Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Empty or Full?
As I watched the seconds bleed off the clock on the Eagles 27-24 loss to the New Orleans Saints on Saturday night I began to ruminate on the Eagles season. Over the last few seasons we’ve been able to unequivicably state that a season was a success or a failure. 2001? Big success. The Eagles went to the NFC title game and nearly upset the mighty St. Louis Rams. 2003? Failure. The Eagles should have beaten the Carolina Panthers in their third consecutive NFC title game loss. 2004? Success. The Eagles went a franchise best 13-3 and went to the Super Bowl. 2005? Failure. A Super Bowl-quality team went 6-10 and was divided between McNabb and T.O.
What about 2006, I wondered. Success or failure? If you are a glass-half empty sort of guy you can hark back to McNabb’s belief that the Eagles could go 13-3 and make Super Bowl XLI and say that the season was a failure because they were three wins worse in the regular season and didn't make the Super Bowl. If you are glass-half full, you’d look at the fact that the Eagles made the playoffs at all after McNabb and Jevon Kearse were lost for the season and actually came within an ace of making their fifth NFC title game in six years. I’m sort of torn.
Yes, the Eagles struggled a lot in 2006. McNabb was alternatively brilliant, slinging the ball down field, seemingly making the Eagles look like the 1999 Rams and their Max-Q offense, and alternatively terrible, playing the Eagles into a hole in the game against the Buccaneers and blowing a huge lead to the Giants. If McNabb hadn’t gone down it is an open question as to whether or not the Eagles would have gone 5-1 and made the playoffs.
On the other hand, McNabb might have thrown for near-40 TD passes and been a factor in the MVP race. We’ll never know.
Generally, I think the year was a triumph. The Eagles lost Jevon Kearse and still played great defense. They lost McNabb and seemingly re-discovered their running game. Yes, they lost to the Saints, but they won the NFC East after everyone gave them up for dead and won three consecutive road games against the Redskins, Giants and Cowboys, something NOBODY said they could do at the outset of the season.
The Saints game wasn’t perfect at all. The offense, not the defense, lost the game with its slow start in the first half, then by botching opportunities to score … specifically I am thinking of the Eagles Second-and-One inside the five yard line that ended up being a field goal to make the game 27-24 instead of a touchdown to put the Eagles ahead 28-27, and the Eagles failure to score after recovering Reggie Bush’s late fumble. Should Andy Reid have gone for it on Fourth-and-fifteen? I say yes, but I understand the argument the other way: the Eagles did convert the play before and what were the chances of capturing lightning in the bottle again? Put it in the hands of your defense and play for the field goal later. I would have gone for it, but that’s a 50%-50% call.
I was deeply impressed by the Saints. This is not the old Aints of the past. This was an aggressive, well-coached team that has a lot of weapons. I think the Eagles D did a great, great job of keeping the Saints to 27 points. That could have been much, much worse. They were aggressive, forced Drew Brees to make bad throws and did a good job keeping the Saints bottled up. Sure the Saints ran the ball well, but the Eagles will always surrender rushing yards as opposed to big plays.
So now the Eagles move on. Free agency time, draft time. Planning for 2007. I personally think the Birds are well-positioned for 2007. McNabb will be back and hungrier than ever. I suspect that the Eagles will keep Jeff Garcia as their backup, which means if McNabb isn’t ready they’ll have a great QB waiting in the wings and they will have a great leader in the locker room. The offensive line is great and the Eagles skill players are second-to-none. They just need a little depth at running back and tight end. On the defensive side of the ball the Eagles will get Kearse back and seem to be improving in their linebacking corps. Some depth there in the draft and the Eagles will be fine. Kicker? David Akers. The Birds are loaded. They need some depth in the draft and they’ll be fine.
What will the NFC East look like? The Redskins are Jason Campbell’s team now and I am very skeptical about his abilities. Joe Gibbs seems tired and worn out. The Redskins will be lucky to get to 8-8. The Cowboys? Tony Romo looked very beatable late in the season and we’ll have to see how his botched hold will affect his mental state in 2007. That, and Bill Parcells will have to deal with the T.O. problem again. 2007 won’t be a good season for the ‘Boys and T.O. will drive Parcells to early retirement. The Giants? The less said the better: Tom Coughlin is a terrible coach and Eli Manning is a bust at QB. This team has 5-11 written all over it. The Eagles get a nice schedule too, with games against the offensively-challenged Bears, the inept Lions, the rebuilding Packers and the wildcard Vikings on the horizon. The Seahawks? Shell of the team they were in 2005. Add in games against the AFC East (Miami? Buffalo? East W’s) and the Birds are in good for ’07. This team could go 13-3 in '07.
As for the NFL playoffs, let me just say that I am stunned that the Patriots beat the Chargers Sunday. With the Eagles gone, I am turning my support to the Patriots. Brady and Belichick are brilliant competitors and have an opportunity to equal the mark the 1970s Pittsburgh Steelers made when they won four Super Bowls in six years. The Patriots could do so with a win in Super Bowl XLI, which would mark the Patriots as perhaps the greatest dynasty in NFL history, better than the ‘60s Packers, better than the ‘70s Steelers, better than the ‘80s-‘90s 49ers, greater than the ‘90s Cowboys. To win four titles in the free agency period with vastly different teams in a short time period … I defy anyone to name a greater team.
Predictions:
-NFC: The Saints win a blow-out, 34-10 in Chicago over the Bears. The Saints are too explosive and have too many weapons.
-AFC: The Patriots over the Colts 31-28 in Indy. The Patriots mastery of Peyton Manning continues, but the decisive factor will be the Patriots offense ability to run on the Colts defense, the first team to do that this off-season.
See everyone next Monday!
|
What about 2006, I wondered. Success or failure? If you are a glass-half empty sort of guy you can hark back to McNabb’s belief that the Eagles could go 13-3 and make Super Bowl XLI and say that the season was a failure because they were three wins worse in the regular season and didn't make the Super Bowl. If you are glass-half full, you’d look at the fact that the Eagles made the playoffs at all after McNabb and Jevon Kearse were lost for the season and actually came within an ace of making their fifth NFC title game in six years. I’m sort of torn.
Yes, the Eagles struggled a lot in 2006. McNabb was alternatively brilliant, slinging the ball down field, seemingly making the Eagles look like the 1999 Rams and their Max-Q offense, and alternatively terrible, playing the Eagles into a hole in the game against the Buccaneers and blowing a huge lead to the Giants. If McNabb hadn’t gone down it is an open question as to whether or not the Eagles would have gone 5-1 and made the playoffs.
On the other hand, McNabb might have thrown for near-40 TD passes and been a factor in the MVP race. We’ll never know.
Generally, I think the year was a triumph. The Eagles lost Jevon Kearse and still played great defense. They lost McNabb and seemingly re-discovered their running game. Yes, they lost to the Saints, but they won the NFC East after everyone gave them up for dead and won three consecutive road games against the Redskins, Giants and Cowboys, something NOBODY said they could do at the outset of the season.
The Saints game wasn’t perfect at all. The offense, not the defense, lost the game with its slow start in the first half, then by botching opportunities to score … specifically I am thinking of the Eagles Second-and-One inside the five yard line that ended up being a field goal to make the game 27-24 instead of a touchdown to put the Eagles ahead 28-27, and the Eagles failure to score after recovering Reggie Bush’s late fumble. Should Andy Reid have gone for it on Fourth-and-fifteen? I say yes, but I understand the argument the other way: the Eagles did convert the play before and what were the chances of capturing lightning in the bottle again? Put it in the hands of your defense and play for the field goal later. I would have gone for it, but that’s a 50%-50% call.
I was deeply impressed by the Saints. This is not the old Aints of the past. This was an aggressive, well-coached team that has a lot of weapons. I think the Eagles D did a great, great job of keeping the Saints to 27 points. That could have been much, much worse. They were aggressive, forced Drew Brees to make bad throws and did a good job keeping the Saints bottled up. Sure the Saints ran the ball well, but the Eagles will always surrender rushing yards as opposed to big plays.
So now the Eagles move on. Free agency time, draft time. Planning for 2007. I personally think the Birds are well-positioned for 2007. McNabb will be back and hungrier than ever. I suspect that the Eagles will keep Jeff Garcia as their backup, which means if McNabb isn’t ready they’ll have a great QB waiting in the wings and they will have a great leader in the locker room. The offensive line is great and the Eagles skill players are second-to-none. They just need a little depth at running back and tight end. On the defensive side of the ball the Eagles will get Kearse back and seem to be improving in their linebacking corps. Some depth there in the draft and the Eagles will be fine. Kicker? David Akers. The Birds are loaded. They need some depth in the draft and they’ll be fine.
What will the NFC East look like? The Redskins are Jason Campbell’s team now and I am very skeptical about his abilities. Joe Gibbs seems tired and worn out. The Redskins will be lucky to get to 8-8. The Cowboys? Tony Romo looked very beatable late in the season and we’ll have to see how his botched hold will affect his mental state in 2007. That, and Bill Parcells will have to deal with the T.O. problem again. 2007 won’t be a good season for the ‘Boys and T.O. will drive Parcells to early retirement. The Giants? The less said the better: Tom Coughlin is a terrible coach and Eli Manning is a bust at QB. This team has 5-11 written all over it. The Eagles get a nice schedule too, with games against the offensively-challenged Bears, the inept Lions, the rebuilding Packers and the wildcard Vikings on the horizon. The Seahawks? Shell of the team they were in 2005. Add in games against the AFC East (Miami? Buffalo? East W’s) and the Birds are in good for ’07. This team could go 13-3 in '07.
As for the NFL playoffs, let me just say that I am stunned that the Patriots beat the Chargers Sunday. With the Eagles gone, I am turning my support to the Patriots. Brady and Belichick are brilliant competitors and have an opportunity to equal the mark the 1970s Pittsburgh Steelers made when they won four Super Bowls in six years. The Patriots could do so with a win in Super Bowl XLI, which would mark the Patriots as perhaps the greatest dynasty in NFL history, better than the ‘60s Packers, better than the ‘70s Steelers, better than the ‘80s-‘90s 49ers, greater than the ‘90s Cowboys. To win four titles in the free agency period with vastly different teams in a short time period … I defy anyone to name a greater team.
Predictions:
-NFC: The Saints win a blow-out, 34-10 in Chicago over the Bears. The Saints are too explosive and have too many weapons.
-AFC: The Patriots over the Colts 31-28 in Indy. The Patriots mastery of Peyton Manning continues, but the decisive factor will be the Patriots offense ability to run on the Colts defense, the first team to do that this off-season.
See everyone next Monday!
Comments:
Post a Comment
