I'm running out of things to say about these losses already: it's only been 5 but the last 2 had very obvious reasons. For the second consecutive week the "potent" Eagles offense has failed to score a touchdown, and have only managed a measly field goal overall. Oh, and that "awful" defense hasn't allowed more than 20 points in any of the last 3 games. I won't be saying much about this week, since we all know exactly what happened. Numbers don't lie, right?
In this case, the numbers absolutely don't lie! I could pretty much copy everything from last week's game vs. the Cowboys for this game against the Giants, just substituting "Nick Foles" with "Matt Barkley". The offense stunk, and the defense only allowed 15 points without a touchdown. Now on to the (lack of) numbers...
Building off of last week's performance, the Eagles posted new season lows in net yards, average gain, passing yards, rushing yards, and first downs. Amazingly they only lost the game by 8, thanks to a defensive touchdown; that's only 3 offensive points the last 2 weeks and only 10 total. More later, but give the defense credit for keeping Eli Manning in check for most of the game, and forcing a turnover and 11 penalties from the Giants. Total first downs were almost even, and NY only gained an extra yard per attempt; third down is really where this game was won (42% to only 25% for the Birds).
Once again I'll start with the positive: the defense. The Eagles suddenly impressive defense was the sole reason this game was even within reach for them to win. They allowed 5 scoring drives, but they were all field goals. They also recorded the only score for the team as well, recovering a botched long snap for a TD. Perhaps the only downside for the defense was (once again) a less-than-decent pass rush. Manning was only sacked once and hit twice, and had plenty of time to throw. Luckily the secondary played well again, and allowed less than 10 yards per completion, with the longest play being 27 yards. All things considered the defense definitely played great, and this was the third consecutive game of allowing 20 points or less. Unfortunately, this was another game where the offense sputtered. An interception at some point would have been nice, but you can't pin this loss on the defense at all.
First off, Michael Vick probably shouldn't have played. But who would you rather have start the game? A less than 100% Vick or a 100% Matt Barkley? Yeah, I'd rather have Vick too, so I can't argue his start. That being said, he didn't have much of an impact before he left the game, so go figure. The most frustrating part of the game was that despite an abysmal offensive game, the Eagles were in this game until the final drive. It could have been a much different game if they had been able to score at the half; instead of going into the locker room down 12-0, it should have been 12-7 or even 12-3. But terrible play calling and a terrible play by a rookie led to a fumble and no points. No points was the trend for the rest of the game, and the closest they got was to the NY 32 during their first 2nd half possession. More terrible play calling led to a failed 4th down attempt instead of a field goal. Just think: the game could have been 12-10 at this point. Enough about this game!
Miscellaneous:
-Chip Kelly's play calling has been dreadful the past two weeks, as mentioned above. He definitely should not have put Barkley in that situation at the end of the half. LeSean McCoy is there for a reason!
-Also, why would you try an onside kick with over 4 minutes left in the game?!?! There's no need for that, especially when your defense is doing well.
-Who will be the Eagles quarterback next week? At this point, it seems it'll be whoever is healthy.
-Barkley is NOT the answer.
-Will Philadelphia ever win another home game?
(Eagles vs. Giants PDF)
Last week vs. Dallas: L, 17-3
Next week at Oakland Raiders: Sunday, 4:05pm
No comments:
Post a Comment