Did We Have the Red Zone Backwards?

I'm still collecting my thoughts on a couple of longer pieces I'm chewing on, but I did want to bring up an idea that occurred to me last night while I wasn't watching MNF.

You have to square a lot of circles if you want to try to understand the 2008 Eagles, but last year's team was also a bit of a puzzle.  For example, the offense was very good at accumulating yards, but not so good at scoring points.  We spent a lot of time trying to figure out why this was so, eventually settling on a tripartite solution involving:  1) poor special teams and not enough forced turnovers, 2)  uneven performance in the red zone, and 3) the decline of David Akers.

(And by the way, I know no one's really in the mood for good news right now, but have you noticed that Akers hasn't missed a kick since the bye?  And he's now 4-for-5 from 40-49 yards?  And even in last week's tough wind he was drilling them down the middle?  Now I just wish I hadn't dropped him from my fantasy team when the Eagles' bye came up.)

So anyway, fast forward to today and you see something interesting.  The Eagles offense is ranked 6th in the NFL in yards ... and also 6th in scoring. 

Of course, while that symmetry is nice, it comes despite the fact that the red zone offense is still broken.  After a better start to the year, the Eagles have not been good down by the goal line, with the result being the 21st-ranked red zone offense in terms of (first) touchdowns then (second) field goals. 

My goal today isn't to explain how those last two paragraphs fit together.  I haven't researched that yet.  It's to bring up another point.

The question we asked last year was this:

If the Eagles are so good at moving the ball, why do they have so much trouble scoring in the red zone?

This was my long attempt at an answer.  I think it still holds up.  The stuff about Westbrook is particularly critical.

The thing is, though, I now think I was asking the wrong question.  It's not "why were the Eagles so good and yet so bad," it's "why were they so bad and yet so good."  Or rather:

If the Eagles have so much trouble scoring in the red zone, why are they so good at moving the ball?

The reason I think this matters is because it suggests that the answer to the old question was backwards too.

Take a look at this chart again from that old post:

 

Again, with apologies to our stats friends, that doesn't look like a random walk. 

It's turned around a little this year, but if I updated that chart, the blue line would go to 90 percent, the red line would bump to 50 percent and the green line would go just over the upper of the two lines between the four and the five (4.7 pts/trip).  In other words, still not great.

Which brings me to why I think this is important.  The Eagles coaching staff spent a lot of time in the offseason working on how to improve in this area.  And yet despite all that effort, they haven't really moved the needle.

Now I know what many of you are probably thinking -- "See, more proof that Reid sucks and we should get him out of here."  And hey, you may even be right.

I don't think so, though.  I think what we're really seeing here is how an insufficient talent base across the roster can be covered up at midfield, but gets exposed by the goal line.

And the Eagles coaches are very good at that covering up.  Take Greg Lewis as an example.  Somehow, despite all his physical limitations, the guy is still an effective #6 wide receiver.  He trots out there for three plays a game, pulls in his 1.5 catches for 1.0 first downs, then calls it a day on offense and returns to his position on special teams. 

Does Lewis manage this because he's such a great receiver?  No, if he were, he'd never have lost the starting job after the 2005 season.  He's able to contribute this much because the Eagles coaches -- ahem -- put him in a position to make plays.  They see a weakness on film, figure out how to attack it, and then give Lewis a route that lets him exploit the problem.

This doesn't work in the red zone.

In the red zone, there's no space.  You don't have to worry about putting a safety over the top of DeSean Jackson to stop him from beating you deep.  There's no deep tight end seam route once you're in the shadow of the goal posts.  Everything compresses, and it comes down to who can beat whom. 

That's a big reason why Greg Lewis has managed 132 receptions for 1,859 yards in his career, but only 10 catches for 84 yards in the red zone.  Catchwise, 7.6 percent of his production comes in 20 percent of the field.

That's why having six pretty good wide receivers isn't as good as having two very good ones.  That's why it hurts that McNabb can't run as well as he used to down there.  And that's especially why having a complete inability to drive-block the man in front of you is a disaster in goal-to-go situations. 

From an X's and O's perspective, my growing conviction is that it's the players, not the coaches. 

From a motivation and focus on tuning out old voices perspective, I can't speak to that.