Off-Topic...All Season...Also....The OFFICIAL Philadelphia Eagles thread, V. 1.0
View Single Post
11-08-2004, 02:41 AM
Join Date: Apr 2004
I am only going to argue this because I can't sleep and it is a little bit entertaining.
Originally Posted by
The Lito I have seen this year was no different than the Lito I saw last year. A guy who bites on the double moves and is caught peaking in the backfield rather than covering his guy. Even when he does have near perfect coverage on a WR, he lacks the measurables to take on any of the top WRs. Contrary to what you may believe, 6'2 WRs are not some rare commodity. Yes, Burress and Moss quality. So do Moulds, Fitzgerald, Toomer, Keyshawn, Gardner, Williams, Walker, Muhammed, Chad Johnson, Andre Johnson and Porter. And that is just off the top of my head.
Lito will always be a gamble corner back. He has the flat out speed to compensate. When he does bite on double moves (and it is not nearly as often as you presume) he is able to compensate because of his speed. There have been two times that has hurt him. Once against Burress today, and there was another, i cant remember the game. He has also defended several passes and got a interception by allowing seperation and closing on it in the air. Again, i never mentioned that 6'2 WR are a rare commodity. i said that Burress (who is more like 6'5 6'6) is a match up problem for every team. You criticized Lito's lack of tools as being what will never allow him to be a good cornerback. But there is not a signle starting corner in the league that can match Burress's height, and very few that can match up with the 6'2 WR's there. Sheppards height will always be a problem, but when that he can compensate for.
Eagles have been more than just getting killed on the run, they are not as effective against the pass either. And no, they have not played 8 in the box lately. I have no idea where you are getting that from. They are blitzing with the same ferocity as they have for the past few seasons. No change other than keeping the safeties back more in order to shelter the weaker CBs.
Then you haven't been watching the Eagles. They opened up with an 8 man in the box scheme against the browns. I can get you a quote from Trotter if you want to confirm it. There were playing the safeties in against the Ravens, why in the hell wouldnt they? They actually are not blitzing with the same ferosity in the years past. The front four have been doing the majority of pressure this year. Of course JJ still blitzes, but it is in fact statistically down this year. They can keep the safeties back because of the pressure up front.
Again, you can list off literally dozen of big-bodied WRs in the league. A hefty number of which are talented enough to really punish small CBs 1-on-1. I named at least a dozen without even looking.
Not being able to handle the 1-on-1 match-up is a probelm for every team. However, other teams do more to compensate. That accept the mismatch and keep extra played back in coverage to help-out and bracket the mis-match. Not the Eagles. Johnson has done very little to alter his scheme. He still sends 5 in on the rush routinely and trusts his CBs in man situations. I can recall only once when he radically deviated from that scheme, and that was to use Kearse (or McDougle or Douglas) in a spy roll to contain Culpepper. Otherwise, is was trusting the DBs to man-up in order to send an extra attacker.
This would make since if you have not been trying to make the point that JJ has been compensating for the corners lack of ability by moving to a cover 2 system. Right here you are saying that they are relying on man coverage, but all the while you have been saying that they have been playing a cover 2.
I never said he was an absulte weakness, you are just being overly dramatic. I said he was a marginal starter, average at best. He isn't a guy you can trust in man situations. Not just because his lack of size/leaping, but because he can't jam at the line and he bites on double moves and pump fakes. How many top CBs can you name that is worse than he is? Then again, the league is quite short on quality CBs, so the list is surprisingly long. Not that Lito is that good, just that the competition is pretty weak.
You have been saying all the while that one of the Eagles biggest weaknesses is their poor cornerbacks. I'm sorry if "absolute" is not what you meant. Also, Lito is not a poor leaper. He is short though. He can jam on the line, but he generally relies on his speed and allows a cushion. Lito's faults are his lack of technique. I'm not saying that he's a perfect CB. But you are trying to make it out that he has no potential beyond that, which is absurd that when he only real weakness is his lack of technique. How many top CB's can I name that are worse than him? Top CB's? Thats a misleading question. Your next statement doesn't even follow from that sentence. If you mean starting CB than i can probably name several. Lito is not a TOP CB yet, but has the potential to be pretty darn good. ANd if the competition is that weak, than how can you single out Lito and SHeldon as being a weakness if they are on par with the rest of the league?
Why? Because this was a glarring shortcoming that was pointing out in the pre-season. Eagles mutli-DB package blows. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that if you put 3 or 4 WRs on the field, the Eagles are really going to struggle to cover them. One of the reasons the Eagles defense was so strong against the pass over the past several years is that they trotted out some of the best nickel and dime backs in the NFL. Now they trot out some of the worst and they are struggling on third down coverage. It isn't a coincidence.
That was not the point. I admitted the Eagles have poor dime and nickle corners. Ware has not been the predominante Nickle or Dime corner all year. You should have mentioned Wynn.
When have they been manhandled? Against any half decent passing attack. Browns, Vikes and Steelers all took them to task in passing. That yardage racked up undeneath wasn't just garbage time yards, it was from the onset because Lewis and Dawkins have had to play a deep zone so much more often to off-set Brown's and Lito's inability to handle 1-on-1 situations. LBs are forced into coverage situations because the S's are occupied covering up for the CBs. One directly relates to the other, they do not exist in a vaccuum.
Except that you already said that JJ has been leaving them in man coverage still. Look, yes they have given up passing yards. But you have not been able to demonstrate that it was the corners responsibility directly. You have created a causal connection that I don't agree with. The Eagles know they can score. This forces teams to resort to the pass. YOu can cover everything so you have to give up something. If you want to say it wasnt garbage yardage because it would insult you as a Vikes fan than fine. But that would be to deny that the Eagles defense dictated what you could do that game. That is great that you got yardage, but it was entirely uncharactersitc of the Vikes offense. The Browns did not rack up huge passing yardage, they did the dink and dunk game that Garcia always does. The Steelers did not rack up huge passing yardage at all. They had some yards, but than again, when you have the ball for 3 quarters, you have to have some yards. The Steelers passing agme was no impressive at all this game. They had some plays, but they certainly didnt manhandle the Eagles pass D. If you want to say it was because of the CB suckiness that forces Lewis and Dawkins to play back and thus opening up the underneath I will just let you believe that because it is clear you are set on that.
Give me an *** break. Nobody other than a blindly biased Eagle fan would compare the loss of part-time players like Kalu, Buckhalter and Ritchie to the loss of every-down guys like Wistrom, Chad Brown, Kleinsasser or Rosenthal. Andrews I concede, but guards are far more replaceable and rather low on the 'value' list for a team. Particularly a pass-first team. Eagles were blatently 1-dimensional even before Buckhalter and Ritchie went out. You know as well as I do that Reid considers the running game an afterthought. He is a pass-first (and second) coach.
No, man for man they may not be equal to the Vikes. That wasnt my point. They were starters and the game plan for the Eagles predicated upon their health. You see the problems the Eagles offense is having now? Those would be insignificant if you have Buck, Ritchie and Andrews. Teams could not gameplan Westbrook out and double up TO because we would be able to run it down peoples throats. That is not even the point. You keep harping on this. I am saying that the relative health of the Eagles should not be used as reasoning as to why they are good. The Eagles have suceeded without McNabb! WIthout Detmer. We made it to the playoffs with f'in A.J Feely!
I would swallow that story if the Eagles showed any inkling of being that kind of team over the past 5 years. Reid is the classic West Coach Coach, preferring the 5-yard pass attempt to the 3 yard run every time. Even when nursing a lead, Eagles are not a team to hammer out 3 carries in a row. That BS simply won't fly with any legit football fan.
Look, don't give me the "legit football fan" ****. If you want to discuss this fine, but keep away from the insults. I know Reid is a West Coast Coach, and I already stated that. But the 60+ passing to rush ratio would not exist with Buck, Ritchie and Andrews. Teams have gameplanned Westbrook out and the Eagles have no compensated. Running Buck up the middle is a much simplier way to keep a D honest against the run. The Eagles can and have run the ball significantly. I guess you didnt watch the Eagles at all last year.
Oh really? Let me just take my team for comparison.
RB. Eagles lost Bucky for the year, Westbrook for a game and Ritchie for the season. Guess what? Bennett has yet to start for the Vikes, Smith was suspended four games and Moore is out for this week. Even up there.
TE. Who have the Eagles lost? Nobody. Vikes lost Kleinsasser for the season, lost their #2 guy in Wiggins for a few weeks and lost their #3 TE for the season. Against the Eagles, they had their 4th and 5th string guys on the field. Two rookies, one an undrafted Free Agent and the other a 7th round draft pick. For what it is worth, those two marginal players had phenominal games against the garbage underneath coverage offered up by the Eagles.
WR. Who has been hurt? Vikes lost their best overall player in Moss for the last 3 games. And it will be at least one more week before he returns. Plus, their #2 WR Robinson was forced to play hurt in two contests because of a lack of able bodies. Eagles have not faced an injury remorely close to losing a player of Moss caliber. He is at least comparable to losing McNabb for 4 games.
OL. You lost a starting guard, Vikes lost a starting tackle. Tackle trumps guard.
DL. You lost a back-up in Kalu (maybe not in name, but certainly in play-time) and replaced him with a back-up in Douglas. Saw off.
LB. Eagles had their bruises here, Vikings had much worse. Henderson and Claiborne both have missed extended time. Vikes are suffering terribly at LB.
DB. Vikes lost their Nickle back and last-year's starter in Ken Irvin before the 1st game. He is on par with the Eagles starters. Eagles worst is missing their 4th stringer in Ware.
I could go through the Seahawks as well, but wouldn't do them justice. Simply put, the Eagles have been fortunate in injuries compared to the other top NFC teams, Seahawks and Vikes IMO.
I have already said that the Eagles are relatively healthy. That should not diminish the value of the Eagles loses. The Eagles have suceeded when they have been screwed by injuries. You can not try to play the injury card here. I am not even going to argue you value of the individual losses (even though I disagree with some of your assessment) because it is not my point. That sucks you have injuries.
Pats defense lost their best CB in Law. He is one of the guys they can least afford to lose. Plus, the Pats offense melted down more than the Defense collapsed. Rothlisberger out-Brady'ed Brady. He let Brady make the mistakes (which resulted directly to TDs) while not making any himself.
That sucks that the Pats lost Law, but an organization that supposedly has such better depth than the Eagles should be able to compensate for his loss. The Eagles have lost McNabb and won. Rothlisberger didnt just out Brady Brady. The Steelers ran it down the Pats throat and embarresed them just like they embarrsed the Eagles. If you want to disregard that game in favor of focusing on the Eagles loss than fine.
Eagles defense isn't over-rated? Tell me this, are they in the upper half for passing yards against? What about rushing yards against? How about total yards? No across the board. However, they do sit pretty in the ultimate measure, points. That are a bend-don't-break middle-of-the-pack defense. That is not the elite unit they are being hyped to be. They are not as good as year's past.
Nobody hyped them up to be that great. But that is not to limit their potential. They defintaly have the potential to be a great D. You will scoff at that because you think the linebackers and CB's are bad. Possibily, but no defense is without its weaknesses. You are absolutely right, they have kept the points off the board.
View Public Profile
Dave Carlson's albums
Find More Posts by Dave Carlson