Tuesday Odds & Ends

UPDATE:  The Trotter news being discussed down in the comments.

- - - - - -

I watched the game last night with a friend who is a Cowboys fan.  Very, very strangely, I actually found myself rooting for Dallas.

No doubt the biggest reason was the hosting obligation.  It's more that a little jerkish to openly root against a guest's team when you don't have a dog in the fight.  But as the game when on, I decided there were two other, almost equally important reasons:

1)  I really don't like the Panthers.  Like, at all.  Outside of divisional opponents and the New England Patriots (natch), they may be the team I dislike the most.  Way to make an impact, Peppers.

2)  I really don't have any fear of the Cowboys.  They're a decent team.  And with guys like Romo and the scary Felix Jones, they can beat anyone.  But overall, it just doesn't look like a team that's headed in the right direction.  They were all out of sync in the first half, I'm not impressed with their coaching, and they appear to have some holes at a number of key positions. 

Right now, the NFCE looks like a two-team race.

- - - - - -

Things can change quickly in the NFL.

- - - - - -

This is the kind of Monday Tuesday morning quarterbacking I just don't get, on a few levels:

1)  This feels like negativity for negativity's sake.  The Eagles destroyed the Chiefs in that game.  There was very little to criticize.  So this is just hunting around to find something bad.

2)  Is it just me, or is the tone ridiculously condescending?  Andy "might not want to put away his toys when he should"?  Sheesh.

3)  It conflates two separate criticisms.  I happened to think going for it was the right choice (for a variety of reasons we'll get to in a bit).  I also happen to think that particular play call was not a good choice.  Donellon just mixes them up together.

4)  Reid does have a tendency to be a bit over-aggressive.  But it's not in the way Donellon suggests.  Usually, his issue is that he has too much faith in his defense, so he calls those end of half timeouts to preserve time for his offense, well before it's all that apparent the other team is truly stopped.  Those aren't good.

Now, as for why going for it was the right choice, I could write up an explanation ... or, since it's a slow bye week and all, I could just point you right to the source and suggest you read all four parts here.

If you're the impatient type, skip to the last part and look at the graphs.  Regardless of whether or not you're comfortable with the (truly) aggressive idea that going for it on fourth-and-one is the right call anywhere on the field, it's pretty clear from those charts that going for it on fourth-and-one at the opponent's 44 yard line is one of the most obvious moves you can make.  By punting there, you're basically handing the opposing team a free probabilistic point.

[Note:  As Brian makes clear, this analysis applies only to "‘typical’ game situations."  There will obviously be times coaches shouldn't go "by the book."  You don't need to type that out below.]

- - - - - -

As for the playcall itself, I thought that was dumb.  We signed Jason Peters and Leonard Weaver for a reason.  Might as well use them.

- - - - - -

This is sort of funny:

That Andy Reid wouldn't let a running back as talented as Brian Westbrook play regularly until he had mastered the nuances of reading, reacting and blocking a blitz by a linebacker or safety.

This Andy Reid all but turned Sunday's game against the Chiefs over to rookie LeSean McCoy.

This idea that Andy has "changed" sort of assumes the Eagles had much choice in the matter.

- - - - - -

Vick wasn't a decoy on Sunday.  In last week's video rewind, I questioned whether the Eagles were actually running the spread option, because it looked like the decision on where the ball should go was being made pre-play, from the sidelines.  The plays looked like options, but if you tell DeSean "hand the ball to Westbrook on this one," it's really just a run.

I have no way of knowing if that observation is true or not, but it's how it looked on television.

This week, now that we have Vick, things may have changed.  In Kevin Kolb's words:

... I thought (Eagles QB Michael (Vick) did a good job there when he came in. Although he really didn't get a chance to really pull and show his stuff, he was making perfect reads and we talked about that, both of us, 'Hey let's just read it out and let the game come to us.' The big plays were happening and so everybody wants to see a flash, but he has to do what's right with the ball and he did that all day."  

If Vick's lined up at wide receiver and he runs a fake end around, that's a decoy.  If he's taking the snap and making the correct reads all day in handing the ball off, that's effective option quarterback play.

For a guy who didn't have the most "team focused" reputation to be willing to play the right way and take what the defense gives him is encouraging.  Keep it up and the big gains will eventually come.

- - - - - -

Isn't the problem that he's done at least two, if not all three, of these things?