 WR to Colbert.

 

The play-calling as well. In fact, I don't think you ever even explained what you thought changed with Henning to suddenly make him worse. The fact is that he wasn't, he was just a scapegoat. I proved it then, and this year has shown me to be correct.

I think you're confusing me with you. You're the one who refuses to acknowledge when you're wrong about something. Good lord, remember the time you insisted that Shawne Merriman was a DE prospect only and not a 3-4 linebacker? It took you several games into the season with him playing linebacker for San Diego before you finally admitted that you were wrong. You're all about protecting your image and seeming correct, while I'll admit being wrong immediately because I care far more about the facts than trying to pretend like I've always been correct.

We didn't drop significantly in overall production on first or second downs, and our total rushing yards only "dropped" from 1679 in '05 to 1659 in '06. Somehow I doubt that 20 rushing yards over the course of a season was enough to get Henning fired or prove that he suddenly became a terrible coordinator, but go on pretending you weren't wrong.

 

It wasn't rushing yardage that got Henning fired, it was the lack of rushing attempts. We had 4th quarter leads in 10 games last year, but inexplicably started throwing the ball more instead of less, which surprise surprise, led to more INT"s late in games. Everybody knows that Fox wants to finish off game on the ground and kill the clock when he has a late lead, he's said that from day 1.

A perfect example is what the Titans did to us yesterday...White only had about 4yds per carry, which is about the same as Foster had, but he finished with 100yds because they committed to running the ball when they had a late lead. Of course, it was easy for them though, because they didn't have to worry about our offense coming back and winning the game, but it's the same principle. They stuck with the run even though we were stopping it early.

 

I just naturally assume that you're wrong because you have proven yourself to be a complete idiot, but just to make sure, I went back and checked last season's play by play records. Guess what? You were wrong again. When we had a lead in the 4th quarter, we passed 46 times and ran the ball 74 times. Jake threw for two TDs in those situations, and the only interception was on Keyshawn's pass (Jake's six 4th quarter INTs all came with the score tied or us behind).

Here are the game by game breakdowns:
MIN - 0 passes, 3 runs
TB - 5 passes, 2 runs
NO - 0 passes, 7 runs
CLE - 8 pass, 8 runs
BAL - 13 passes (TD), 10 runs
CIN - 2 passes, 0 runs
TB - 5 passes (TD), 7 runs
STL - 4 passes (key's INT), 11 runs
WAS - 2 passes, 1 run
PHI - 1 pass, 4 runs
ATL - 2 passes, 12 runs
NO - 4 passes, 9 runs

So how about admitting that you were wrong since I proved it yet again?

 

One thing I didn't like about the game was the few times we had 3rd and 1 or 3rd and 2, we'd put the ball in Carr's hands, instead of running to get the 2 yards.

 

First of all, you left out some games and you left out the 3rd quarter, not to mention that the other team usually had the ball longer than us because of all the incomplete passes. Secondly, the Rams and the second Falcons game skews those numbers because we ran the ball about 100 times in just those two games. I looked up the numbers in about week 8 last year, and the Panthers were about 26th or 28th in rushing attempts...the fucking Eagles were running more than us at that point. You just wasted alot of time.