Reaching For Perspective

Stacy Andrews
Injury:  Torn ACL and "other ligaments"
Date of injury: 12/21/2008
Date of full recovery:  Unknown

Jamaal Jackson
Injury:  Torn ACL
Date of injury:  12/28/2009
Date of full recovery:  ???

Before we get into what Jamaal Jackson's injury means for the Eagles and their playoff chances, let's talk a little bit about what it means for Jackson himself.

Jackson turns 30 in May.  Realistically, it's probably the summer of 2011 before he's fully healthy.  By that point, at least two (Cole and McGlynn) and possibly three (add in a rookie draft pick) guys will have had a chance to win his job, at a position where you don't really want to screw around much with the chemistry once it's established.  If he gets his job back then, it will be because nobody else worked out -- not exactly the outcome we'd like to see.

So unless the injury isn't too bad (and I haven't seen many details yet, could be a clean tear of one ligament) and/or Jackson's an absurdly fast healer, his best case scenario might be that he's looking good enough by the end of next year for one of those across-the-Reid-coaching-tree type deals that would make him a starter somewhere else.

If Jackson has anything going for him, it's that he's cheap.  Talk about a mixed blessing, but assuming those escalators are out of reach, the Eagles have absolutely no need to cut the cord on Jackson to free up some salary space.  Even if he misses most of next year, it's still worth keeping him on the roster.

All of which is to say, as much as I'm bummed about what the injury means for this year's playoff chances, I'm even more bummed for the big guy himself.

---

Now, about those playoff chances.  There's no question this is a big loss.  Given the way the Eagles' backup situation has been constructed, it almost doesn't matter which of the five starters had gotten hurt, we were going to see a new OG in the mix (Herremans probably backs up both tackles now).  So even though JJ may be about the middle in terms of talent on this line, he's the biggest loss other than P----- would have been, simply because you get the guard downgrade and the communication / line call issues.

With that said, I think I'm less concerned about Cole than I am about the poo-poo platter at RG.  Cole is who he is, a serviceable player who won't get run over too often by the big NTs because he packs 300 pounds into an approximately four-foot tall frame.  He's got plenty of leverage.  There's no question we're going to have some pressure situations come up that he's maybe not as equipped to address, but if that forces Marty to concede a little bit in his playcalling, I'm not sure that's such a terrible thing. 

As long as McNabb doesn't get killed on one of those net successful blitzes.

At right guard, on the other hand, we have issues.  MJG and St. Andrews aren't really that different.  MJG's bigger and slower, but the core problem both guys have had this year is simple inconsistency.  They'll make four great blocks in a row -- and these are two powerful, powerful dudes -- but then on the fifth play they'll screw up their technique and get run over.  Or they'll decide to double team an end and let another rusher blow right past them up the middle.

Forced to choose between two sub-par options, I think MJG has to be the choice.  How many quarters has St. Andrews played this year?  Like 10?  Reasonable guess?  And he has four false starts, a holding penalty and has allowed four sacks?

Barring some serious Juan Castillo pixie dust, Andrews shouldn't really be anywhere near the field.

---

Good piece on Westbrook.  Lot of quotes.  Keep an eye on this Marcus Hayes guy.

---

Last point:  Everyone's talking about Macho Harris and the day he had yesterday.  All well and good.  But, um, why was he the starter, anyway?  Did I miss something last week?  Was that announced?  Hasn't Sean Jones been the starter for like a month now?  Was Harris hurt before (didn't really seem like it)?  Did they think he needed some time to sit and watch?  Has Jones been sucking?

One of the things I miss most about not doing the rewinds is that I have virtually no idea what McD is doing with his personnel these days.  Every play it seems like different numbers are flying around the screen.

Was that 23 or 21?  Can you tell if that was a five two or a five three?  Is that a nickel package or just some other random grouping of players?

Sadly, I can't provide any answers, but I can offer a theory.  Let's say you're a defensive coordinator who has to play mix-and-match with his defense, because you've got some guys (like, say, #54) who do some things really well, but can be a bit scary in other situations.  Or you've got other guys (like, say, #24) who can do everything you ask, but maybe shouldn't be put into situations where they have to open things up the whole way all that many times.

One way to handle those issues is to play things situationally.  Play the big guys on run downs, go to the nickel on pass downs, and go half-and-half when it's in between.  That's the typical approach.

The downside of that system, though, is what we'll call the Gruden Fallacy and thenrunawayquickly without saying anything more about it.

So if you're a DC worried about opposing teams getting a fix on your groupings, why not go completely crazy?  Use 20 different packages, and never let the opposition guess at what they're going to be able to attack next.  After all, it's pretty hard to go after the MIKE if you don't know if it will be Trotter, Jordan, Witherspoon, White or Asante Samuel (since that's just how McD rolls).

The obvious counter is to go no-huddle, which we'll certainly start seeing more of the next few weeks.  But that's an obvious counter for almost every kind of non-Tampa-Two defense, and the Eagles might be better able to match up since they've been practicing all these rapid-fire substitutions for a couple months.

Of course, none of this explains why Macho Harris played so much yesterday.  Or why Sean Jones will probably have a bigger role again next week.  Guess we'll just keep guessing.