Bumble, Come Down Off the Ledge

bumble, i'm not saying that the eagles aren't making mistakes, they are, but your pessimistic nature (as you call it) may be causing you to ignore all of the positive traits the team is showing and overemphasizing the negative.

they are making mistakes, but mistakes can be corrected. it's not like they are getting killed in games and showing that they simply don't have enough talent.

this team is legitimately a few bad bounces away from 7-0. there were certainly some bad plays involved as well (mcdougle penalty, cole penalty, gaither 12 men of field), but even those are correctable as well.

i understand that there are no "moral victories", but this team has the potential to score from anywhere on the field, even with the receivers dropping balls. how scary are they going to be once the receivers get more in rhythm?

the season is far from over. aside from the fact that last year's superbowl champ gives you ample evidence that you don't need to dominate from start to finish to be the SB champ, you can hang your hat on the fact that over time the HOF caliber field goal kicking and unnaturally high fumble recovery rates will likely balance out.

They DO run a zone blocking scheme, albeit a different one from the Broncos and Falcons. They really put a lot of stress on their OT in their running game, an unfair and unrealistic move for huge mashers like they have in William and Runyan vs. the smaller speed OT like Denver and Atlanta have. They also expect their interior guys to make 2 gap blocks too frequently and they seldom employ double teams at the point of attack.

i do understand that no one runs a true man blocking scheme now because defenses are getting so sophisticated, but they really don't run all that much zone blocking. in fact, your statement that their interior guys have to make 2 gap blocks actually supports my statement that they are predominantly a man blocking team. they do run some zone blocking when they run counters or misdirections, but you never, for instance, see them run the staple of the zone blocking offenses -- the stretch play. that play is really taxing on the o-tackles because they have to slide out without losing alignment. i know that baldinger mentioned something about the birds expecting the tackles to get to the second level and block and LB, but that looks to be a man assignment, not a zone block.

I don't need to count down the big games where Donny was horrible in the clutch do I?

several of the games you mentioned were just games and of no special importance. let's review your list:

- Tampa 2002 (playoffs) - a huge loss, and if that game had actually happened, would still be incredibly painful
- Tampa 2003 (first Linc game), New England 2003 - i'm going to lump these together because if you recall correctly, something wasn't right with donovan at the start of 2003. could have been the thumb problem he was rumored to have or some other issue, but seems like he's over that now. regardless, these are just two regular season games.
- Carolina 2004 (WR didn't help him, but he threw 3 picks) - mcnabb didn't play that well, but only one of those picks was his fault (the last one), and you neglect to mention that he was also missing westbrook that day. egad, now that i think about it, how did that team even get to the nfc championship? no defensive players, pinky and thrash as your wideouts, no westbrook.
- Pittsburgh 2004 - a regular season game
- New England 2005 (Super Bowl, again 3 picks) - he didn't play that well, but he didn't get much protection either
- Dallas 2005 - you're going to hold this game against him? the guy could barely walk?

How about some clutch performances:
- Tampa 2000 - first playoff game. don makes all of the offensive plays in that game, the birds win 21-3
- Giants 2001 - first time don beats giants, remember the sliding thrash catch in the endzone? the giants dominated that game, yet don beat them at the end. luckily i was at this game.
- playoffs 2001 - bucs, bears, rams - don played great in those playoffs. yes, he threw that pick at the end of the rams game, but that was freddie mitchell not coming back to the ball.
- Cardinals 2002 - he plays the game and throws 4 TDs with a broken ankle. please keep in mind that michael vick had the same injury in 2003 and got carried off on a stretcher.
- Falcons 2002 - mcnabb comes back from injury and leads the team to a playoff win
- Packers 2003 - 4th & 26. leads the team to a comeback win in the playoffs against a HOF QB with a team that has it's whole defense out with injury and no offensive weapons
- playoffs 2004 - finally leads the team to the superbowl with an incredible amount of pressure on him to win the nfc championship. loses the SB to a guy who is not only the best defensive mind of his era but also is on a dynasty run

who has been a better clutch QB than don during his playing career? imo, only tom brady.

It is blatantly obvious that teams with good lines on both sides-Giants, Dallas, Steelers, Pats, Colts, Bears, Panthers, San Diego, Denver-are the league's elite.

did you see the dallas o-line in the game against the eagles? how about the colts d-line when they were giving up 200+ rushing yards to the titans? how about denver unable to protect jake plummer? or the giants with their average d-tackles? come on. the grass is not greener everywhere.

He refuses to adjust his play calling cadence to avoid blowing time outs unecessarily.

how can you conclude that it's stubbornness that is causing this? do you actually think that andy wants to blow timeouts? my conclusion is that it's hard to get plays in on time. he's constrained somewhat by that infernal worst coast offense with it's over-verbiage, but again, it's not unique to the eagles. especially in loud stadiums, teams blow timeouts all the time. regardless, this is not a critical issue. the analogy i'll use is how people are so freaked out by anthrax when driving is much more deadly. according to the analysis at footballcommentary.com, linked on the right of my blog as Model Based Analysis of Football Strategy (see here and here for some specific articles), timeouts really aren't that valuable in the grand scheme of things.

He refuses to get a bigger talented RB to salt games away late or he just refuses to run Buck late to do the same.

you're right about this one. i just don't understand it.

He refuses to establish the run early and then allow the run to turn your talented (despite drops) WR lose with play action.

how many coaches actually do this? very few. unless they feel that they are at a talent disadvantage, even most running coaches (parcells and fox) both pass to get a lead and run later in games. the best coach i've ever seen (belichick) won a SB with kevin faulk as his best running back and a 5 WR set. besides, why would reid do that? he's been pretty successful doing it his way. why isn't it you being stubborn?

He refuses to ever answer a good question, a question trying to pin him down as to why a specific breakdown happened with more than "I've got to do a better job there".

why should he change? his players appreciate the fact that he's never going to throw one of them under the bus. i like this about him. how does him providing more information/selling out his players make him a better coach?

I just feel this hostile backlash is from someone who dislikes everything that is 610 WIP and who refuses to acknowledge any of the points made on that show, some of which are very valid and in line with what actually happens on the field each week.

i can guarantee that this has nothing to do with WIP. they do provide some nuggets of information from time to time, but by and large they get hung up on minutia and look for things to criticize. often they lose sight of the big picture entirely.

I speak from my own observations, and my observations tell me that this team has under-achieved so far.

that is my point exactly. the fact is, they are 4-3 and are a few unlucky bounces/bad penalties away from a significantly better record. do you seriously expect them to underachieve for the entire season? how does that not give you some hope for improvement?