Quote:
Originally Posted by packs
Sorry but I could not disagree more. The defense forcing that fumble was a big play and it occurred at a crucial moment. Nothing mattered unless they forced the turnover and you're looking at things after the fact in a way that suggests this was a pre-determined outcome or something. In the moment they had to deliver and they did. They didn't force the turnover by virtue of prior events, like it was some foregone conclusion.
|
with your logic, the last stop of the game was due to the eagles defense , not because the patriots only have 40 seconds or whatever to go the length of the field and complete a hail mary.
yeah its a stop, just like the sack fumble, but they were because of the eagles offense and its related... put nick foles on the field with 1:40 left in the game to go the length of the field and most defenses have an increased chance to stop him.
Any replacement defense could cause 0 punts and get only a one sack with a fumble with under 2 minutes left in obvious pass situation. The patriots did force a turnover in a harder situation (clock not an ally for them etc)
eagles defense did as close to nothing as they could to win this game is all i am saying. Giving up 500 yards passing etc. My whole argument is the Patriots and Eagles defense get the same grade for the game... FAIL
not sure why you keep defending them..
02-07-2018, 10:32 AM
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode