It Won't Be the Offense

I like where he's coming from here:

Philadelphia Eagles (8-8): Boy, this certainly is a leap of faith.

I strongly considered going with the Washington Redskins here, but decided that if the Redskins aren't convinced regarding Jason Campbell's current level of performance, then my skepticism should prevail.

So, let's assume Donovan McNabb won't suffer a season-ending back injury while looking over his shoulder at Kevin Kolb and Brian Westbrook manages to avoid space-alien abduction. If the latter occurs, the addition of Lorenzo Booker might ease the doom until Westbrook is returned to our planet.

But the big reason for optimism (delivered with a side order of skepticism) is rookie receiver DeSean Jackson, who was the nation's biggest tease while at Cal.

If Jackson can catch the ball -- and not be forced to play against USC -- his big-play potential will work wonders in Philly. We're pretty sure he can catch kickoffs and punts; at worst, he should be quite the threat in those areas.

The defensive additions include big-ticket item Asante Samuel lining up at corner, with rookie Trevor Laws capable of creating traffic jams from his defensive tackle spot. You may remember Laws as one of the few Notre Dame players who refused to be grotesquely overmatched last season.

But if the Eagles are going to be a legitimate Super Bowl threat this year, it's going to be because of the defense, not the offense.

Now I don't expect the offense to be bad, but unless McNabb can find (and stay at) his very highest level for the entire season, I don't expect this offense to be world-beating.  Good, certainly, but not historically good.

But take a look at that defense and tell me where you see the holes.  Free safety?  Maybe, but I wouldn't bet against Dawk being on a mission this year.  Strong safety?  The answer should be found somewhere among Mikell, Considine and (my favorite) Reed. 

The defensive line has depth and talent and the linebackers can run.  And how are you going to complete a pass against three cornerbacks all playing with chips on their shoulders?  These guys should match up well with Dallas and feast on Washington and New York.

If the Eagles pull off some kind of defense/offense swap (read: Lito for Johnson) then maybe the balance shifts, but right now I have a feeling we're looking at a summer of talk about the offense and a winter of domination by the defense.

Comments

[ShouldaTookRickyWilliams]

I agree Derek. I'm loving the defense that we should be able to field this season. Unless we get an Ocho Cinco type WR back in trade, I am firmly against trading Lito at all. He seems to be playing nice so far so I say screw it. The Eagles' D should be one of the best this season. Go Birds!

[Andy]

Nice post Derek... I think you've nailed this one. I'll say this... if the Eagles finish in the Top 10 offensively and increase their red zone efficiency a smidge, this defense can carry us deep into the playoffs. I think last year's lack of turnovers was an abberation. This defense is scary fast with more than adequate depth at key positions.

[Tracer Bullet]

I don't foresee this team being as bad at generating turnovers, scoring in the red zone this year or on special teams (but you're on notice, Akers). Even returning to league average in those areas will be a major improvment. A solid offense, a defense with the potential to be among the best in the NFL and a dynamic return man? That adds up to a that can certainly win the division and possibly (maybe, dare I hope?) a Super Bowl.

[D3Keith]

Given that their defense kept them in almost every game last year, I expect the Eagles to be a popular playoff pick for any writer or blogger who does their homework this year. First off, all you do to do one of those is look at which teams in the 6-10 to 8-8 range got better ... but second of all is this:

In their eight losses, The Eagles really only got their butts kicked twice. Dallas and the 16-3 loss to the Giants -- and a super-optimist could argue that they were in the Giants game most of the way, but I'll count 12 sacks as a butt-whipping.

That means the Eagles were in 14 of their games in the final minutes. They failed six times in the clutch.

I'm sure some blogger somewhere has done this already, but allow me briefly recount:

Green Bay - Pissed away 10 pts. including the GW 52-yard FG on bobbled punt returns.
Washington - Kevin Curtis drops fourth-down pass inside the 5, although they were down 20-12 at that point and just hoping to go to OT.
Chicago - gave up a length of the field drive after taking a late lead, lost 19-16.
New England - You remember this.
Seattle - You remember this too, but do you remember the backside hustle on the Westbrook punt return pushing him out at the 14? He probably could've scored on that runback, but put it in AJ's hands.
Giants - Akers' 57-yard FGA hits the crossbar.

It's a fourth-quarter league, and every team is entitled to their share of bad luck, poor finishes, inability to close, etc.

But even if the Birds trotted the exact same team out there last year, I don't see them going 8-8 again. (for purposes of this argument, let's ignore that they barely won some of those games too).

If they manage to pull out just half of those six close games this time around, that's 11-5, not 8-8. If they just get two more, that's 10-6.

That's why I think the Eagles were shrewd to make an attempt at Moss, etc., but weren't desperate to make a move. Same with trading Lito.

This is a team that was very close last year.

Considering that
1. McNabb is presumably healthy from Day 1
2. LJ Smith will be available in the red zone and the offensive coaches most certainly are obsessing with red zone offense this offseason
3. They addressed the turnover deficiency by bringing in Samuel and attempting to address the pass rush
4. They addressed the special teams, both coverage units and return game

That seems like four ways they'll be able to turn one of those 19-16 Ls into a win.

Reid makes a really good point when he points out how they were No. 6 in offense last year, by yards, but 21 or whatever in scoring. More TDs, less FGs. Field position, red zone offense, turnovers.

The Eagles don't really have any areas where they got worse. They can't really afford any injuries at LB, and it's possible the youth there won't pan out. Great years from Dawkins and a full season from Lito would go a long way, but on paper (famous last words), there isn't a whole lot of reason to think the Eagles will be worse than last season.

I fully expect most preseason magazines to come out with
1. NYG/DAL
2. DAL/NYG
3. PHI
4. WAS (They have talent, but another new system and new coach, they'll regress)

Thoughts?

[D3Keith]

And I should mention that of the two butt-kickings, they avenged the Dallas loss and had a chance to beat the Giants.

I don't think there is any team the Eagles should fear.

That said, they did a great job last year of not beating teams that were beatable.