The Running Backs, Wide Receivers and other offensive questionmarks...

[Dillen]

ar can claim whatever he wants but if the eagles wr's can't get open against single coverage, expect mcnabb to get blitzed all game long.

1) Do the WRs need to beat single coverage if Westbrook and/or LJ get open?
2) Can the Eagles be beaten by the blitz with an improved offensive line & a renewed McNabb?

Um....yeah, it'd be nice.

[Sgt PSN]

1) Do the WRs need to beat single coverage if Westbrook and/or LJ get open?

Uhhhhhhhh, anyone else care to take this one?  You do realize that if the defense blitzes, LJ and (insert runningback here) will be called on to block and provide a little extra protection.  And even if the defense isn't blitzing, if you don't have receivers that can beat SINGLE coverage then I'd say you've got a major problem. 

2) Can the Eagles be beaten by the blitz with an improved offensive line & a renewed McNabb?

Yes.  The Eagles have had one of the more dominating lines in terms of pass protection over the last 4 or 5 years (last year excluded) and they were still beaten by the blitz.....badly......especially in the playoffs. 

Remember the start to the 2003 season?  The 0-2 start?  The Bucs and Pats blitzed relentlessly agianst the Eagles and as a result, McNabb spent more time on his back that hbionic's mom on dollar draft night. 

[Cerevant]

1) Do the WRs need to beat single coverage if Westbrook and/or LJ get open?

You do realize that if the defense blitzes, LJ and (insert runningback here) will be called on to block and provide a little extra protection.   And even if the defense isn't blitzing, if you don't have receivers that can beat SINGLE coverage then I'd say you've got a major problem. 

I wasn't talking about blitzing.  If on a given play, there is one or two players open, does it matter what position they play?

Also, don't forget the two tight-end set we keep hearing about.

2) Can the Eagles be beaten by the blitz with an improved offensive line & a renewed McNabb?

Yes.  The Eagles have had one of the more dominating lines in terms of pass protection over the last 4 or 5 years (last year excluded) and they were still beaten by the blitz.....badly......especially in the playoffs. 

But this line is "better".  Does it make a difference?  *shrug*

Remember the start to the 2003 season?  The 0-2 start?  The Bucs and Pats blitzed relentlessly agianst the Eagles and as a result, McNabb spent more time on his back that hbionic's mom on dollar draft night. 

Philly was #5 in sacks given up that year.  Not what I'd call a good o-line.

I agree that they are 1 wr short from Andy's offense working properly.  Oddly enough, that missing WR is pinky - the deep threat.  A good reason to not give up on the possibility of a Lelie trade.

[The BIGSTUD]

Laughable. They got Rumph for less than nothing. They over paid for two WRs, yes, but they are better WRs than they had last year, not to mention a better return man. They improved. Not by a ton, but they improved. Portis is a legit issue, but everything else you just wrote are not valid points.

Rumph is terrible. Todd could get 100 yards receiving on him with 2 bad achilles. I'll agree they improved. Still nothing to worry about though. Their defense is pretty solid, but their offense doesn't scare me one bit.

The Eagles don't have RBs, WRs or LBs who can play.

Westbrook and Moats can play. Reggie Brown can play. Trotter can play. No team is perfect from top to bottom at every position. Okay, the Eagles have no 3rd RB or their SAM LB kinda sucks, but plenty of teams aren't great from top to bottom. Every team has a weakness somewhere.

Ridiculous. If that's all you can come up with about the Cowboys you must be more scared of them than I am.

No QB, RBs worse than ours, average offensive line, overrated DTs, bad cover secondary, Parcells can't coach anymore.

[Dillen]

They have bad coverage safeties, but they have good corners. Newman, Glenn, Henry..

[The BIGSTUD]

Newman, Glenn and Henry are average at best. Newman is nothing but a name. He has been a disappointment so far for Dallas.

[Feva]

Laughable. They got Rumph for less than nothing. They over paid for two WRs, yes, but they are better WRs than they had last year, not to mention a better return man. They improved. Not by a ton, but they improved. Portis is a legit issue, but everything else you just wrote are not valid points.

Rumph is less than nothing too.  You make it sound like they'll get any benefit at all from him.  He'll be a liability... and what's worse is that they're gonna have to rely on him since Springs, their best corner, is gonna be hobbled pretty much all year.  It's all good though since Archuleta will be there to help out in coverage, right?  That's a huge chink in that defensive armor since their pass rush is questionable.  Rumph is gonna be picked on all year.

The Eagles don't have RBs, WRs or LBs who can play.

Our interior line versus the Giants DT's... Westbrook, Moats and LJ forcing their LB's into coverage mismatches... and if you're convinced about Madison, Demps and McQuarters securing their secondary... then more power to you.  I think we can score on that D.

Ridiculous. If that's all you can come up with about the Cowboys you must be more scared of them than I am.

If you don't consider the O-line of the Cowboys a question mark on so many levels, then you haven't been paying attention.  Not only do they stink at run blocking for Jones... but obviously Bledsoe is a statue that starts throwing off his back foot after he's been knocked around a few times, which = inaccuracy and INT's.  I don't even have to get into how that effects things with the ticking time bomb on top of everything else.  They've already got health questions too considering Flozell's knee still isn't all the way back yet either.  Every offense is made or broken by the offensive line.  The Cowboys are no different.

Finally, something reasonable. Andy Reid doesn't put any value on the outcome of preseason games. Never has. All of this means nothing. But the first teamers could have not played a single down and we would all still know that their WRs, RBs and LBs are HUGE question marks. This doesn't have anything to do with it being pre-season...

No one ever said that the Eagles don't have question marks.  They do.  Where you go wrong IMO is that you build up the other teams in the East as some kind of invulnerable powerhouses that the Eagles can only hope to be able to compete with.  That ain't the case.  They've got issues for us to exploit... just like we have some for them to exploit.  That's football.  Who's to say that these teams are even gonna be as good as they were last year?  None of the teams in the East return a team that could touch what we returned from 2004 and look how we ended up.  Who's to say the same can't happen to any of them?  Who says Brunell throws for 23 more TD's?  Who says that Tiki doesn't start to slow down?  That TO doesn't blow up from the start?  That any of them stay as healthy as they did last year?  All that matters for them too.

[rjs246]

The other teams in the east are not invulnerable powerhouses. The very notion of that is retarded. The Skins are going to have trouble scoring. The Giants defense is weak. The Cowboys have less question marks than the other two but they will need to protect Bledsoe in order to move the ball.

My point is that all three are dangerous for different reasons (Skins defense, no matter what you think of Rumph who should only be their nickle if anything and Archuletta, will be very difficult to score on. The Giants' offense should be silly good and they can get after the QB on D. Dallas' offense can be scary good and their defense is young and talented and well coached.) and the days of this team cruising through the division are gone.

Why are we even talking about Rumph anyway? The dude sucks. But he isn't going to be asked to do much because that's not the way Williams' defense works. That team's weakness is offense and they improved. Period.

You can come up with little holes in any team. When the 'little' hole on a team are an utter lack of talent at WR and an utter inability to run for tough yards by the RBs, the hole does look so little any more.

[The BIGSTUD]

Archuleta is a worse cover safety than Roy Williams.

[rjs246]

WHAT IS YOUR POINT?!

Jesus, I can point to a lot of individual players on the taterskins defense that wouldn't set the world on fire by themselves. Did that make one iota of difference last year? No. Their defense is sick. Williams is easily the best defensive coach in the NFL because he takes parts that are useless on their own and turns them into a scary unit. Stop trying to convince yourself that their defense will be anything other than top flight because it just isn't true.

[Feva]

The other teams in the east are not ivulnerable powerhouses. The very notion of that is retarded.

You get my point then.  Like I said, people around here act like we've got no shot when it comes to competing against the rest of the East. 

We don't have to "cruise" through the division to win it.  Like I said before, the only year we cruised to a division title was '04.  This year, we are just as capable of sweeping any team in the division as we are of getting swept.

[The BIGSTUD]

I'm just saying that when you said Archuleta would be tough to score on, that I disagree with that.

[rjs246]

I'm just saying that when you said Archuleta would be tough to score on, that I disagree with that.

I said their defense would be tough to score on you illiterate twit.

[The BIGSTUD]

I misread, my fault.

[Feva]

I'm just saying that when you said Archuleta would be tough to score on, that I disagree with that.

I said their defense would be tough to score on you illiterate twit.

If Portis' shoulder ain't right... it'll have to be.



Nice use of twit, btw.