Tuesday, October 10, 2006

The Birds didn't Win - the Cowboys just Lost

So, I expected to come home on Sunday night to a plethora of coverage of this game, but have since seen only some brief highlights here and there - and not because I haven't been searching and searching. What commentary there has been on the game has focused solely on the state of affairs in Dallas and how the Cowboys just had an off-day and layed down, handing the game to the Birds: Bledsoe made bad throws and is old, so it's his fault; youth in the secondary broke down coverage, Parcells use of T.O. was poor...on and on.

Some of that is true, no doubt. But what, the Birds didn't have any mistakes that day (and still won)? And whatever happened to a straight-up WIN?...maybe the Birds just outplayed the Cowboys and deserved it? Or maybe, just maybe Salisbury, Hoge, Theismann, and the rest of you meatheads, the Cowboys just aren't that great of a team at this point? And maybe the Skins and Giants aren't either. No, Say it ain't so! The Birds had more total offense and disrupted the Cowboys offense with sacks, forced passes, fumbles and strong secondary play. Isn't that an indication that the Birds just may be a better team? a remote possibility perhaps? The hatred the NFL gentry has for the Birds is palpable and it disgusts me. I can't believe that they allow these idiots to analyze a complicated game like football - remember when the Birds made their Super Bowl run in 2004? Yeh, that was when Merril Hoge tirelessly "predicted" all year long that the Birds wouldn't even make the playoffs! And then he predicted us losing throughout the playoffs and then finally, a 35-0 loss in the Super Bowl. Has no one held that idiot accountable? How about his continued ridiculous statements? NFL Primetime is now hosted by Salisbury and Hoge...guess I can't watch that show anymore. Well, unfortunately, the only way this bias is going to stop is when the Birds finally get a trophy and stick it in these clowns' faces.

Back to the Cowboys - Even Len Pasquerelli wrote on ESPN.com: "In the long run, though, many came away from the contest believing the Cowboys had outplayed the Eagles in several facets, and Dallas might ultimately become the better team. Right or wrong, such a suspicion was based on two factors: First, despite surrendering seven sacks and five turnovers, and with quarterback Drew Bledsoe playing miserably, Dallas still had a chance in the closing seconds to send the game into overtime. Second (and far more meaningful), the Cowboys have assembled a defense that could emerge as a terrific unit."

So yes, I agree with some of this commentary about Dallas, but the same could be said for the Birds, but strangely I haven't heard anything about it; plus wasn't this game supposed to be close? Sure it was, but the Birds were the better team.


Blogger J Dubs said...

Screw Pasquerelli. Anything negative the commentators can say about a 4-1 team with a 1 1/2-game division lead, they will.

The "boys can get better"? How about "the Eagles can get better"?!?! We went into that game without our #1 receiver, without our starting nickle corner, and with a RB so banged up he missed the last game, didn't practice all week, and was a game-day decision. We lost 2 fumbles that we shouldn't have (no one even touched the one Westbrook fumbled [practice, anyone?], and McNabb's fumble came on a sack he should have seen coming, he shoulda tucked it away and taken the sack). Our punter had his worst game in 2 years, and Sheldon Brown was missing tackles all over the field that he usually makes in his sleep. Our starting LG goes out with a knee sprain, and his replacement gave up a couple of pressures and a 5-yard false start penalty. Lito had just come back from an ankle vacation, and was still able to bat 7 balls down, pick 2 off, run 1 back 102 yards, and throw in 8 tackles to boot!

On top of all this, we are #2 in the league in dropped passes, and we left a LOT of catchable balls on the field on Sunday. Despite that McNabb still threw for 357 yards. Clean that up and who knows what this team is capable of.

Our #3 WR is a free agent ROOKIE, and the #2 (#1 on Sunday) is in only his 2nd year. In fact, we've got 2nd-year players all over the field, 1 of whom leads the team in TDs, and another who leads the NFL in sacks.

I think we have some room to improve.

I watched the game again last night, and the thing I noticed, was that the 'Boys did have momentum from the halfway into the 1st, through halftime. But when McNabb his Baskett for that 87-yd TD, momentum was ours from that point on. The 'Boys tried to get it back but the 40-yd flea-flicker TD to Brown snatched it back for good. Even the final drive was sketchy for the 'Boys, Bledsoe took consecutive sacks on 2nd and 3rd down. The only reason they were even in it right before Lito took it to the house was the stupid coverage mistake by MLewis. Point is, when you're at the game, you may not notice the momentum swings b/c you're so caught up in it, but when you watch that mess on Shortcut (which only shows every play, whistle to whistle, with a few slo-mo replays thrown in for good measure) you really get a sense of which way momentum is going.

The 'Boys came into this game with a top-10 offense and defense, and most "analysts" picked them to whip us. This was a great win.

10/10/2006 1:46 PM  
Blogger Paulomon Grundy said...

Exactly. You just summed up why I'm pissed. The Cowboys, Skins and Giants get so much leeway, they get the benefit of the doubt at every turn...they are always "just about" to really improve, "untapped potential" etc. There never seems to be similar statements about the Birds and analysis about the potential they have. We don't even get the reach around! We had PLENTY of obstacles to overcome in order to win this game, but none of that was discussed post-game. Maybe this is a good thing for us - fly under the radar all year and come on strong for the playoffs. That would be nice.

10/10/2006 2:05 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home