Let's Hope It's An Ankle

The Eagles lost last Monday night.  I felt pretty good on Tuesday.

The Eagles won yesterday.

I don't feel that good today.

Just three games into the season, the Eagles have suffered significant injuries to their three best offensive players.  The Andrews back injury -- while troubling -- seems manageable.  We have a capable backup at that position and while this is the kind of injury that can linger for awhile, the worst-case scenario isn't that bad.

This is emphatically not the case with the Westbrook and McNabb injuries.  Neither guy is replaceable over the long haul.  And both these injuries could end up having serious consequences.

For McNabb, the McNair comparison has already been made in the comments.  You don't even have to go that far, though.  Just think back to the season opener against Atlanta a few years ago, when McNabb took that vicious shot to the chest that messed him up pretty good for awhile. 

Here's some scary reading for you:

McNabb confirmed that he was injured on an attempted flea flicker that fooled no one, and ended with him being sacked by Travis Kirsche and Larry Foote.  "They pounced on me a little bit," McNabb said. "It was a tough hit - my chest felt like it caved in and my head hit the ground."

"My chest felt like it caved in." 

Let that sink in.

And of course, the McNabb injury isn't even the biggest concern of the day.  Westbrook officially has an "ankle strain."  X-rays yesterday were negative, but the MRI comes today.

At this point, I hope it's an ankle.  As bad as that can be, if no bones are broken, then this is likely not a season-threatening injury.

But I watched that replay a dozen times or more yesterday, just like you did, and to me that didn't look like an ankle.  Yeah, bad things happened to the ankle, but worse things seemed to be happening to his foot.

If this is a foot injury, we could be in trouble.  I'm sure Westbrook -- protected by his new deal -- will strap it on and play as much as he can, but if it's a foot problem, that could be the kind of thing that doesn't heal until well into 2009. 

If you watched the Eagles' offense try to operate without Westbrook for three quarters yesterday, then you know just how terrifying that prospect may be.

Comments

[Sudhir Razdan]

Hey there!!! What a win!!!
I am a little confused about the official sack count from yesterday. Since you are the stats-guru, was it 8 or 9 sacks. Some websitee say 8 and some say 9. PE.com says 8. Just trying to get my facts right...

Thanks,
Sudhir

[Eric]

It was 9 total sacks. A lot of websites are saying the Eagles sacked Rothlisberger 8 times, which is correct.

Should we now be concerned that Andy may be ruining Hunt's career in only his second season? He's getting far too hurt this early. Which goes back to your post about the Eagles possibly messing up the FB thing.

[Derek]

Should have been 10, too. The grounding call on Roethlisberger in the end zone should actually have been a sack. His knee was down.

[Wilbert Montgomery]

Well I have to say that when I was sitting watching the second half of the third game of the season and there was no McNabb, no Westbrook, no Curtis, and no Brown, I thought the cruel Gods of Philly sports had managed to slide us the high hard one again. I'm aware as anyone that without McNabb or Westbrook the playoffs are a distant dream, but they are playing pretty decent ball without some of their major weapons. That's a good sign because if they do manage to play into January - god forbid February - they'll almost certainly have to be playing well without some of their weapons.

I'm just gonna have to take the glass half full approach to this one and say that I'm encourage with the heart this team has showed so far.

[Sudhir]

Thanks for clarification Eric. I did not realize we sacked Leftwich too...

[bigmyc04@yahoo.com]

I think it's safe to say that the offense will have a much better chance without McNabb than without Westbrook.

McMarginal has yet to show that he can sustain a high level of play through more than a handful of games in a row. While I think he is a very good QB, to call him great is a stretch. Consistency is what the Eagles need from this guy and on a weekly basis, he doesn't do it.

I wonder how many points Kolb could put up with the same starting roster. The difference would show itself in postseason of course, but ya gotta learn sometime.

[Derek]

Kolb comes in and throws a pick on his very first pass and we're still playing the "we'd be better with Kolb" card?

That's pretty amazing.

[bigmyc]

I suppose that the Iggs will need a healthy McNabb to have a shot at a Super Party but I and legions of others have grown long since tired of Donovan's story.

Champs don't botch those plays at the end of Monday Night games whilst trying to salt the game away against a perrenial rival with long term implications.

It's never been a question of, "can he do it?"

It's always been about, "Will he?"

[bigmyc]

Derek, with all do respect, you'd be pretty handy with either the Obama or McCain camps....

Funny thing is; I knew someone would point right to that play as I watched it unfold. It'd be a fair enough point if the ball hadn't hit L.J. Slip Grip right in the hands....

was that pick really Kolb's fault?

[bigmyc]

The topical political reference was about that textbook "spin" you put on the Kolb interception. Basically, you made it out to be something that it wasn't...

Great blog, though.

[Eagles Fan in San Fran]

All the power rankings out there (SI, ESPN, Fox Sports, etc.) have us ranked in the top 5 in the league (i.e, a Super Bowl contender) and someone thinks Kolb should replace DMac.
Must be TO posting here.