Trent "Deja Vu" Cole

One month ago today, Trent Cole led the Eagles' defense against the Vikings with eight tackles and two sacks.  Those were his last sacks of the season.

If you're scoring at home, that's nine sacks in his first seven games, none in the four since.  He was particularly a non-factor against New England, chipping in only one assist and making no other contributions to the stat sheet.  (I'll know more about how the three-man line affected him after tonight.)

Of course, this is simply a continuation of Trent's career-long pattern.  Last year, Cole had 6.5 sacks after eight games and only 1.5 the rest of the year.  Five of those sacks came in the first three contests.  During his rookie season, he started more slowly because he didn't really become part of the rotation until the Denver blowout the day before Halloween.  He picked up five sacks in the next three games -- winning the starting job when (if memory serves) ND Kalu was injured -- but managed zero sacks in the season's last six games. 

In the last two seasons, Cole has 10 sacks in September, 5.5 in October and 1.5 in November.  He's never had a regular season sack in December or January.

That, folks, is a trend. 

Of course, we don't know exactly why this is the case.  The first theory -- which is more charitable to the Eagles' coaching staff -- is that Cole's early-season success draws a lot of attention and teams adjust later in the year by sending more blockers his way.  Unfortunately, that theory is based on the notion that other teams' coaches are idiots who every year spend the first half of the season ignoring him and the second half adjusting all their schemes around him.  It's also belied by the video rewind work I've done where it hasn't appeared to me that Trent is getting all that much extra attention. 

The second theory is that Cole is an undersized guy with a huge motor who wears down over the course of the season, compromising his effectiveness.  The problem with this theory is that it would seem to indicate that our coaches are idiots for doing things like this.

Let's see ... every other coaching staff makes the exact same series of mistakes ... or it's just one coaching staff that always claims to want to rotate guys but when push comes to shove and there isn't enough production from the backups, they just leave the starter out there ... whip out Occam's razor, carry the two ... and voila!

Comments

[BrianS]

You're going to turn me into a negadelphian. Oh, who am I kidding, I am one already.

I think it's fair to say that the coaching staff's really underachieved this season. I don't expect Reid to go anywhere, but I wonder if there'll be any changes at the coordinator or position coach levels.

[Me]

Here's the thing, though, would you really want to ditch Johnson after the scheme he threw against the Pats? He had those guys befuddled in a way that no one else has managed this season. (And by "befuddled" I mean "slightly discomfited as if wearing shoes that were a quarter-size too small.")

Someone upstairs just needs to put some of these guys on a "pitch count" that the defensive coaches aren't allowed to exceed, no matter what the game situation.

[Paul]

Jim Johnson seems to be a great coach about 50% of the time. It seems to me like the games where he develops a very original or unorthodox gameplan (like the Pats game) are the one's the defense really excels at. I remember a big game against the Cullpepper/Moss led Vikings in 04 where he used Kearse as a floating linebacker, which turned out to be very effective. I think it's a combination of the actual gameplan and the players excitement to try something new. Also, those unorthodox game plans always seem to be the one's that include the most blitzing, something he seems to have lost faith in over the years. I think most of his lack in faith can be traced back to his faith in the overall talent of the defense. Maybe he decided to have a change he needed to this game and placed some more trust in Gaither, Gocong, Reed, and even Sheppard (being on Moss all night).

One last thing...I never valued a quality nickel cornerback as much as I have this year. I don't think Wes Welker is as effective Sunday night if Al Harris or even Roderick Hood are covering him. James and Hanson have shown little this year, IMO.

[BleedingGreenNation]

The interesting thing is that I think Cole has maintained his effectiveness against the run during this sack drought. So would that sink the theory of it being about him wearing down?

That said, it's insane that they had him play every snap of a game. Even the best need a blow from time to time.