eaglesrule wrote:(don't argue, as a team can't score if it doesn't hold the ball, unless it's safety, which wouldn't be yielded here)
You had me up until this comment.
Is a safety the ONLY way a defense can score?Yes,
the only way you can score if a player doesn't hold the ball is through a safety. This isn't that hard. A defense can recover the ball and score, but then they would be HOLDING the ball. the ONLY was one can score without the ball is through a safety. You deny them the ball, they can't score. Best defense is a good offense for a reason.
Stop defending the indefensible stupidity of the descending Iggles. This was just another display of WHY they stink. Horrible, fraidy cat play calling. See you at the bottom of the division.
so they had one bad year, which was a bit fluky considering they were in the top ten in offense and defense, had the best defense in the division in terms of points allowed, and lost to the giants, packers, patriots and seahawks by combined 13 points, one year removed from winning the division, and five time division champ this decade with a bowl appearance--they sure "stink". They had a down year, and they aren't good, because good teams don't lost that many close ones, but its a ridiculous statement too.
It's not "fraidy cat" it was one of the smartest plays in a long time. there is an incredibly fine line between valor and stupidity--and giving the o the ball and letting the "defense handle its business" is machismo at its worst, and its just not a wise play. And while you aren't stupid, (not name calling) I think your analysis of this situation is.
How is it fraidy cat ball to take a 100 percent chance of winning, versus less than 100 percent by scoring? It's a fact. If someone can show me an example of a fumbled kneel down, where it wasn't only just fumbled, but recovered by the defense then we can talk. But even if one COULD find an example or two of that, wouldn't offset the countless wacky comebacks that happen EVERY year, and Dallas was a part of one this year, and the Jets part of another.
Fact of the matter is, fumbles simply don't happen on kneel downs, and its not fraidy anything. You guarantee the win, shorten the game, keep your defense from getting back on the field. They did a magnificent job that afternoon, but no need to risk them getting hurt, or losing the game. To argue anything otherwise is really, really silly, and I would not be surprised to see this happen more often moving forward.
Sorry you disagree, but this debate isn't subjective opinion like most are here, the benefits far outweigh the negatives (the only two being realated to "manhood" or some absurdly unlikely scenario of a fumble recovery. Remember, if the time was misjudged, the still had first and goal at the one) to such a degree its just being purposely difficult.
One final note, this isn't the first time something similar has happened, (or its exact opposite) and I explained some of those lessons to you. How is that different than a team letting the opposition score? The broncos let the pack score to get the ball back. This kind of move is a preemption of this, which is why its genious. Where is the manhood in that? Was it "fraidy cat" to develop the forward pass rather than playing wishbone or something? I just don't get your position, and almost no one agrees with you, because it was in fact smart, and you need to remember not every bit of strategy has been mastered.
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.