Iggles Blog - Philadelphia Eagles Blog

But Enough About Me

Let's talk about you.  You, that once proud franchise (was it really just last year?) that strode across the NFC North like a colossus (at least since 2002 when they put you in that new division). 

As has so often occurred during the history of your storied ball club, this year's team is built around a proud defense.  It's not a particularly good defense, mind you, but it's very, very proud.

There have been many theories put forward for why the unit has struggled so much.  Is it the Super Bowl hangover?  The loss of defensive coordinator Ron Rivera?  Maybe just injuries?

No, no and no.

It's actually pretty simple.  And no, that link didn't work for me either.  But somehow that seems fitting, don't you think?

It's called addition by subtraction, baby, or in this case, subtraction by addition.  Sadly, there's no guarantee Mr. No-Gap will be playing this weekend.  I join Brian Westbrook, Correll Buckhalter and Tony Hunt in sending my best wishes for a speedy recovery.

Now some may remember the last time the Eagles went up against one of their former defensive tackles.  It didn't go so well.  On the other hand, Hollis was pulling a Belichick with the needle.  Heck, if he'd shown that kind of commitment to getting his next contract winning while with the Eagles he'd probably still be in Philadelphia. 

Beyond the issue of OIllie Olé -- and I hope the section of the playbook devoted to attacking players other than the Swinging Gate is extremely small -- Sunday's contest really comes down to just one facet of the game.  And no, it's not special teams.  It's stopping Brian Griese.

That's right.  Stopping ... Brian ... Griese.

After Griese's first game as a starter, everyone pretty much laughed him off.  Three INTs, six sacks, not a good performance. 

But consider how rusty McNabb looked at the beginning of this season, and he'd only been off since the middle of last year.  Griese hasn't really been a full-time starter for years, really since his time in Denver.  Gruden jerked him around in Tampa Bay and evidently no quarterback can ever succeed in Miami.

This year, Griese's early preseason numbers were outstanding (yeah, I know) and he's been getting better each game.  Compare his career stats to Sexy Rexy's.  Which one would you rather face?

It's certainly possible the rest of his team is going to fold around him and it will be one of those multi-sack days, but if our guys aren't ready for him, things could get interesting. 

However, if the Eagles can hold down the Bears' rushing attack (the way everyone else has) with just the front seven and if Lito can actually get on the field this week, I like our match-ups.  As long as we can score some points early to keep the crowd from collectively losing its shit, I think this could actually be a pretty fun game.

What's that?  I'm talking about the Eagles again?  Sorry, just can't help it.  Although you'll be talking about them too on Sunday night, after they stick a boot in your butt to the tune of 27-23.

It's not you, it's them.

Radio Silence

The wife and I are violating a cardinal rule of football season.  We're taking a trip out of town this weekend.

Ordinarily such a decision would violate everything in which I believe, but there are extenuating circumstances (her milestone birthday, pregnancy, etc.) in this case. 

All of which is to say I won't be around for the next couple days and I'm going to try desperately not to find out anything about the game until we get home late Sunday and I can watch it on TiVo.

As for my prediction... the Eagles don't have a great track record in the games where I think there's just no way they could possibly lose.  So, um, I guess they could lose this game somehow.  But they won't. 

Happy times are coming again.

Giants Game Preview

When I started this blog, I figured my schedule would go something like this:

• Monday -- Game review (long)
• Tuesday -- Second-day reactions (short)
• Wednesday / Thursday -- Random stats or around-the-league stuff (short)
• Friday -- Game preview (long)
• Saturday / Sunday -- Watching football, not writing about it

My assumption was that people would care most about the Eagles right after and right before their games, with less interest during the middle of the week when other things were going on.

Not exactly.

First of all, people don't want to wait until Monday.  It's amazing how many people show up within 10 minutes of the final kneeldown.  I try, but even the pros get a couple hours to file. 

Secondly, folks aren't easily sated.  Interest runs strong through at least Wednesday before it starts to slow down a bit.  (I've also noticed that when bad things happen, traffic is better than when things are good.)

Finally, Friday's are glacial.  This is the biggest surprise.  I figured that would be the "ramp up" day.  Nope, it's always the slowest week day.  I have a few theories for why this could be so:

1. Especially in the summer, lots of people take off early on Friday.
2. It's a night/day effect.  The day is similarly paced, but people aren't hanging around the house reading about the Eagles on Friday night.  (This can't be the whole answer, based on the numbers.)
3. My game previews suck. 

I kinda think it might be #3.  Or at least maybe it's that they don't provide something you can't get a million other places.

That thought came to mind last night as I was trying to figure out what to write about the Giants.  I mean, we played those guys three times last year.  Other than Tiki's retirement, not much has changed.  You watched all those games too -- you know what they do.  And if you do want to read about the game, you have approximately six million choices. 

So I've got a request.  I'm always open to feedback on what happens around here.  If you've got any ideas about ways I could make these things more interesting, please email me or pop 'em in the comments.  I'm all ears.  And the same thing goes on a week-to-week basis.  If the Eagles are playing a team we all don't already know everything about, let me know if there are any specific questions you'd like to see addressed.

As for this week, here are the things I think those six million people are all getting wrong:

Chris Gocong is not going to be the primary coverage option on Jeremy Shockey.  Every week we get these stories about how such-and-such a tight end will be Gocong's "toughest test yet."  I'm sure it will happen again when Jason Whitten comes to town.  Guys, can we all please just keep in mind that Gocong spends half the game on the bench, there's no way Johnson trusts him yet to consistently match up one-on-one with a guy like Shockey, and very few linebackers can stick with these modern tight ends in space.

I don't think Burress is going to be that effective.  The Eagles don't typically flip their cornerbacks for match-up purposes, but after what happened last year we might see a bit more of that on Sunday.  As for William James, he definitely struggles a little bit with the quick guys, but Burress isn't beating anybody down the field, he just jumps over them when Eli heaves one of his hopeprayluck specials down the sideline.  He'll probably destroy us in the second game, however.  (Also, the Eagles corners aren't "small," it's just that he's 6-5.)

It's going to be very, very tough for Westbrook to have a big game.  I think good players can go one week without practicing and not show any ill effects, but that starts to catch up to you if it continues.  I think Brian might be a little less sharp this week.  Also, the Giants are going to throw everything they have at Westbrook.  Spagnuolo was around Philly long enough to get a good sense about what works best against him.  McNabb better be on again.  (On the flip side, if Westbrook can't go look for Buckhalter to have one of those "oh, well we don't have to worry about him" big days.  He was hitting the hole really, really hard last week.  Obviously the rest of the package isn't the same, but I think Bucky might be faster than Westbrook these days.)

Eagles / Redskins Game Preview

Eagles' fans clamoring for offensive balance would love last week's performance by the Redskins.  Against the Dolphins, Washington amassed 191 yards rushing and 197 net yards passing.  Clinton Portis and Ladell Betts matched each other with 17 carries apiece, with Portis having by far the more successful day: 98 yards versus only 59 for Betts.

Monday night should see more of the same, with a young quarterback in Jason Campbell making only his ninth start and journeyman Todd Wade filling in for the injured Jon Jansen.  Jevon Kearse may not be the destructive terror he once was, but it would be coaching malpractice to give him too many free shots at a bright green quarterback with only a guy who used to "block" for David Carr standing between them.  So expect a whole lot of good old-fashioned, power running Redskins football. 

In other word, the Green Bay Packers were a nice warm-up for the Eagles' run defense, but the real show starts on Monday night. 

Now, after one whole game, I'm sold on the Patterson/Bunkley combo in the middle.  They've still got room to grow, but after years of watching the likes of Darwin Walker running a no-gap scheme in the middle, I'm thrilled to see a couple of guys who actually hold their ground.  That should be enough to prevent a repeat of the 171-yard Betts' debacle from last year, but it's going to take more than that to stop this offense.

On Monday night, the linebackers are going to have to make plays. 

You can keep your starting strongside linebacker on the bench for 65.6 percent of your plays against the likes of the pass-happy, no-running-back Packers, but that's not going to fly against Joe Gibbs.  Think about it for a second.  Here's a basic Eagles' defense, with last initials of the starters:

   S  . Ga    Go

C  . B    .P     K

.O  O  X  O  O  O

If you're a power running team, there's no reason to spend too much time attacking the big guys in the middle.  You can instead seal them inside and then get to attacking the edges, where the Eagles sport two game, but undersized defensive ends.  If the Redskins can get some push there, then it's down to the linebackers to read, react and make plays.  Might as well try that out and see how it works.  Hell, I'm curious too.  (And if you replace that "Go" with a "JH" -- forget it.)

Because of this concern about the young guys, I think we might again see a fair number of plays where Gocong starts out on the line of scrimmage.  That takes a fair amount of the "reading" away from him.  If Cooley tries to blocks him, he plays run.  If Cooley tries to get off the line into a pass pattern, jam him and beat the crap out of him.  (And if he pretends to block and then slips out for a pass, we give up a big play and just hope it's not near the end zone.)  That's this alignment, which we saw often in the preseason:

     .Ga . .s

Go  C     B  . P .K

. O  O  O  X  O  O

Then it's on Spikes to have a big game if they're attacking that strong-side 'B' gap.  I'll take those odds.

Now, this article notwithstanding, I actually don't expect to see Gocong spending too much time covering Cooley.  He will try to jam him at the line, but the Eagles have all kinds of plans on the shelves for handling great tight ends.  Most of them involve Brian Dawkins.  But with Lito hurt and a need for some size, there's a chance Quintin Mikell could be called into service on obvious passing downs to try to stay with the Cooley.  At any rate, on third-and-eight, don't expect Gocong to be the one trying to keep up with him.

On defense, the Redskins are a puzzle.  They looked pretty good against Miami last week, but at this point I'm not sure we can definitively say which one is Trent Green and which one is Kurt Warner.

Jim Johnson likes to say he has three starting cornerbacks -- on those occasions when Lito is healthy -- but the Redskins actually do, as this strange story attests:

What might be a difficult decision for some teams -- having to choose only two of three well-compensated cornerbacks to start each week -- offers the Washington Redskins the opportunity to confuse opponents before the game even begins.

Last week, against a meek Miami offense, Gregg Williams, the Redskins' assistant head coach-defense, started two corners who were less heralded, Fred Smoot and Carlos Rogers, and used his most accomplished corner, Shawn Springs, sparingly. None of the corners -- or the Dolphins -- knew until game day who would be in the starting lineup and they suspect that will be the case all season, with the lineup a closely guarded secret each week.

Huh?  They're going to keep their starters secret?  And one of those starters might not include their best cover corner?  Wow, that's confusing.

On the defensive line, which already isn't a strength for this team, the 'skins might have serious depth problems, with starting left defensive end Phillip Daniels "unlikely" to play Monday night.  As that story notes, that would leave Washington with only seven healthy defensive linemen on the roster. 

I know what you're thinking.  "Awesome, let's turn the big guys up front loose and wear the crap out of them with Westbrook, Buckhalter and Hunt!"  The only problem is, Andy Reid's thinking: "Awesome, an injured starting defensive end, let's pass the ball as much as possible since they won't be able to pressure Donovan as much!"

And, sadly, only one of you actually coaches this team. 

The Redskins are playing a lot of cover-three looks this year to focus on taking away the big plays.  LJ's ability to split those seams will be missed, so Donovan will need to be sharp to hit those intermediate crossing routes that should be there all night.  Kevin Curtis in particular should love working against those sagging cornerbacks all night.  No one runs a 14-yard dig route like a former St. Louis Ram can. 

From a big-picture perspective (and don't worry, I'm about to bring my most rambling game preview ever to a close), I think the key is going to be making sure the Redskins don't ever start to feel like they can win this game.  The Eagles have owned these guys for awhile now, if they come out sharp in the first quarter and take care of business right away, that might stay that way.  Otherwise, could be an interesting night.

I'm feeling much better about this week, though, so:

Eagles -- 27
Redskins -- 10

Oh, and Paul Posluszny once again led his team in tackles, with five solos and seven assists.  Just saying.

And if you want to read an interesting story about one member of the Redskins, here's one.   

A Paradox and a Prediction

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." --Ralph Waldo Emerson

Two days before kickoff and here's where I am:

1. The Eagles of 2007 are better than the Eagles of 2006.
2. I felt more optimistic about the Eagles of 2006 than I do about the Eagles of 2007.
3. This makes no sense.

Last year I was convinced -- I knew -- that the Eagles were going to be better than everyone else believed (present company excepted).  I laughed my way through a fantasy football draft as I picked up Eagles players several rounds after they should have been gone.  I railed against the national "experts" who all proclaimed the window was closed as they jumped on the Cowboys or Redskins bandwagons.  I even started a blog dedicated to the idea that they were all wrong and the Eagles were going to be a very good team. 

I'm not going to claim I foresaw the wild ride the team went on last year, but the core points were proven.  McNabb is still a great quarterback, there's plenty of talent on this team, Reid still knows how to coach, and -- most importantly -- the window argument was bogus. 

Something's different this year, though.  I still think they're going to be a very good team, but my excitement over that prospect is tempered with ... something.  I'm not even sure what it is, but I have a few theories:

The poor preseason theory (30%).  I know the preseason doesn't matter.  But while it wasn't an unmitigated disaster, it still wasn't great.  The good points were that Kevin Kolb looked remarkably advanced for a rookie and no one got hurt.  The bad points included:

1. Abysmal first-half performances against the Ravens and Steelers.
2. Evidence that linebacker could continue to be an area of concern for some time.
3. A gimpy Dawkins.
4. Problems with the running game.
5. Continued poor play from the return and coverage teams.
6. Missed connections that suggest Curtis doesn't have Stallworth's extra fifth gear.
7. Questions about depth at key positions, notably right guard.
8. Occasional-to-frequent poor tackling.
9. Jon Dorenbos.
10. Name your own favorite issue here.

And I was even one of the people who didn't think Kearse looked all that bad out there.

Again, I know the preseason doesn't matter.  I've been repeating that to myself every day for a month now.  But would I feel better about the team if they'd shown a little more in that game against the Steelers?  Yeah, I think so.

The defense must prove it theory (25%).  Last year, all we heard about before the season was how the Eagles were ready to roll out maybe their best defense of the Jim Johnson era.  Didn't happen.  After a strong start, things went downhill in a big way.

This year, everyone is being reeeeally careful about not spouting any of that crap before the games begin.  Here's Dawkins in a story on Thursday:

"There's no way to possibly know," Dawkins said. "I hope people will be drastically surprised by the speed we play at."

I like the changes that have been made.  I think Bunkley is going to be a revelation as everyone gets to reap the benefits of playing with a defensive tackle who must be double-teamed.  But last year at this time I also thought Bunkley was going to a monster after watching him beat up on second and third-team guards all preseason, so we'll have to wait and see.

The "popular pick" theory (20%).  If most national experts generally are wrong about this stuff...  And most national experts are on the Eagles' bandwagon...  Is that a good sign?  I don't think so. (No offense to our good friends at USA Today.)

The "what about Don" theory (15%).  Sooner or later he has to stay healthy for a full season, right?  He's due.  Right?  Isn't he?

The Philadelphia theory (10%).  This crap always happens to us.  The recent collapse of the Phillies just demonstrates once again that some how, some way, these guys will find a way to lose.  Look, I'm not proud of it either, but I'm a Philly fan, so there you @$#%!ing go. 

-------------------------------

So where does that leave us for Sunday?  Honestly, for as much as I (and my alter-ego) think the Packers are going to be an improved team, this game really doesn't come down to what they do.  If the Eagles play like they should, with an offense led by the recovered McNabb and explosive Westbrook, then they really should take care of business.  Even if there are a couple of bust-ups in the secondary or linebacker area, that shouldn't be enough to make a difference as long as the Eagles take care of the football and don't give away free points off turnovers.

The Eagles should be 4-0 after their initial run against Green Bay, Washington, Detroit and the Giants, but I don't think it's going to happen that way.  There are going to be growing pains and I think they're going to lose a game they should win somewhere in that stretch (it won't be against Detroit). 

With that said, taken individually, these are all games they should win and it would be a fool's errand to try to guess when the toe stub will come:

Eagles - 27
Packers - 20

Bonus prediction - Akers 2-for-3 on field goals. 

Eagles / Saints Game Preview

At some point, information fatigue begins to set in.  After you examine a game from every possible angle, read everything that's been written about the match-up and looked for clues as to what might happen, there comes a point when there's not much left to say or hear.

This, incidentally, is the real problem with Monday Night Football.  It's not that Tony Kornheiser or Dennis Miller or any of the alternately hot or bumbling (or hot and bumbling) sideline announcers aren't/weren't good at their jobs.  It's just that we've ... heard ... it ... all ... before. 

The problem is especially acute during the playoffs, when fans get really excited about their teams and flock to message boards and other websites looking for more and more information. 

(Or in the case of Saints fans, flock to Eagles message boards to make complete asses of themselves.)

(If you're a Saints fan who has shown up here, I'm sure you're not one of those people.)

(Probably.)

News angles move super fast now, too.  At the beginning of the week the story was: How bout' dem Saints and what they're doing for New Orleans.  Then it became: I live in Philly but I feel guilty rooting against them.  Which, of course, finally ended up on: Enough Already about your stupid hurricane.  (I'm not joking.)

But here's the point, after all that discussion and all that analysis, the conclusion I'm left with is that these are two pretty evenly matched teams.  Statswise, it's very close:

• The offenses are ranked #1 (Saints) / #2 (Eagles)
• Scoring offenses ranked #5 / #6 (same order)
• Defenses are #11 / #15 (same)
• Scoring defenses are #13 / #15 (at least we're consistent)

Against common opponents, the Eagles are 10-2 and the Saints are 9-3.  This proves nothing other than that it's good to be in the NFC.

Both teams have heady, under-sized quarterbacks.  Both teams have multi-dimensional rushing/receiving threats out of the backfield.  Both teams have guys who used to play for the other team out for a little something extra.  Heck, they've already played once this year and the result was about as close as it could be.

So I'm starting with the presumption that if these two teams played on a neutral field, with the same amount of rest and in a regular season game, it would be a complete toss-up.  50-50.  Of course, that's not the case, so let's look at those other factors:

• Rest.  This is the big one for the Saints.  There's no way to overstate the importance of that first-round bye for healing banged-up bodies.  The slight mitigating factor is that the Eagles' starters basically got a bye in the last week of the regular season, but they still had to go through a week of practice and banging around.  (+3 Saints) 
• Rust.  Here's the downside of rest, it can throw off your timing at the beginning of the game, particularly for passing-based offenses.  Given that slow starts are perpetually a problem for the Eagles, any delay on the part of New Orleans would be helpful.  Small edge (+0.5) for the Eagles.
• Home-field advantage.  The Superdome is going to be nuts on Saturday night.  There's no doubt.  But Philly fans know all too well what happens when a confident crowd suddenly watches its team fall behind in a "sure-thing" game.  It can get awfully quiet and that negative energy can affect the players.  I know everyone talks about this one as being some kind of big determining factor, but honestly, I don't see it.  To me it's just a reinforcer.  If things are good for the Saints, the crowd will be nuts, but it won't matter because the Saints will be winning anyway.  If they're losing, the crowd's edginess -- and let's be honest, this isn't exactly a Boston, New York or Philly fan base we're talking about here -- is going to make a comeback even harder.  Also, the Saints were only 4-4 at home this season.  Just saying.  (No difference)
• Experience.  I wrote about this earlier in the week.  I can't see it affecting a guy like Reggie Bush all that much -- given his background -- but let's see how Marques Colston and a few of the other Saints' youngsters handle the spotlight.  Edge to the Eagles, especially since they're coming off a hard-fought playoff win last week.  (+3 Eagles)
• Injuries.  On our side, Lito Sheppard, who is definitely out.  On theirs, Joe Horn, who sure doesn't sound like he's going to be ready to go tomorrow night.  Losing Sheppard is a big deal, but check out the stats from the first game.  I'd much rather take my chances with the bigger, slower rookie than the faster, savvier veteran.  Slight edge (+1) to the Eagles if Horn can't go.  Slight edge to the Saints (+1) if Horn can gut it out.  Huge edge (+3) to the Saints if God performs a miracle on Horn's leg overnight and he can play at full speed. 
• Turnovers.  Eagles were +5 on the year, Saints were -4.  That's a difference of about one turnover every two games.  If this is that game...  (+1.5 Eagles )
• Hollis Thomas.  In the first game he was a monster.  In this game he's likely to tire quickly if the Eagles offense can stay on the field, given that he hasn't played football for six weeks.  Without him, the Saints run defense gets pretty spotty.  (+1 Eagles)   
• Pressure. This is the final differentiator that I see.  The Eagles are playing with house money at this point.  They want to win, but the season will in no way be a failure if they don't.  The Saints, on the other hand, are playing not just for themselves, but for a city, a region, a state and a nation.  They're also supposed to win.  Maybe if this were a more veteran team, I wouldn't think it would matter, but this is a young group playing a team that's had its back to the walls for weeks and isn't about to let up.  You may think I'm crazy, but to me that goes (+3 Eagles).

So where does that leave us?  Well, if Joe Horn is out I've got the Eagles by seven points.  If he's fully healthy, I still have the Eagles by three.  So there's my range of guesses for this week. 

Now I know what you're thinking.  Do I honestly believe the Eagles are seven points better going into this game?  No, I don't, but the way things are lining up for the Saints, I think their fans should be very, very nervous.  This is probably the worst draw they could have gotten this round, with the confident Eagles, winners of six straight, back in New Orleans for some revenge.

That doesn't mean things can't change, however.  I'm thinking right now that the bye week is about a three-point edge for the Saints, but if our offense can't sustain any drives and leaves the defense hanging, those big fellas could get awfully gassed by the end of the game, like what we saw last week with New York.

Truly, anything can happen.  But a month ago, I thought the Saints were probably going to have an easy ride to the Super Bowl.  Now I think the Eagles are going to take 'em out at home.  So does that make me a savvy prognosticator or hopeless fan? 

Guess we find out tomorrow night. 

Time to Pull Out All the Stops

Eagles / Giants Game Preview

One of the perils of writing something the night before, but waiting to post it until the next day, is that by the time you go live, someone else might have "stolen" your idea.  And so it is today, when I was beaten to the punch by not one, but two Philly columnists (of the compensated variety) who argued that it is time for the Eagles to shift to a more high-risk, high-reward strategic mindset.

And so it goes.

If I were feeling more peevish about the whole thing, I might consider flipping my argument around and suggesting that what the Eagles really need to do is trot out a conservative, ball-control offense and a bend-but-don't-break defense that gives Garcia a chance to win this thing in the fourth quarter.  But, well, I don't think that's the case and, besides, that's sort of been done too.

So let's instead just reorganize things a bit and play another round of the Should/Will Game.  Here we go:

The Giants SHOULD pretend Eli Manning is a rookie who needs to be protected.  That would mean calling either running plays or screens to Tiki/Jacobs on 75 percent of their first-half plays.

The Giants WILL realize that Shockey and Burress would flip out with that gameplan.  Meaning Eli will throw far more often than he should, and Coughlin will repeat the mistake made by both the Panthers and the Redskins.  When in doubt against the Eagles, just run the ball.

The Eagles SHOULD flip their defensive ends this game.  Trent Cole seems to have worn down as the season has progressed, but let's see what the kid can do against the decrepit Bob Whitfield, who is filling in for the injured LT Luke Petitgout.  Best case scenario, Cole picks up three sacks and terrorizes Manning.  Second-best, the Giants have to commit Shockey and Tiki to help on Cole, taking those two explosive weapons out of the offense on some plays.

The Eagles WILL keep things as they are.  But Juqua Thomas will have a nice day playing on the right side as he takes some of Darren Howard's snaps. 

The Giants SHOULD focus on taking away the Eagles' big plays.  At the expense of letting Brian Westbrook have a huge (though non-fatal) afternoon, the Giants should play soft in the secondary and try to take away the quick strikes that have been such an important part of the Eagles offense this year.

The Giants WILL make stopping Brian Westbrook their number one priority.  This will open up the deep passing attack for the Eagles, particularly since the likely absence of Eagles' killer Michael Strahan will cause the Giants to blitz more often to bring pressure, leaving an already weak secondary exposed.

The Eagles SHOULD start Brodrick Bunkley.  I don't know why Darwin Walker can't play the run (injuries, lack of talent, lack of discipline), all I know is that he can't. 

The Eagles WILL start Darwin Walker.  And the Giants will run right at him.  And Walker will again put up no more than token resistance.  And Rayburn and Bunkley will eventually replace him.  And we'll again wonder why the Eagles defense is so bad on opponents' first drives. 

Finally, the Giants SHOULD win this game.  They're at home and the Eagles have no answer to the kind of sustained rushing attack the Giants can bring.

But the Eagles WILL win.  Because our coaches are better, our quarterback is much more clutch, and because you should never, ever, anger Mr. Trotter.

Eagles - 27
Giants - 24

Eagles / Redskins Game Preview

Quick quiz.  You're a Philly fan when:

A) The Phillies trade for a top of the rotation starter and you know in your bones that some how, some way, it won't work out.
B) This week's game against the Redskins scares you -- not because the Redskins are good, but precisely because they aren't.
C) You're not sure what the Eagles' problem is, but you know the answer is "Reid should run the ball more."
D) All of the above.

In truth, I try to avoid the woe-is-me fan stuff as much as possible.  Ever since the Red Sox rode the "tragic losers" card to a national following and a World Series title, too many other cities have tried to stake their claim as the most suffering fan base.  At some point that just gets kinda weak.

I'm not saying that I would necessarily have chosen to be a Philadelphia fan if I had just shown up from Mars and was looking for an excuse to waste a lot of time on the couch.  The championship dry spell can be a bit much to take.  On the other hand, it's much, much better to be a fan of teams that are at least interesting, as opposed to, say, the Pittsburgh Pirates.

Great stadium out there, though.

However, there are weeks, like the one we're in right now, when being a Philly fan truly sucks.  I would love to be excited about the trade for Fast Freddy Garcia.  Clearly the Phillies needed more pitching, and Gillick went out and got us a good one.  I should be totally amped about this.

But, you know... 

(I don't even have the heart to link to the really enjoyable philly.com story that recapped the Phillies' stellar history of trading young players for "proven" pitchers.) 

As for the Eagles, I'm really worried about this week's game, for reasons that have nothing to do with the skill levels of the two teams.  Yes, we lost Donovan McNabb since the last game, but Jeff Garcia is better than first-year starter Jason Campbell and without Clinton Portis, the Redskins aren't nearly as scary.

Right now, the Redskins look a lot like Panthers did last week: strong running game (Ladell Betts), one dangerous weapon at receiver (a finally healthy Santana Moss), an underachieving defense and a mistake-prone quarterback.  On paper, at least, the Eagles should be fine in this game as long as they don't turn the ball over and continue to at least slow down the opposition's running game.

But here's the thing.  I haven't heard much about the Redskins all week.  All the discussion in Iggles Land (that's right, I said Iggles) has been revolving around our linebackers, our quarterback, and our coaches.  In the grand scheme of things, that may not mean very much, but every time the Eagles have had any excuse whatsoever to look past an opponent this season, they have done so. 

That makes this week a real test.  No, the Redskins aren't very good, so beating them doesn't say much about the team's place in the NFC.  But if the Eagles come out focused and determined, and take care of business without looking like they need a wake-up call to get going, that will say something about the developing character of this team -- which has been an even bigger problem this year than the defense.

I don't think it's going to be an easy game by any means, but it's one the Eagles should win.  My guess is they keep Moss in check, but struggle yet again with stopping the run.  Offensively, Garcia is due to come back to Earth a bit this week and if Brian Westbrook's toe means he's anything less than 100 percent, that could be an issue.  A lot of field goals in a game that goes down to the wire:

Eagles - 19
Redskins - 16

Does This Thing Work?

The killer who won't die is the ultimate horror movie cliché.  No matter how many times he's shot, stabbed, scalded or smashed, he keeps trudging on, always ready to reappear just when the victim thinks the coast is clear.

This year's Eagles are pretty much the Jason Voorhees of the league, only if the Friday the 13th anti-hero had been more obsessed with finding creative ways to kill himself than other people.  The Eagles have tried just about every manner of self-inflicted wound at this point, but somehow the league just won't let them die. 

It's come to this: if the Eagles beat the Panthers tonight, this team will be sitting in the sixth NFC playoff spot and have control of its own destiny. 

Amazing. 

Of course, that raises the question of if the Eagles actually can beat the Panthers tonight.  I'll be honest, part of the reason I didn't blow up over last week's loss to the Colts was that I was convinced they were a really good team that was out of our league.  Then Indy lost to the Titans yesterday and ... well, can you really use the "letdown game" excuse one week after playing this year's Eagles?

Last week I defended Jim Johnson's approach to the Colts by arguing that the first thing you have to worry about when you play Indy is Peyton Manning.  Stacking the box with eight defenders to stop the run would be insane against the future Hall of Famer and smartest quarterback in the league.  Unfortunately, that put the Eagles in a bad spot when their front seven proved completely incapable of stopping the run.

The problem is that the Eagles face an analogous situation this week.  Steve Smith is the league's most dangerous receiver and this year he is the only thing keeping the massively overrated Jake Delhomme from a sub-70 passer rating.  For a guy who's only 5-9 (in cleats), Smith does a great job making tough plays against bigger cornerbacks, but his biggest weapon is easily his downfield speed.  If the cornerback so much as blinks, Smith will be by him.  He is one of the very few players in the NFL who is a threat to score from any point on the field.

That puts Johnson in a difficult spot tonight.  On the one hand, he wants to make sure his cornerbacks have deep safety help to contain Smith.  On the other hand, dropping his safeties off the line means the undersized Eagles front seven will have no help stopping the run.  And even with Smith, Panthers coach John Fox would be happy to hand the ball off to DeAngelo Williams 35 times tonight if he could.  (You would too if Jake Delhomme were your quarterback.)

So what does Johnson do?  Well, the first step seems to be replacing Matt McCoy with Omar Gaither in the starting lineup tonight.  That's not going to solve all the problems, but it should help, particularly since McCoy seems to be battling some nagging injuries. 

But I'm not sure Johnson can afford to play it safe.  Given the crowd, the field conditions and the fragile state of the defense's psyche, a conservative first series that conceded big yardage on the ground and led to some early points might be enough to send this defense into the tank.  There's also this:

"Maybe we need to take more chances," Johnson said. "We kind of start out the ballgame trying to see what they're doing. Maybe I can't do that anymore..."

I might be crazy to think they would do this facing a team with Steve Smith, but I honestly think the Eagles might come out like gangbusters tonight, blitzing early and often, sticking eight in the box, trying to pressure Delhomme into some mistakes and trusting Lito (Smith) and Sheldon (Keyshawn) to keep their guys in check.  Clearly Johnson needs to do something to get his guys back into an attacking mode out there.  Well, this is one way to do it. 

Maybe they give up a big play doing this.  But if in return they can control the Panthers running game and force Delhomme into a mistake or two, that's a good trade.  When you're no longer the more talented team, you can't always afford to play it safe.

As for the offensive side of the ball, I'm really worried about tonight.  The Panthers have the league's best front four and one of the top front sevens.  In the sloppy field conditions that are likely to follow yesterday's Army-Navy game, quicker running backs like Brian Westbrook are at a disadvantage relative to bigger running backs like [insert name of Eagles big running back here].  I think the Eagles can run effectively against this front -- if they don't fall too far behind early -- but "effectively" in this case means 3-5 yards a pop and not too many big plays. 

Which means it's going to come down to Jeff Garcia.  I've defended the guy all week against the folks who think he was somehow at fault for what happened at Indy.  He wasn't.  But the Carolina Panthers present a very different kind of challenge.  I hope heart and veteran savvy are enough to cut it this week. 

I think Garcia needs to throw for 185+ yards and be +1 in touchdowns vs. interceptions (1TD/0INT, 2TD/1INT, etc.) for the Eagles to win.  There are some teams in this league that can pretend the quarterback doesn't exist and still win, but the Eagles aren't one of them.

So IF the Eagles come out aggressively on defense tonight and IF they can hold the Panthers' running game in check and IF Steve Smith has a 100yard/1TD game rather than a 160yard/3TD game and IF the Eagles are able to run the ball at least enough to keep Carolina honest and IF Garcia has enough time to get the ball to his wideouts and plays as well as he did last week, the Eagles really have a chance to win this game.

But if some of those dominoes fall ... look out.

I'm not making a score prediction tonight, because, honestly, if I had to bet my house on the outcome, I don't think I'd pick the Eagles.  But it's bad karma to put it in black-and-white (unless I'm giving them the reverse hex...) so let's just say I'm rooting hard for the boys in midnight green.

Come on, fellas.  If Philly's own Rocky Balboa can make a successful comeback at age 87, you guys can make a run at the playoffs.  

Deserve's Got Nothin' To Do With It

My college roommate grew up in Temple, TX, a decent-sized city located north of Austin and south of Dallas.  He was in middle school when Jerry Jones bought the Dallas Cowboys and unceremoniously dumped legendary head coach Tom Landry in favor of upstart Jimmy Johnson.  That fall, one of his football coaches pronounced gravely that "God would never let the Cowboys win another Super Bowl after what they did to Tom Landry."

Evidently, He is very forgiving.

I doubt that old coach ever stopped rooting for the Cowboys.  But my guess is he took at least some satisfaction from watching the team go 1-15 the year after Jones shoved Landry out the door.  I imagine it's like getting dumped by your former fiancée.  In the long run you probably would wish her well, but if she first stubs her toe on some loser her mom never liked that much, well, that's ok too.

...

I struggled a bit rooting for the Eagles at the beginning of last season.  The combination of my favorite team and my least-favorite player required a careful calibration of interests that was massively complicated by the fact that their success was inextricably linked, given how much of the offense flowed through his (stone) hands.  It was a relief when they finally benched his idiotic butt.  The team wasn't as good, but at least I didn't have to root for that preening little jerk.

There's a little bit of the reverse going on this year.  Winning this week against the Colts is going to be really, really tough.  But the NFC is so flat this year that the Birds could conceivably lose two of their remaining six games and still make the playoffs.  I still believe the talent is there.  What has been missing all year is focus and consistency, and if the loss of McNabb gives this team a little feeling of desperation, maybe things will start to fall into place.

Honestly, after watching these guys blow major opportunities all season, I can't say I really think that's going to happen.  But there's a chance.  And if it does, it may be partly because Jeff Garcia gives some of these guys the kick in the pants they've been missing. 

So why am I not really hoping to see that happen?

Because of McNabb.

Because I don't want to hear stupid, know-nothing commentators from around the country opining that McNabb was holding this team back.  I don't want the Sports Guy to pick the Eagles in a first-round playoff upset because "they have Ewing Theory potential."  I don't want the idiots running around Philly right now saying that it's time to give up on McNabb to grow in number.

And I do NOT want to hear the inevitable TO interview on December 24th where he explains why he thinks the Eagles are "better off without McNabb."

Yeah, if the Eagles pulled off the improbable, I'd be right there rooting for them, but McNabb doesn't deserve that any more than he did another season-ending injury. 

Unfortunately, as William Munny, Clint Eastwood's character in the classic Western "Unforgiven," says to Little Bill right before he kills him, "Deserve's got nothin' to do with it."

...

So what am I rooting for?  Signs of life.  A 4-2 or even 3-3 finish that helps this team understand what it needs to do to have success next year, but doesn't take us into August with a quarterback controversy.

Capable performances from the backup quarterback(s) that don't give us visions of Mike McMahon.  And maybe some young receivers who learn a little something from Garcia's hard edge. 

Brian Westbrook reaching the end of the season with 1,000 yards rushing and a healthy body.

Development from some younger players.

Ryan Moats on the field.

More use of LJ.

Pride.

...

Even before McNabb went down, I knew this was likely going to be the first game all season where I picked against the Eagles.  I just don't see it happening.  The Colts are too good.  And as much as everything has gone wrong the last 18 months for the Eagles, the Colts are looking like the team that may have everything going right. 

Without McNabb, we don't have the offense to keep up and Manning is practically un-sackable, which means it comes down to coverage, intelligence and tackling on defense.  We've been a little short on all three this year.

No final score prediction, but if most of America hasn't turned off the TV by the middle of the third quarter I'll be surprised.