Know Thy Enemy 2009: Philadelphia Eagles - December 20
by David Fucillo on Aug 19, 2009 8:00 AM PDT
in Preview
Email
Print
After six straight games of non-division opponents, the 49ers get Arizona and Seattle back to back in what could be monstrous matchups for divisional supremacy (or at least we hope). However, late December gets them a pair of non-divisional matchups, one of which will see them facing one of the NFC favorites in the Philadelphia Eagles. If not for some of the worst play-calling in recent memory, the 49ers had a shot at upsetting the Eagles last season. The Eagles only get better this season and have most definitely become rather intriguing with a certain quarterback addition. Glad I waited on this particular preview.
The Philadelphia Eagles are represented here at SB Nation by JasonB over at Bleeding Green Nation.
2008 Overview
2008 was a rather odd year for the Eagles. You of course had the bizarro tie that Donovan McNabb didn't know could happen. The Eagles stormed through December winning four of five games, and having everything fall their way the final day of the season to gift them with a wildcard spot. They then proceeded to make quite a bit of noise in the playoffs, knocking off Minnesota and New York en route to a very unlikely NFC title game between the Eagles and the Arizona Cardinals. The Cardinals did win but not before blowing a 24-6 lead in what turned out to be a highly entertaining second half of football.
The Eagles offense finished the season 13th in the league overall, 12th rushing and 14th passing. The Eagles offense has rarely been spectacular, but once again got things done. On defense, though, the Eagles finished the season 3rd overall and 3rd against both the run and the pass.
After the jump we look at the Eagles offseason additions and subtractions, 2009 Questions and Answers and a quick preview of the matchup...
Additions
We'll get to the controversial addition in a minute. The Eagles knew they had a solid defense last season and an improved offense could have won them a Super Bowl, given how last year's playoffs played out. The Eagles wasted little time on offense through free agency and the draft. They added a pair of offensive tackles in Stacy Andrews and Jason Peters and solid fullback Leonard Weaver. In the draft they went heavy on offense, adding WR Jeremy Maclin, RB LeSean "Shady" McCoy and a potential steal in TE Cornelius Ingram. On defense, the Eagles lost Brian Dawkins (pissing this guy off to no end), and went with Browns free agent FS Sean Jones as his replacement. Probably a downgrade, but still a solid addition. They also signed safety Rashad Baker and traded for CB Ellis Hobbs for some depth.
The one addition that has everybody abuzz is quarterback Michael Vick. Given the existing QB situation in Philadelphia, this was certainly an intriguing addition. When it was announced by the Monday Night Football crew, Ron Jaworski thought it was an awful move, while Jon Gruden thought it had great potential and was willing to wait on it. I have to side with Gruden. It's a low risk deal for the Eagles (given that the second year salary increase is a team option) and as they say you can NEVER have too many offensive weapons. Imagine if the Eagles rolled out McNabb and Vick in the same offensive formations. I recall reading somewhere that McNabb mentioned how he might roll out at receiver or even tight end on a play here or there. Even though I'm not an Eagles fan, they might be the most intriguing team outside of the 49ers (just because) that I'll want to watch on Sunday. I'm absolutely fascinated by how they might utilize Vick.
Also, please keep this thread's discussion to football-related matters. If people post about the dog stuff, the comments will be deleted. This is about the football aspects of the signing.
Subtractions
The most notable change was the departure of Brian Dawkins. Eagles fans will miss him, but given his age, they were going to have start looking in a new direction at some point. The same also holds true for offensive tackle Jon Runyan. He took care of business on the line, but he was getting up there and the Eagles have made some impressive additions to bring down that average age. They also let Tra Thomas walk, but again, they made the necessary replacements.
Aside from that, they lost LJ Smith and Correll Buckhalter. Buckhalter will be replaced by Shady McCoy, which could end up being an upgrade if McCoy gets things going. Maybe not immediately but soon. As for Smith, he's struggled to stay healthy and even when on the field, he hadn't been overly productive in the passing game the last couple years so it made sense to look for a replacement.
2009 Questions and Answers
Right off the bat, what do they do with Michael Vick and how does it affect Donovan McNabb? I realize McNabb is saying all the right things now, but I am wildly intrigued to see what happens if McNabb struggles at some point. Kevin Kolb seems to be the guy tabbed for the future and once he gets healthy (sprained MCL, day-to-day), he'll be added into that equation. It's just human nature where if Vick has some success in whatever role, people might clamor for him if McNabb struggles.
Although I like Shady McCoy, I also think the running game could have some question marks if Westbrook goes down. He's sat out so far and might sit the whole preseason, which might not be the worst thing in the world. While a guy like Buckhalter wasn't exactly a homerun hitter, he was a reasonable backup. McCoy is the primary backup and is unproven at this level. Alongside the QB and RB positions, the offensive line will play into this. They're rolling out a new pair of offensive tackles, so we'll see how cohesive the unit is early on.
On defense, the questions surround how the team does without veteran leader Brian Dawkins. Even if he was getting up there in age, he was still effective. Sean Jones is talented, but he's not Brian Dawkins at this point.
vs. San Francisco
In our early schedule discussion, Bigelow and I split, me predicting a loss, Bigelow predicting a win. While this is certainly a game the 49ers could win, I think they have less of a chance this year compared to last year. Bigelow wasn't high on McNabb but I think he's still a tough QB to handle. Throw in the fact that it's a December home game for the Eagles, a great second half team, and this is quite a tough matchup.
61 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Great, read, though I think the Eagles are overrated to sin.
Jeremy Maclin looks like the next Ted Ginn Jr., they tremendously downgraded both offensive tackle positions, Donovan is due for another injury, and Cornelius Ingram is out for the season with a torn ACL, which makes me still wonder why the hell they drafted him after such an injurious history in college as well. Karma for skipping out on Brandon Pettigrew I suppose, who would have made their offense much, much better.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
Jeremy Maclin looks like the next Ted Ginn Jr.
Please add “…and I base that on absolutely nothing.”
they tremendously downgraded both offensive tackle positions
They did?
Donovan is due for another injury
Again, please add “…and I base that on absolutely nothing.”
Cornelius Ingram is out for the season with a torn ACL, which makes me still wonder why the hell they drafted him after such an injurious history in college as well.
5th round.
Karma for skipping out on Brandon Pettigrew I suppose, who would have made their offense much, much better.
Karma? So the Hindu gods are punishing the Eagles for not drafting a TE that never had more than 540 yards in his 4 years in college? I think the Hindu gods have more important matters.
Bye, Big Stew and JJ :(
I have to really disagree with you on this one
I like the Eagles and the Giants as the two best teams in the NFC.
by Brendan Scolari on Aug 19, 2009 1:42 PM PDT up reply actions
We'll see.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 19, 2009 7:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Who do you like more than the Eagles?
Except for maybe the Giants, I don’t see any other team on that tier in the NFC. Definitely nobody in the NFC West, I can only see maybe the Panthers in the South, and you’ve said you don’t think Cutler will work out with the Bears so unless you think the Pack will REALLY bounce back (possible) or Farve provides a big boost to the Vikings (unlikely) I don’t see who is going to be that good. I suppose I left out the Skins and Cowboys, but I don’t see either being top tier contenders.
by Brendan Scolari on Aug 19, 2009 8:15 PM PDT up reply actions
It’s an odd calendar year, meaning it’s not a good year to pick the Panthers. I’m in the small camp that believed they really were not that good last year (me and Chris Carter).
The Saints have been toying with that defense for 3 years and might have finally figured it out. Atlanta probably won’t be elite but feisty enough to wear a few teams down.
Don’t forget the Vikings either. Tarvaris Jackson was a horrendous QB, even a 55 year old Brett Farve would be an upgrade. The team has everything to excel but were missing competent QB.
Don’t sell the Cardinals short either. Everyone wants to marginalize their success last year but nothing has changed to slow down their attack. Not to mention everyone forgets or doesn’t know they should have beat both Washington and Carolina on the road early last year but inexperience cost them. I don’t think they will have that issue this year.
Eagles will probably be good. I still the question the Giants. They looked pretty pathetic at times without Plaxico and it’s asking a lot of their rookie WRs to fill that kind of role.
re:
I would have a hard time taking any argument that the Panthers weren’t good last year seriously. They went 12-4 in a tough division and were #6 in DVOA. Jake Delhomme playoff meltdowns aside, they were easily a top 10 team.
However, for this year I can see them not being so good. I can see it, but I can also see them being one of the best teams in the NFC again. The Saints should be decent but I still don’t think they have fixed the defense. The Falcons were incredibly healthy last year and Turner was overworked, they should regress a bit but still be solid contenders.
Farve won’t be as big of an upgrade as most people think IMO.He was bad last year and he’s nearing 40. I don’t expect him to stay healthy all year, especially because he hasn’t been practicing/working out. The Vikes should still be pretty good regardless.
I’m not buying the Cardinals at all. As stated here (A Football Outsiders interview with Revenge of the Birds, scroll down to the last question) there are tons of question marks surrounding the Cardinals. They scored one more point than they allowed in the regular season, went 3-7 outside the NFC West, got blown out by the Eagles, Pats, Vikings, and Jets (The Jets!), and had all of their O-line, Warner, and Fitz start every game last year. That will change and I expect a huge downturn for them.
And finally, I think “pathetic” is a bit harsh for the Giants. Their schedule for the last ten games of 2008 was ridiculous. 7 of the 10 games were against playoff teams and the other three games were against Dallas twice and Washington, not exactly creampuffs. It had to be the hardest schedule in the league for that stretch and I think it made it look like they collapsed more than they actually did. The Giants were still pretty good without Plax and they added quite a few pieces in the offseason.
by Brendan Scolari on Aug 20, 2009 1:10 AM PDT up reply actions
The argument against the Panthers last year is when on the schedule they played teams. They caught a lot of teams when they were not at full strength (except the Giants). I admit, it’s pretty difficult to tear down a team with so many wins. As for this year, their pieces look old. They are good candidate to be the Seahawks this year.
Like the Cards, everyone questioned the Giants run from the previous post season. The Giants went onto being the best team in football last year before their top receiver got arrested shooting himself in the foot. The Cards got blown out by Viks and Pats in meaningless games to them. They came back against Jets after being down 30+ (when the Jets were still good) and I already mentioned they should have won both games in Carolina and Washington.
Don’t get too caught up in FO stats on the Cards. They were also defending their asses on Revenge of Birds forum for looking ridiculously stupid in last year’s post season predictions. Anyways the argument against the Cards is always the same, ignore the post season run and just pay attention to the regular season. BTW, we neglect to mention the Cards were an inexperience team still trying figure out how to grow up in the regular season.
The Giants turned into the Vikings last year without Plax. Could not throw the ball to save their life. Teams run blitzed and blitzed to shut down the run game and Giants could not get the ball outside to make them pay.
"As for this year, their pieces look old."
Steve Smith, Jordan Gross, Ryan Otah, Jonathan Stewart, DeAngelo Hall, Jon Beason, Chris Gamble are old?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 20, 2009 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions
Steve Smith, Muhsin Muhammad, Jake Delhomme, Julius(as) Peppers . . . aren’t those the same key pieces from the 2003 team?
Delhomme's role is minimized.
Peppers is still good, if he declines maybe Everette Brown shows something. Smith is still an elite receiver, Muhammad is replaceable even if he tanks.
The people I listed are far more important to their success, although by DeAngelo Hall I obviously meant DeAngelo Williams.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 20, 2009 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Vikes, Saints, Giants,
outside chance to Cardinals and Cowboys
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 20, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions
Wow, Saints?
I like the Cardinals and the Giants. Dallas already imploded, and is done. They are already rebuilding, and guess who they are using as their model?
Giants are an organization that has succeeded after copying the Eagles strategies as well. Although, they are a very, very talented team.
Saints aren’t a threat, but should be a 7 to 8 win team.
Vikes are OK, I grant you. But got the door slammed on them by Philly last year.
Bleed green, or don't bleed at all!
by yophillybro on Aug 20, 2009 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions
I think it's unwise to sleep on Dallas.
I’m not a big fan of them by any means but there’s no denying they have some extreme talent.
And I don’t get your point about succeeding by copying the Eagles’ model? So? The Giants dominated and won the division handily, the Eagles snuck into the playoffs by a miracle.
I think the Saints are going to improve. They finally realize they shouldn’t waste their time trying to force Reggie Bush as the starting RB, and I like the improvements on defense.
And while Philly did beat the Vikings last season, that was with Travaris Crapson around.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 20, 2009 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions
"there’s no denying they have some extreme talent."
Yeah, there really is. They don’t. If they really had “extreme” talent they would have one at least one playoff game in the last decade.
The way people continue to buy into that hype despite nothing to show for it amazes me.
Okay?
And one can argue that the Eagles keep getting touted as paper champs year after year and couldn’t even beat the lowly Cardinals when it mattered.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 20, 2009 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions
I’m not too high on the Cowboys. They played that video game offense last year of having Romo line up the shotgun every down so he could scramble around for 5 seconds to make a play. It looked their running game and overall toughness dried up because of it.
They are also playing the Owens blame game. Every team that has cut Owens as the reason for them losing ended up losing more the next the season.
Their biggest problem is their O Line...
Their starters’ ages by the end of the season…
Adams – 34
Kosier – 31
Gurode – 31
Davis – 31
Colombo – 31
Oldest O Line in the NFL, and absolutely, positively, no depth whatsoever behind those guys.
Bye, Big Stew and JJ :(
The Saints and Cards over the Eagles?
Come on now. Even the Cowboys can’t really compare. Unless McNabb gets hurt I don’t see how those teams will play as well as the Eagles.
by Brendan Scolari on Aug 20, 2009 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions
When you say Ted Ginn Jr. . . .
Are you referring to the guy who missed his rookie season and came on slow or the guy who now looks like a solid pro and play maker?
The guy who's a wholly average receiver and not definitely not worth a top 10 pick.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 19, 2009 7:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Eagles are NOT over rated.
Don’t go by the record, we lost 4 games on 4 yards last year. And if did not make the bowl due to a pass interference call that wasn’t called on Curtis against Arizona.
Just Ask Dallas and New York if Philly is bad. Brandon Jabons said it himself, the Eagles were by far the best team they faced all season.
I don’t think Maclin is the next Ted Ginn Jr. Maclin only played 1 “Vanilla” preseason game. Remember, he is opposite DJax. And you failed to mention the major upgrade in RB with Back up LeSean McCoy.
Also, I don’t know how adding 2 probowl tackles is a downgrade. Last I checked, Jason Peters is a 2 time probowl in 2 years. And Stacy Andrews was Cincy’s Franchise player last year. Obviously they wanted him.
I think (baring injury), Eagles are the best team in the NFL. It depends on injury though, Although I’m sure you would agree, our 3rd QB is better than your starting QB. Oh, that 3rd stringer is Michael Vick (4 time probowler, NFC championship QB).
Bleed green, or don't bleed at all!
What's up with letting Dawkins go?
I get the argument that the tread on his tires was worn but he was also the center of that team last year. I’m not so sure you are suppose to be releasing veteran leaders when gearing up for a title run, even if they will only play part time.
Is their any concern in Philly? What was the upside of letting him go? Did the team sign Peters with that money?
How many teams have almost completely rebuilt the nucleus of its team and still competes.
And made the NFC championship with only a hand full of vets over 30.
Dawkins was DONE, trust me. OK, he played well down the stretch, but mostly because of Jim Johnson using him as more of a LB than a safety.
Eagles did Brian a favor by letting him go. He has a year, maybe 2 left in the tank, if even that.
Lets say the Eagles were to cave in to Dawkins request, we would have to cut him next year. Imagine the PR nightmare then. We allowed him to leave with dignity. Being in SF, you clearely remember Montanas deal.
Also, Denver went bananas with that contract for him.
Bleed green, or don't bleed at all!
by yophillybro on Aug 20, 2009 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions
I just bring it up because the 49ers in their day would hold onto to veterans the years they legitimately thought they had a title run. Yes, the 49ers would flat out cut them after the run and experience the PR nightmare . . . oh it just wasn’t Montana.
Yes, Denver offered a huge contract, that I can understand.
I agree.
Rather let Dawkins walk and gain a respectable contract on the open market rather than the PR suicide by benching or cutting him.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 20, 2009 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm on the opposite side
Although wildly unpopular at the time, no brings up memories of the 49ers cutting Ronnie Lott, Roger Craig, Freddie Solomon, Jerry Rice or Fred Dean. The only harsh move that still registers any uptick is the trade of Montana. Charles Haley is a different story, not that we got rid of him but gave him to the Cowboys which probably cost the franchise another SB.
What everyone does remember is the 5 SBs. In two years, no one in Philly would give a shit if the Eagles cut ties with Dawkins after celebrity a SB.
"And if did not make the bowl due to a pass interference call that wasn’t called on Curtis against Arizona."
No, you would have made the Bowl if your defense didn’t choke the entire game and McNabb wasn’t useless until the game was practically out of hand.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 20, 2009 11:45 AM PDT up reply actions
McNabb did not give up that huge drive and allowed Hightower to score. But he did
score 21 unanswered straight points.
I’m just saying, you can’t go off the record. Eagles lost 4 games by 4. They were in everygame. No one manhandled them. Except maybe Baltimore, and the score was relatively close till the very end when they just blew it open.
If you are in everygame, you will win a lot of games. When you suck, you lose by 10 plus regularly. Which is not the case in Philly.
What team do you fear? Do you not think Philly is good. If not, why not? They have been consistantly good for a decade.
Also, Sorry about Crabtree, sucks that he is suck a rearend.
Bleed green, or don't bleed at all!
by yophillybro on Aug 20, 2009 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions
Right, but the 49ers and Seahawks also lost games by less than touchdown, and you won't see anybody tooting their horns.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think Philadelphia is a bad team, or even an average one. But the way you see some people talk about them, it’s like we might as well skip the regular season already and just crown their asses into the next Super Bowl.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 20, 2009 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions
They look pretty damn good
That’s why. They may be the best team in the NFC. They were the best team in football last year according to DVOA and then had a great draft.
And the Niners and Seahawks got blow out and beat by weak teams, that’s why no one is touting their horns. They also didn’t make it to the NFC Championship game.
by Brendan Scolari on Aug 20, 2009 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions
What weak team did the Seahawks get blown out by?
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 20, 2009 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions
Sorry, I wasn't clear
I meant the Niners and Seahawks got beat by weak teams, and also got blown out in other games. In other words, if you get blown out by the good teams, and still lose to weak teams you are probably not very good.
by Brendan Scolari on Aug 20, 2009 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions
r u serious
they downgraded at both tackle positions??? wow i didnt think Jason Peters(who is probably the best at his position) was a downgrade!!!!! hahaha this site should take u off for saying such stupid things!!!!! next time do your homework pal!!!!!!!!!
NINERS WILL BE LUCKY TO GET WITHIN 3 TDS OF THE BIRDS
PHI 38 SF 17
by goldenbird09 on Aug 20, 2009 8:39 AM PDT up reply actions
for the record Fearless Frog is NOT a 49ers fan
and his opinions don’t necessarily reflect the opinions of actual 49ers fans.
and in his 4th season, VD broke through the wall, Niners fan rejoiced and all was well in the kingdom. Singletary 3:42
SURPRISE!
Jason Peters sucks. I wouldn’t be surprised if Justin Smith got at least 2 sacks straight up against him.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 20, 2009 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions
huh, Jason Peters sucks?
Wow, you must be on some strange medicine. You got to lay off that stuff bro, its not good for you.
Bleed green, or don't bleed at all!
by yophillybro on Aug 20, 2009 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions
You realize that he was bad last year right?
Of course, that doesn’t mean he wil be bad this year but touting him as the best tackle in football is silly.
by Brendan Scolari on Aug 20, 2009 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Our offense is probably as strong as it has ever been since 2004, when the Eagles appeared in the superbowl. In fact, there’s a good chance that it’s even stronger than that, but only time will tell. I will say my personal favorite addition this offseason has been FB Leonard Weaver, but don’t sleep on McCoy. He looked amazing in his first preseason game, and I think he is a great weapon to have even if Westbrook is still on the field.
Our defense is kind of up in the air right now, just for the sole fact that we haven’t really seen them tested yet. On paper, we are bringing back a lot of defensive players with experience, but we are working with a handful of people who are taking on starting roles for the first time. I honestly am not concerned with Sean McDermott taking over as defensive coordinator, since he is cut from the same cloth as the great Jim Johnson. Again, I am not saying our defense will not be good, just that the linebacker and safety position include some players with little starting experience.
One correction though, is that in your section about offseason additions, you mentioned Saftery Rashad Baker. He was recently (yesterday?) cut from the team to make space on our roster.
"THIS IS NOT COLLEGE NO MORE. THIS IS THE BIG MAN SPORT." ~Crazy Lady on BGN forums
“Safety” Rashad Baker
"THIS IS NOT COLLEGE NO MORE. THIS IS THE BIG MAN SPORT." ~Crazy Lady on BGN forums
by southjersey89 on Aug 19, 2009 5:20 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm still bitter about "The inch that stole Christmas"
But back on topic:
The Eagles knew they had a solid defense last season and an improved offense could have won them a Super Bowl, given how last year’s playoffs played out.
I cant argue with this based on the season as a whole, but in the NFC Champ game, our defense lost it for us. McNabb drove back at the end and gave us the lead. If our defense stopped them, we’d be at the dance.
.
.
And in case you’re interested… Inch that Stole Christmas: http://articles.latimes.com/1992-11-30/sports/sp-899_1_philadelphia-eagles
Looking Mean in Kelly Green
I think McNabb pulled his typical “can’t cut it under pressure in a big game” routine in the 4th quarter.
how you figure?
he should have played on defense?
Looking Mean in Kelly Green
by goodfella46er on Aug 19, 2009 9:32 PM PDT up reply actions
Can you really blame the defense for not stopping the Cardinal offense at home for the entire 2nd half? The Eagles offense did nothing in the first half and barely made a dent in the 4th. If you are going to beat the Cards offensive production has to be more consistent. The Steelers defense had trouble keeping that unit down.
If I remember correctly
The WRs kept dropping the passes on the final drive. McNabb wasn’t perfect on the drive, but the WRs weren’t perfect either. Feel free correct me if I am wrong.
Go 49ers
You're right.
A lot of Incompletes. (good thing we weren’t at Mile High b/c that would have been annoying as shit.)
Looking Mean in Kelly Green
by goodfella46er on Aug 19, 2009 10:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Sure it is.
When McNabb keeps throwing behind, ahead, or above a receiver, I don’t hold them liable for dropping the ball while trying to make difficult re-adjustments.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 20, 2009 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions
I honestly don’t remember the details. I just know McNabb has been disappointing in many of big games. I didn’t give the Eagles a chance last year in the NFC Championship game because of him. He did catch on fire in the 3rd, had a huge smile on face than his performance and face clinched up in the 4th. Before I sound like a total dick to Philly fan I admit to having same feelings about Steve Young. Overall he wasn’t very good in a lot of big games but he did come through on a few.
Cards had a killer drive in the 4th - no doubt
And its tough for me to blame our D b/c they kept us in the running all season long. The whole point with my original post is that It was ironic that a single botched play on our defense (our DB tripped over his feet b/c he was juked by Fitzgerald) led to the Cards’ go ahead score. Therefore more offensive firepower wouldnt have helped.
But I’ll agree with you – clearly we should have done more in the 1st half other than kick field goals. And I realize that was what Fooch probably meant with his comment. I was just commenting on the irony that devastated us Iggle fans: our strength (defense) was the final thing to do us in.
Looking Mean in Kelly Green
by goodfella46er on Aug 19, 2009 10:01 PM PDT up reply actions
No, he should have tried to hit receivers in stride during the first half.
"Part, fools!
Put up your swords. You know not what you do."
by Fearless Frog on Aug 20, 2009 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Niners Nation
Related FanShots on Niners Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Tiquan Underwood, cut on Super Bowl eve, is a Patriot again
- Woman at Giants Super Bowl parade can’t wait to see Mark Sanchez (video)
- Bradying is sweeping the nation (for the next 48 hours or so)
- Knowshon Moreno charged with DUI; has a license plate that reads ‘SAUCED’
- Giants fan who won $50,000 on Super Bowl safety will donate winnings to charity
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
