Iggles Blog - Philadelphia Eagles Blog

More On Those Spending Stats

Ok, this is going to be a bit convoluted, but stay with me.

This weekend, Eagletarian linked to a story by NFL.com's Jason La Canfora about how much each team had spend in terms of actual salary dollars from 2004 through 2008.  We linked to it, a spirited discussions has ensued (here and elsewhere), and so it goes.

Anyway, today, Eagletarian linked to La Canfora's latest offering, in which LC demonstrated he's just as bored with the offseason as the rest of us by breaking down the spending per win. 

Now, I tell you all that just to establish where everything is before I link to this post on Don't Boo The Birds, in which those guys do the same thing LC did in his most recent post, except they also do the analysis for postseason wins and provide some commentary on the bottom for why some teams really stuck out.

Anyway, it's an interesting read.  I still hope when the MSM guys get back from vacation they pick things back up by waving the numbers in Banner's face and demanding an explanation. 

As mentioned before, the "controversy" itself is meaningless, but it sure is fun when the Eagles have to pull back the curtain a bit.  Bray, jackals, bray...

Fresh FO Content!

Yeah, we don't use exclamation points around here very often, but when the Football Outsiders guys start giving premium content away for free, we're all over it.

Gabe noted a few weeks ago that FO would be doing something a little different with Pro Football Prospectus this year, due to a little issue related to not having a publisher.  In an attempt to assuage everyone's concerns that maybe this year's version of the Football Outsiders Almanac (née PFP) wouldn't be the same great offering, they're giving away sample chapters for free. 

You can start today with the New York Giants chapter, wherein we get to see the new book is pretty much the same as the old book.  Long live the new book.

Now, with all of that said -- and really, I can't overemphasize how much you need to buy this book -- I know from personal experience that there are times one can get so excited about disproving conventional wisdom that, well, you get out in front of the data.  And they've done that here:

The correlation of the incident to the team’s downswing in performance yielded a simple narrative: The Giants offense wasn’t as good without Plaxico Burress, and it turned them into a totally different team.

That narrative is simply untrue.

The Giants’ passing offense actually improved with Burress out of the lineup ... The running game declined some without the threat of Burress stretching the field to concern opposing safeties, but it wasn’t enough to drag the offense down; the team’s offensive DVOA was 20.6% with Burress in the lineup and 27.8% over the eight games he wasn’t around.

Those topline numbers are all well and good, but check out the chart they also helpfully include:

(Ordinarily I'd not just pilfer the graphic, but since they're giving the chapter away for free -- and since you should really, really buy the book -- I think we're ok.)

I'm not denying the extent to which defensive issues contributed to the team's slide, but look at those rushing numbers.  Going from a DVOA of 21.1% to 11.3% is a huge swing.  It's basically the difference between "we can't stop those guys" and "now we've got a chance." 

And it's exactly what we predicted would happen when Plax went away for good:

Burress demands a double team ... But that's out the window now.  Today, rather than worrying about how he's going to square the circle by constantly helping over the top on Burress while also bringing enough guys into the box to stop that wicked running game, Jim Johnson has the luxury of saying, screw it, I'll let my secondary cover these guys one-on-one, focus on stopping the run, and bring extra guys all day to try to shake up Eli.

This is a huge change for the Giants.  And while it might not be enough for the Eagles to pull off a win this week, it will be enough to ensure New York isn't winning another Super Bowl. 

The reason, I would wager, that the passing statistics look relatively unaffected is that I imagine every defensive coordinator in the league came to pretty much the same conclusion:  I can't beat these guys if I don't stop their running game, so I'll throw what I have at that and take my chances with Eli. 

There's tons of other good stuff in the chapter, of course, so get reading.  The info on how the defense will change now that Spags is gone is also interesting.  Personally, I'm not a huge fan of seeing great pass rushers dropping into coverage all that often either, but if I'm a Giants fan, I have to wonder if we're changing things up because that makes the most sense or because our new defensive coordinator has never held that position before and only has two years in the scheme.

Also, I've really, really been looking for an excuse to link to this. 

Mosley Talks To Maclin

ESPN NFC East blogger Matt Mosley writes about the Eagles' offseason additions today.  His take on Maclin and the "pro-style routes" question:

If there's a negative about Maclin, it's that he played in a spread offense in college. I think that's a crock, but you'll hear a lot of scouts bring it up ...   But all this talk about not knowing the full "route tree" sounds like a lot of NFL savants who are intoxicated with their own coachspeak ...

"We ran a lot of no-huddle [at Missouri]," Maclin said. "There were a lot of 10-yard and 12-yard routes. And we had options on those routes. I would say that we used a lot more concepts than plays in college. It's obviously more complex here, but fortunately I pick things up pretty quickly."

Maclin also hasn't determined whether or not he'll join McNabb in Arizona this summer:

"I haven't figured that out yet," Maclin said. "I've got to speak with Donovan."

More non-Maclin stuff in the full story.

Promoted From Comments

There's a point at which one goes from "Football Worried" to "Real Life Worried."

Football reasons, my butt.

Hugely Important Article

On a day when -- I kid you not -- someone is "guessing" that the Reid/McNabb relationship is "probably" frosty, Bob Brookover writes the single most important article you've read this season:

Eagles still confident in Reid
By Bob Brookover, Inquirer Staff Writer

Now that the public has weighed in so heavily against Donovan McNabb and Andy Reid, what is the talk within the inner sanctum of the Eagles?

Two sources close to the ultimate decision-makers on the Eagles seem much more inclined to blame the quarterback's support system - the offensive line and wide receivers - than the quarterback himself for the Eagles' woes.

Likewise, the Eagles' brain trust remains confident that Reid is a quality head coach and that there is a significant amount of talent in the locker room, the sources said yesterday.

Money quotes:

"I unalterably believe these two things: We have a significant amount of talent, and that Andy is a real good head coach," the source said, representing the feelings of the voices that count. "I know it's difficult to reconcile those beliefs with what's happening on the field, but you can't just forget about what has happened here over the last 10 years."

...

"I don't see a lack of effort on the field or anything else like that, but that's one of those things you do have to think about."

...

One source noted that the Eagles' wide receivers also have been disappointing in recent weeks.  "We're dropping way too many balls," the source said.

...

It sounds as if the Eagles are determined to get younger at both tackle positions next season, which means veterans Tra Thomas and Jon Runyan, both of whom will be eligible for free agency, likely will not be re-signed. The team also has concerns about center Jamaal Jackson.

One source said that left guard Todd Herremans has been the most consistent performer along the offensive line. A year ago, he was the offensive lineman most likely not to have a starting job when the 2008 season began.

One of the sources said the back injury to Shawn Andrews has been a big problem for the offensive line because he is so much better than Max Jean-Gilles.

...

"We tried to run it eight or nine straight times and never made it," the source said. "Andy always talks about running the ball effectively rather than running it a lot, and you can see why. When you throw a lot and can't run effectively, it creates a real problem."

Despite the fact that Brookover couldn't get these guys to go on the record, the Eagles' iron-fisted approach to media opportunities means it's not that hard to figure out who's talking here.

Andy's not going anywhere, guys.  And despite the fact that the source says the team has a "significant amount of talent," most of the article is a discussion of the positions where more talent is needed.

Big article.  Big.  Kudos to Brookover for this one.

Stupid

Pro Bowl invitations are pretty much done as a backward-looking measure of individual achievement. 

But, you know, the NFL can make money off of it, so they'll keep doing it. 

Proof That Writing Ability and Wisdom Are Two Separate Things

No, I don't have time for anything real today.  Blame the Patriots for making a comeback.  But I did want to mention one thing.

I'm a little disappointed by this column today.  This Gonzo character is a heck of a writer.  I'd ease off the accelerator at times if I were him, but he's bringing an undeniable energy to his new gig.  He also doesn't seem to think "blog" is a four-letter word, so more power to him on that.

The problem is that that particular column is simply a (far) more literate version of the exact same fact-free discourse you can hear any time you want to flip that radio dial to six one zero. 

I get that there's a certain first-mover advantage here.  Local opinion is clearly not in Andy Reid's favor.  Especially if you're the new guy in town, why not pick up the Reid Must Go banner and see how far it carries you (while you pretend to carry it). 

But this column does not advance the argument an inch beyond its current resting place.  The crux is basically that Reid must go because people -- locally and nationally -- say he must go.  It also helpfully argues that Reid is never "held accountable" for his mistakes.  Um, by whom?  Other teams seem to be doing a pretty good job of holding Reid's team accountable for his decisions these days.  And what's Jeff Lurie supposed to do?  Take away his parking space?  "Forget" to send the Christmas fruit basket? 

Or should Lurie hold a press conference, Al Davis style, in which he bashes Reid and makes it very, very clear that now he has his eye on him?

There's only one real way to hold a coach accountable, and that's to fire him.  For, I guess, having a 5-4 record in the league's toughest division.  ("No one expects Joe Banner or Jeffrey Lurie to hold Reid accountable for last year's 8-8 mark or this season's 5-4 record.")

Look, you can make plenty of arguments for why Reid should be fired.  I was trying some out the other day to see if I could convince myself.  Unfortunately, you won't find any of them in Gonzo's column.

Great writing though.

More IB Stuff

Yeah, another contribution to another site.  Pretty much the same stuff you've read before.

Nice Find

Serious kudos to bounty for spotting this one:

Um, so I guess Andy Reid didn’t get the internal e-mail I forwarded him (the one that said that all his best players considered the Giants their biggest rivals in the NFC East)?  Because according to former Eagles coach and current Giants defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo, Andy Reid went out of his way to offer tips and advice to Spags in the weeks before last February’s Super Bowl:

Did you hear from Andy or Jim after the Super Bowl?
Oh yeah. They were great. They were both really happy. Both of them called. I talked with Andy a couple of times actually before the Super Bowl. We had gone through it in ’04 together and he had a couple of things, ‘Hey, remember this Steve, remember what happened here,’ we talked a lot about how long the pregame was. He was great. I remember him saying, ‘just keep firing at him, just keep staying aggressive.’ That was his advice and they were certainly tremendous after it is over.

It's taking things to another level once you start reading press conference transcripts from opposing teams. 

No word on whether they conferenced in Brett Favre.

IB Around The Web

Huge game this weekend, and not just for the Eagles, so a couple of sites have asked for some Iggles insight.  The first post is live over at Fan House. 

The most interesting part (I think):

The key, then, seems to be stopping Jacobs behind the line of scrimmage. That's easier said than done, of course, but if he hits the hole unimpeded, he's got too much inertia going to knock him back.

Not to dork out too much on the tactical stuff, but Jacobs provides an interesting and somewhat unique situation, I think. Generally speaking, defenses are afraid to stack too many guys at the line of scrimmage because if the back breaks through, there's no one at the second level to bring him down. The thing with Jacobs, though, is that because he gets so much momentum going and it takes more than one guy to tackle him, you're almost not going to bring him down close to the line of scrimmage anyway, if there's a hole.

So if he's not a speed guy you worry about popping off 60-yard runs, and if your base defense will yield seven-yard gains even if things work out the way you hope, then you might as well jam the line and try to stop him in the backfield before he gets going. You'll lose a few battles that way, but you may rack up enough "no gains" to force the offense to change its play-calling.

Read the rest...