Iggles Blog - Philadelphia Eagles Blog

By This Logic...

Ferrari is depriving me of my right to own a non-POS car by making me pay for it...

She's Baaaaaack

I don't typically check the byline before I start reading, but I was only halfway through the second paragraph of this story before the blinking lights came on:

Dana   Pennett   O'Neill

Stories of alleged date rape are hard.  The details are often murky, relying on the interpretation of events that can happen fast in an environment of incomplete sobriety.  In this particular case, there are certainly issues that call the accuser's account into question.  Leaving aside any football issues, we all hope the alleged crime didn't happen.

Which is why reporting on these stories has to be very, very careful.  Particularly when the reporter only gets a chance to get one side of the story.

But that's not O'Neill's style.  Look, I've never met this person, but we've seen enough of her reporting now to figure out the trend.  Call it the Stephen A. track.  And I will be shocked if she's not a significant national figure on ESPN within four years.   

Here's how she opens today's story:

Ever since Oct. 5, Austin Scott has felt as if he's trapped in a bad movie where the protagonist constantly tries to rewind to that moment, either to prevent what's about to occur or understand how he got there.

Eighteen days later, the reels are still spinning, with no end and no answers in sight. The only thing the Penn State running back knows for certain is that his life hasn't been the same. What seemed like an unremarkable morning changed when he learned that a woman who had been in his apartment only hours earlier, a woman he said he had consensual sex with, started the wheels in motion that would end with him facing multiple charges, including felony rape and sexual assault, and banishment from the football team.

Not even a semblance of balance.  In fact, the entire story reads like someone came up with a list of issues he needed to address and then checked them off as they went:

Austin Scott doesn't come off as some macho star athlete filled with bravado. If that ever existed, it is gone now. He is polite as he speaks, an open book willing and ready to talk about his emotions and as much of his case as his lawyer will allow...

During Sunday's interview, however, Scott said that he went into the bar only after his accuser failed to come out and was inside for such a brief period of time that the bouncer offered to refund his $3 cover charge...

Scott said on Sunday that they went back to his room and he did not "do anything she did not want to do..."

The police report indicates that they had known each other for 2 months, but Scott also is said to have referred to the woman as "this girl," implying he did not know her name.  "Yes, of course, I knew her name," he said. "She was in my phone..."

The one question Scott can't answer is the same the cynics will ask: Why, if she wasn't raped, did this woman make these accusations?

"Until we found out about the previous case, I had no idea because everything was consensual," Scott said, alluding to an article in the Allentown Morning Call, which revealed that Scott's accuser had levied similar charges against a Moravian College student in 2003. The student was acquitted of the most serious charges and the jury deadlocked on lesser charges. 

"I went to bed with a clear conscience and wake up like, 'What? My life is gone,' " Scott said. "The only thing I've come up with since that information is that she has problems..."

"I was gone that morning," Scott said. "I don't want to say anything that will look bad on [Paterno], but he didn't want to hear my side of the story. He decided that I was at the bar drinking two nights before a game and that was not the case."

Sources have said Scott was suspended for a curfew violation, but Scott said he knew of no curfew in his five seasons on the team...

Here's the other problem with this story.  The judge presiding over the case imposed a gag order on both parties on Monday, refusing to let them talk to the press.  O'Neill claims the interview with Scott took place on Sunday, meaning he gets a free chance to tell his side.  The other side is not so lucky:

"Assistant District Attorney Lance Marshall, who is prosecuting the case, said because of the gag order he could not comment. E-mails sent to Scott's accuser went unreturned."

But if that's the case, shouldn't O'Neill have looked somewhere else for balance?  The police department?  A national expert on these types of crimes?  Someone in the accuser's family?

Nothing.

Austin Scott may very well be innocent of all charges.  As mentioned above, I sincerely hope he is.  And if he is, he will unfairly be dealing with the repercussions for the rest of his life.  Paterno will owe it to the kid to do penance for the next 52 weeks and should make sure he gets approximately 30 carries in whatever mid-range bowl game the Lions are playing in this year. 

However, the time for all of that will be after the judicial process is complete.  Of course, by then O'Neill will have moved on the next item in her resume climb.

About That Snap "Rule"

I'd love for someone to be able to explain why yesterday's bad snap play was a false start against the Bears, but this play last year by the New Orleans Saints was a touchdown:

"McAllister brought the Saints back to within one score by scooping up a bad snap and running it in from four yards out to make it 38-31 with 8:05 left in the game. Saints center Jeff Faine's snap rolled through the backfield to the single-set back McAllister, who alertly picked it up and ran it in."

You can watch it yourself here on NFL.com.  The first viewing of the play comes at about the 2:24 mark of that video.  Then there's a replay from behind that gives an even better angle.  It's just like the Bears play, in that the ball does not go through the quarterback's legs, but rather shoots off to his left. 

And here's the strange thing -- it doesn't look like it was an accident.  After the snap, Brees drops back as happy as could be, pretending he's going to throw the ball, while Deuce McAllister immediately runs to the ball, scoops it up and scores. 

Why did the New Orleans Saints have a play in their playbook that was illegal?  Why was that play not stopped and called a false start? 

Why does the NFL still refuse to make public its actual rulebook on its website, rather than this worthless "digest of rules"?

What's Wrong Won't Be Easy to Fix

The Eagles are not a bad team.  The season is hanging by a thread, the priest has been called and we're about to move from screaming rants to the hushed whispers more appropriate to an imminent demise. 

But the team itself is not that bad. 

Of course, it's not that good either.  Which makes them no different than any of about 20 other franchises in the NFL.  Good enough to win most days, bad enough to lose even more often, let's just flip a coin and save everyone three hours of heartache.

What this means is that the people calling for a complete re-do are wrong.  No one needs to come in, strip this baby down, sell off the parts and build it back up.  Most of the talent needed to compete at this level is there. 

But that doesn't mean there aren't real and serious flaws with this team.  Seven weeks into the season, this is what we know:

The Eagles don't have enough playmakers on offense.  We all know Andy Reid's formula for assembling a team: you build through the draft, you focus on controlling the line of scrimmage, and you do what you have to do to make sure you've got your franchise quarterback in place.  Beyond that you fill in as you go. 

That's admittedly an oversimplification, but we've got nine years of track record to go on now, and it's pretty clear that Reid considers physically gifted wide receivers to be a nice bonus, but "system" guys to really be where you make your money.

The result is that after two years of Terrell Owens and one year of Donte Stallworth, we're back to partying like it's 2003.  The only player who scares opposing defensive coordinators is Brian Westbrook.  After that, it's a bunch of nice complementary parts.

And let's not say that this is just further proof that McNabb is the problem.  First of all, injuries or not, McNabb is an older guy who doesn't have the game-changing speed he used to have as his backup plan.  He's a pocket passer who can occasionally make a play with his legs.  Kevin Kolb, once he's ready to start, is going to be the exact same way.  It's the quarterback's job to get the other guys the ball so they can make plays.

Those guys aren't making plays.

The second problem is that the Eagles don't have enough guys who know how to win.  There's a strange, alchemical process that teams have to go through when they're rebuilding.  I'm not sure anybody totally understands it, but basically teams have to learn how to win -- first by losing, then by winning. 

I really thought we'd seen a lot of that progress last year, after the Eagles blew a couple of games they had no business losing, but then buckled down and played grind-it-out football the rest of the year. 

Evidently that was wrong.

Again, my intention here isn't to jump on McNabb, but at some point you have to look at the performance of the team under Garcia -- tough, gritty, winning -- and look at the same team under McNabb -- and I almost just threw my computer across the room -- and say, "You know what, this may not be coincidence."

You know that NFL.com commercial?  The grammatically-questionable one where John Lynch claims, "There's 11 leaders on this defense"?  Well I'm not sure the Eagles have more than one.  On the whole team.  And he hasn't played in weeks.

Here's my new grand unifying theory of the Eagles:

During the run of four NFC Championship Games, this team was so well-stocked with veteran leaders that it didn't matter that the franchise quarterback preferred to play a different role as the back-slapping, encouraging, upbeat guy who tried to keep things loose.  After those guys moved on, everyone expected McNabb to fill their shoes.  When he didn't do so -- probably because he didn't recognize the need -- the team was doubly hurt, both by his unwillingness to be the motivator but also because his presumptive status of team leader kept other guys who might have stepped into that role from doing so.   

When McNabb went down last year, there was a vaccuum, but it was quickly filled by Jeff Garcia -- a man desperately facing down career mortality -- and Brian Westbrook -- a fierce competitor who by all rights should be the focal point, since he's the best player on the team. 

This year, Garcia is gone and McNabb's return has again crowded out the potential contributions of other players.  With no Trotter, who had to go from a performance standpoint, and without Dawkins, this team is practically rudderless.  That's a very bad position to be in when so many of the regular players are not battle-tested winners. 

And no one knows what happens next.

Now here's the thing about theories, lots of times they're wrong.  Maybe I'm completely full of shit.  Maybe the talent problems are deeper than the lack of top-end playmakers and I'm just not seeing it correctly.  Maybe the coaching really is bad, rather than just inconsistent.  These are all possibilities, and I'm sure you could construct detailed arguments for any of them.

But I just finished reading a truly outstanding book about Henry V and the battle of Agincourt and it's a little hard to just dismiss the whole leadership as determining factor thing right now.  (No, I don't do the Amazon ad revenue thing, but it really is a fantastic book if you like that sort of thing -- solid, eminently readable history.  Shakespeare left a few things out.) 

There are signs that this situation might be changing.  Westbrook speaks up a lot more now.  More importantly, for the first time I can remember, McNabb actually looked angry during moments of yesterday's game.  But these are, at best, halting steps forward.  These guys need to take it all the way.  Westbrook has to start calling people out.  McNabb has to go from showing some occasional fire to full-on, my-career-and-legacy-are-in-danger mode seven days a week. 

And other guys need to step up and decide that losing is no longer acceptable.  I don't know if that Kearse/Sheppard story in the comments below is true, but if it is, it's time for someone on this squad to start grabbing some face masks. 

Especially since Hester beat Lito like a drum on that last drive.

The third, and finally, biggest, problem is that this team may not be capable of endogenous change.  And that might mean we're really screwed.

I'm not at the point yet where I don't believe these guys can work things out.  I really believe that Andy Reid has not lost the respect of his locker room and, moreover, is one of the few coaches who can identify, fix and eliminate these sorts of problems.

Yes, I could be wrong.

But if I am wrong, then what?  If the quarterback won't change, then you have to change the quarterback.  For all the other issues, McNabb is still a great, veteran quarterback.  That's going to be an ugly transition if it happens.

If the other guys don't start stepping up, can you bring other people in?  How will that work when guys like Darren Howard and Takeo Spikes have come in with reputations and veteran savvy but have so far been unable to make a difference?

If the players can't make the shift, then what?  If you can't / don't want to change the players, do you then have to change the coach to try to get as much as possible out of the current group?  Even knowing that while you might be able to whip more out of them in the short run, there's no guarantee that you'll be better off in two years?  (Sean Payton and Jon Gruden both come to mind.)  And is that two-year window worth very much when the players may not be Super Bowl caliber right now anyway?

Jeff Lurie has been lucky.  He bought the franchise at the perfect time, hired the perfect coach, and since then he's basically had this thing on auto-pilot. 

He's not on auto-pilot any more.

Pathetic Effort

Let's get this out of the way right up front: the refs fucked the Eagles today.  There's no other word for it.  From the first play to the last -- when Juqua Thomas was held -- the refs absolutely sucked today.  Complete bailout job.

With

   that

      said

This was a pathetic effort by the Eagles today.  The Bears are not a good team.  At all.  The Eagles dominated them in the first half and ended up with nine points.  Three field goals.  No touchdowns.

And when the offense finally stepped up and scored to put the Eagles ahead, the defense allowed the Bears to march easily down the field, 97 yards, for the game-winning touchdown.

This team is not making plays.  That's the difference between the good teams and the mediocre teams in the NFL.  The good teams have guys who make plays, the mediocre teams don't.  (The great teams and the shitty teams are another matter.) 

Right now, there are 1.21 guys on the Eagles who make plays.  The 1.0 would be Westbrook.  The 0.2 would be McNabb.  The 0.01 would be everyone else. 

There's a real and serious problem with this team, one that has nothing to do with playcalling, red zone efficiency or rolling over like ------- ------- when all you need is a three-and-out to win the game. 

The problem is that these guys are losers.

Week in, week out, they play just well enough to lose.  In fact, they often play better than their opponents, but they still end up finding a way to lose. 

L

O

S

E

R

S

And that's a humongous problem, because while it may not be easy to establish a culture of winning in the NFL, it's 10 times harder to reestablish it once it goes away. 

That was a pathetic loss today, and for once, there really aren't any excuses.  Yeah, they're still missing LJ and Dawk, but every team has injury issues right now.  This team is healthy enough and they've been together long enough that there's no defense for an effort like that. 

With this loss, the road to the postseason just got insanely difficult.  Even the most optimistic fan would find it hard to argue that the Eagles can beat the Pats and do better than a split with the Cowboys, so that's your six losses right there.  No other margin for error.

Something has to change this week.  Whether it comes from the players or the coaches, something needs to be done.  A .500 record and waittilnextyear isn't what we signed up for this season.

What a waste.  And now this week is going to suck. 

Fucking Eagles.

But Enough About Me

Let's talk about you.  You, that once proud franchise (was it really just last year?) that strode across the NFC North like a colossus (at least since 2002 when they put you in that new division). 

As has so often occurred during the history of your storied ball club, this year's team is built around a proud defense.  It's not a particularly good defense, mind you, but it's very, very proud.

There have been many theories put forward for why the unit has struggled so much.  Is it the Super Bowl hangover?  The loss of defensive coordinator Ron Rivera?  Maybe just injuries?

No, no and no.

It's actually pretty simple.  And no, that link didn't work for me either.  But somehow that seems fitting, don't you think?

It's called addition by subtraction, baby, or in this case, subtraction by addition.  Sadly, there's no guarantee Mr. No-Gap will be playing this weekend.  I join Brian Westbrook, Correll Buckhalter and Tony Hunt in sending my best wishes for a speedy recovery.

Now some may remember the last time the Eagles went up against one of their former defensive tackles.  It didn't go so well.  On the other hand, Hollis was pulling a Belichick with the needle.  Heck, if he'd shown that kind of commitment to getting his next contract winning while with the Eagles he'd probably still be in Philadelphia. 

Beyond the issue of OIllie Olé -- and I hope the section of the playbook devoted to attacking players other than the Swinging Gate is extremely small -- Sunday's contest really comes down to just one facet of the game.  And no, it's not special teams.  It's stopping Brian Griese.

That's right.  Stopping ... Brian ... Griese.

After Griese's first game as a starter, everyone pretty much laughed him off.  Three INTs, six sacks, not a good performance. 

But consider how rusty McNabb looked at the beginning of this season, and he'd only been off since the middle of last year.  Griese hasn't really been a full-time starter for years, really since his time in Denver.  Gruden jerked him around in Tampa Bay and evidently no quarterback can ever succeed in Miami.

This year, Griese's early preseason numbers were outstanding (yeah, I know) and he's been getting better each game.  Compare his career stats to Sexy Rexy's.  Which one would you rather face?

It's certainly possible the rest of his team is going to fold around him and it will be one of those multi-sack days, but if our guys aren't ready for him, things could get interesting. 

However, if the Eagles can hold down the Bears' rushing attack (the way everyone else has) with just the front seven and if Lito can actually get on the field this week, I like our match-ups.  As long as we can score some points early to keep the crowd from collectively losing its shit, I think this could actually be a pretty fun game.

What's that?  I'm talking about the Eagles again?  Sorry, just can't help it.  Although you'll be talking about them too on Sunday night, after they stick a boot in your butt to the tune of 27-23.

It's not you, it's them.

Jets Video Rewind

Real life intruded this week, which has really stretched the publishing schedule.  Last night I baby-sat (sans wife) our friend's practically still-in-the-wrapper three-week-old son.  Given that our first is on the way in just a few more months, I needed the practice.  The bad news is that this even further delayed things with the blog; the good news is I only dropped him twice and none of the damage will likely be permanent. 

Just kidding, J & P. 

The end result, and I'm not going to lie to you, is that this week's video rewind is a little half-hearted.  Still some things we can learn though.

First things first -- Gocong.  He was definitely on the field more against the Jets than he has been before.  I did a first-half snap count and had him on the field for 17 plays, with the Eagles in nickel for 11.  Different teams call for different strategies, but remember that he started the year playing only about one-third of the snaps.

There's not a whole lot of dipsy-do to Gocong's game, but I love the way he comes up the fill the hole now.  When he gets a running start on a lead blocker, man, he destroys the guy.  It's not just fullbacks, either, there was one play where an offensive lineman pulled around the outside to lead out Thomas Jones and Gocong just stopped him in his tracks, forcing Jones to take an early cutback.  Eagles fans are going to like the way this guy plays the game as he continues to get more comfortable playing LB out there.

Speaking of cutbacks, those first two running plays...  A number of guys got out of their gaps on both plays, so you can't pin it on any one player, but Jevon Kearse had the toughest time with them.  On the first play, Kearse came flying upfield, so when Jones cut back he was able to blow through Kearse's spot in the line.  There should have been a linebacker there anyway, but Kearse ended up being the closest guy to the play. 

On the next play though, the exact same thing happened, but this time Kearse said, "uh-uh, you're not cutting inside me again," so he fought his way back towards the line.  Unfortunately, Jones saw this and this time he just looped around Kearse the long way.  The impressive part of that play is that it was Kearse who chased him down on the sideline.  Still, tough way for a guy to begin the game.

Bigger picture, I think we saw in this game how teams are going to have to try to go at the Eagles' run defense.  This mistakes in this game were mostly just overpursuit, so not anything too worrisome, but the Jets demonstrated that you can have some success if you commit enough guys to control the DTs and then attack the defensive ends.  We've seen this in the past (remember Trotter's famous line about the team's undersized DEs last year) but with the rest of the run D working so well, teams almost have no choice but to keep going at it.  If the DTs are soaking up all those blockers, the linebackers are going to have to make those plays.

Speaking of the tackles, Johnson changed his rotation this game.  I didn't keep a close count of it, but gone was the two-line approach he's used up to now with Bunk / Patterson starting and Howard / Reagor in on passing downs.  Instead it was a three-man rotation with the starters and LaJuan Ramsey, who sort of came out of nowhere for this game.  Johnson said after the game he felt like he needed Ramsey's size out there, but isn't that why we have Kimo Von Oelhoffen?  The depth chart hasn't changed, so maybe this was a one-week thing to remind Howard, Reagor and VO that combining for three tackles so far as a group isn't getting it done.

The one thing I REALLY hope we don't see is a permanent shortening of the DT rotation.  These guys are doing such a nice job out there, the last thing we need to do is fall into the trap of wearing them down again with too many snaps.

As for the rest of the defense, the biggest thing we're seeing five weeks into the season is that the young guys are really getting better.  Sean Considine is a much better blitzer than he was a year ago, both in hiding his intention and timing his jump.  Joselio Hanson no longer scares me as much when he's on the field -- he's starting to look more and more like Rod Hood out there. 

The only negative is that Gaither hasn't made quite the jump I've been hoping to see yet.  It could just be that he's on a temporary plateau waiting for the next breakthrough.  If you're a Penn State fan, remember the transition Poz had to go through his senior season after he moved into the middle before he figured out the angles in there.

Two more quick defensive thoughts: 1) Trent Cole cannot get a holding call, which, given that he's #2 in the league in sacks and all, is incredibly annoying; and 2) that pass interference call on Spikes wasn't as bad a decision as it looked.  If Spikes had gotten there a step sooner he would have made a legal jam on a receiver within five yards of the line of scrimmage.  He was just a little slow.

On the offensive side, of course the big question was formation and protection.  The Eagles really mixed things up.  The first drive only last two plays, so we can't tell very much, but the second drive went nine plays before Akers converted a field goal.  On this series, the Eagles stayed mostly with their traditional look of one tight end and single back or I-formation. 

The third drive, which lasted 17(!) plays before the Akers missed field goal, was when things got crazy:

1. Two tight ends left, one right
2. Two tight ends left, one right
3. Double tight end / wing (or H-back)
4. Double tight end / wing
5. Tight end right
6. Tight end right
7. Two tight ends split
8. Tight end right
9. Two tight ends right
10. Bunch left (outside WR runs immediate route, middle guy Baskett blocks for a count and then releases, tight end stays in to block)
11. Three tight ends right
12. TE / WR tight on right side (WR blocks/releases, TE stays to block -- also, Westbrook chipped on left side)
13. One tight end left, two right
14. Tight end right
15. Two tight ends split
16. No tight ends
17. Bunch left, same blocking pattern as #10

Had Jamaal Jackson stayed on his first block even half a second longer on the Westbrook TD run that was called back, Andrews wouldn't have had to hold that man and the drive would have been perfect.

In other areas, the Jets clearly spent the entire week working on screen defense.  The Eagles tried to run screens to Westbrook on both the second and third drives when they reached the red zone and both times the Jets were all over it.  They're going to have to put that away for a little while down there in the shadow of the goal posts. 

On the fourth series, there was one notable play on a deep completion to Curtis where the Jets showed blitz pre-snap, Donovan made a blocking adjustment and Westbrook came forward to yell at the linemen about where he would be picking someone up.  It was good communication and it worked perfectly.

Speaking of communication, on the Curtis touchdown play Donovan audibled to a route package that had both his outside receivers running slants.  The signal for this was, um, a slanted arm across his chest. 

I really hope our audible signals are actually more complicated than that.

As for the Eagles' struggles in the red zone, I know everyone's looking for big-picture explanations, but some times it's as simple as guys just not making plays:

First series -- TD to Curtis

Second series -- Avant open in end zone and if McNabb puts six more inches on that ball it's a touchdown

Third series -- If Jackson holds his first block for a second that Westbrook TD counts

Fourth series -- Curtis was interfered with in the end zone and the refs -- who may not have realized their penalty flags could be reused so they didn't have to save them for something REALLY blatant -- didn't call it

As for how much they passed versus ran in the red zone, keep in mind that a couple of those passes were screens to Westbrook, which are basically running plays.  Also, the Andrews holding call put them in second-and-20, so the run was basically out there.  Sometimes, stuff happens.

Now we get to see what the Eagles can do against a much stiffer defense this week.

Oh right, the Jets' D is actually only one spot worse than Da Bears.

Rocca Vs. Hester

If you're looking for ways the Eagles could blow a game to the Chicago Bears this week, it's not going to take long before you get to Devin Hester.  The guy is an absolute freak in the return game.  Here's a good old media piece on what the Eagles are facing.

But while everyone's wondering about how Eagles punter Sav Rocca is going to do against him -- he's not been the model of consistency so far -- I think there are a few key points to make here:

1. The best way to stop Hester is not to punt to him.  If the Eagles are finishing drives with points, they won't even need the punter to step on the field.

2. The second-best way to stop Hester is not to punt to him from deep in your own territory.  Short, high kicks are much harder to return because they give the coverage unit time to converge.  No three-and-outs from your own 20-yard-line.  In this regard, it's not a great sign that the Eagles have asked Rocca to punt five times from inside their own 20 and only once on the opponent's half of the field.

3. Rocca and the Eagles have been very good this year in minimizing returns.  Sav doesn't have the greatest averages, but if you look at the spread between his gross and net, he's top 10 right now in the league:

4. Even Rocca's "misses" so far have not been the kind of punts that would hurt him against Hester.  Take a look at this chart that breaks down every punt he's had so far this season:

(F- fair catch, D - downed, TB - touchback, R - returned, OOB - out of bounds)

When Rocca makes a "bad" kick -- under 40 yards -- it's generally not returnable.  (And based on the spots he's kicking them from, most of those have not been intentional pooch punts.)  I think this happens for a few reasons: a) returners have to respect the strength of his leg so they can't just camp short and assume the ball's coming there; b) his short kicks are generally pretty high, which gives the coverage team time to swarm; and c) the couple of true s----- he's had have gone to the sideline, making them pretty much impossible to return.

The one thing he has to avoid is the long, low, line drive kick.  That could be trouble. 

5. Finally, the Eagles shouldn't be letting this game come down to special teams.  Score some points, build a lead, and then if Hester brings one back, whew, ok we dodged a bullet.

Bonus note:  Did you know that the NFL does not subtract penalties that occur on a return into the net average statistics?  So if a returner takes one back eight yards but then his team gets penalized 10 yards for holding during the return, the eight-yard return still goes against the punter's net average stats. 

I discovered this when looking through Rocca's stats.  Hardly seems fair to the punters, since sometimes it's that very penalty that allowed the big return.

The One-Headed Monster

Back in May, flush with Tony Hunt-fueled enthusiasm, I attempted to predict how the Eagles running game would look in the 2007 season.  Going into that analysis, I made two key assumptions:

1. The running game would be a more important part of the offense this year, due to its success last season and the uncertain status of Donovan McNabb.
2. The Eagles would continue to limit Brian Westbrook's carries in an attempt to keep their primary offensive weapon healthy and fresh.

I think we can safely say that assumption #2 is off the table.  Westbrook is averaging 17.8 carries per game, above last year's mark of 16.0 and much higher than his workload throughout his career.  Although, this figure is still below the 20 carries per game he averaged during the regular season after McNabb got hurt last year.

If we assume Westbrook can stay healthy from here on out and that every game is going to count this year for the Eagles, the team's number one back is on pace for about 266 carries.  (Remember that number for later.)

As for assumption #1, it's a little harder to say.  I think it's fair (and accurate) to argue there have been game situations this season when the Eagles passed more than would have been optimal.  On the other hand, the Eagles are on pace to run 371 times this season, which would be their highest figure since the 391 of the three-headed monster year.  So maybe assumption #1 was correct, just not as correct as we thought (hoped?) it would be.

So what was my biggest mistake?  Tony Hunt.  I really did believe we would be looking at a three man rotation that would keep Westbrook healthy and not put too much of a strain on Buckhalter's knees. 

Not so much.  Here's a table with predicted carries versus what we're actually seeing:

But this trend is based on the fact that Westbrook missed a game.  I know that seems to happen every year, but if it hadn't, that table would have been even more unbalanced, since Buck just isn't getting much action when Westbrook is healthy.  Which means the real trend (if Westbrook stays healthy -- knock wood) actually looks more like this:

So those 90 carries I thought would go to Hunt?  Westbrook's keeping those, which pretty much covers his bump from 175 to 266.  Buck's getting about half the carries I thought he would, with about 40 short-yardage carries getting carved out for Hunt and Tapeh.  The last 20 carries I thought we'd see have disappeared to wishful thinking. 

So, to refresh, here's how I thought the Eagles running game could look this season back in May (click for larger):

And here's the pace we're actually looking at now:

Or if you use the "real" trend from the above table, it looks like this:

Yeah, Westbrook's pretty much making the leap. 

One last point.  I know everyone is all pissed off that the the Eagles aren't using their big offensive line and they're not running the Garcia/Marty offense they ran last year ... but look at those graphs again.  Right now the Eagles are on pace to rush for almost 2000 yards as a team this season (just counting running backs).  That would be BY FAR the highest number of the Andy Reid era. 

If they can just keep Westbrook healthy.

Vegas Loves the Eagles

Eagles favored by five or 5.5 across the board against the Bears...  I guess I can see that, it just seems like a lot for this kind of matchup.  Although the Bears are even worse against the spread than the Eagles this year.

Note: Nothing on here should ever be considered gambling advice.  Trust me.