Talley56

Yeap, I thought this was a well-known rule. I know I've seen it done before.

Calvin was drafted in 2007. He was on the 0-16 team.

Schwartz>>>>>>>>Mcdaniels and it's not even debatable Mcdaniels has been the beneficiary of being linked to maybe the best HC/QB combination in NFL history. He ran Denver into the ground in only 2 years as HC. Schwartz has put together great defenses and as a HC got an 0-16 team to the playoffs.

^This He had maybe the biggest challenge any HC in history has ever had, take over an 0-16 team. And he got That team to the playoffs in his 3rd year.

And we'd have 11 if it wasn't for that ridiculous personal foul penalty on Hughes yesterday.

So come the end of the season, say we are 10-6. Our playoff chances are worse in that scenario than if we would have lost yesterday leaving us at 9-7 instead?

May be off here but I think he's content sticking with his D coordinator role with the Eagles for the long term.

I know we won anyway but I'm one of the few who feels like you have to go for it. Complacency = mediocrity but risk takers win championships.

Maybe not but we might be better off right now. Schwartz would most likely still be running the defense (unless someone would have hired him as a HC) therefore the defense would still be good and even if Marrone would have been fired after last season perhaps Rex gets hired by someone else after the 2014 season leaving us to hire an offensive minded HC like we should have done in the first place (Hue Jacskson maybe) and I think that would have put us in a better place.

I've heard Steeler fans really didn't like Bruce Arians either. Might not mean much but it's possible they are hard to please.

The Eagles have the Steelers coming up next week. Eagles D vs Steelers O should be interesting.

Eagles benefiting from mistakes of three teams: Rams, Browns, and us. Rams and Browns for passing up on Wentz and us for taking the control of the defense away from Schwartz and foolishly handing it to the Ryan brothers.

It's a tradeoff. We looked better on offense last night but dreadful on defense and we looked really good on defense but dreadful offensively in week 1. Not sure that one is definitely optimal over the other.

Yeah, I'm skeptical about this too. He seemed vehemently against taking the Bills job in the past so I'd be surprised if he suddenly wants it. But I honestly would take him. Not sure what the whole "game has passed him by" arguments are based on but I think he'd make us better. Can't do worse than our recent hires.

Maybe 2010: week 1 we lost a miserable game at home to Miami then we went to Green Bay and got stomped. I believe those were the final days of Trent Edwards as Buffalo's QB.

Horseradish, never understood how anyone could eat that stuff. And sauerkraut, yuck. I tried a Reuben one time and only got through a few bites. Everything else on the sandwich just didn't do enough to drown out the sauerkraut taste.

2nd half comeback!

Never know, he could still be a star and Wentz could flame out. Not sure where you are getting "both end up stinking" out of that. As for the RGIII/Luck I'm just saying it sounds like people are ready to say Wentz was the Better choice than Goff way too soon. I was comparing it to RGIII and Luck when there was a point during their rookie seasons where people thought RGIII would be better after only a few games.

Not ready to say he sucks after he hasn't even taken an NFL snap. Never know, he could still be a star and Wentz could flame out. As I recall, there was a point in time during their rookie seasons when it looked like RGIII might be better than Luck.

Reggie Bush: 3 carries, -4 yards. Good thing McCoy is still healthy.

Why do I still get the feeling New England is going to win this game?

Seeing some of the hits Denver got away with make me actually feel a little bit for guys like Burfict. You know if any of those hits were from him it would have meant a penalty and possible suspension.

Called it! One of only 9.

Seahawks run the ball this time. Seattle 31 New England 28