The inimitable Mike Tanier, at Football Outsiders:
So there they were, two of my favorite performers, two legends of contemporary music, being completely non-entertaining as they indulged their worst instincts. But I could not turn away, because I am a Springsteen and U2 fan. I kept waiting for it to get better. Maybe they would rip into some song I don’t expect or do something truly magical. I felt obligated to watch and feel exasperated.
I promise, it’s about the Eagles.
Earlier today, I quoted a point Tommy Lawlor made about the question of whether or not to fire Andy Reid. Sam Lynch elaborated on that viewpoint in the comments. For those who don’t visit the comments (shame on you), I’ve re-posted his response below. Also, follow Sam on Twitter here.
I think Tommy is absolutely right. His point is consistent with the post I made at Iggles Blitz a couple of months ago now: you have to answer a lot of questions before you figure out what moves need to be made.
Here is how I would have expressed his thought:
You can’t fire Andy Reid just because you are mad at the world, at the team’s record, at whatever. That is a really bad idea. That is really bad management.
If you fire Andy Reid, you have to know exactly what it is that he isn’t doing, you have to know why he isn’t doing it, and you have to have an idea of who or what can be done to make that thing happen.
Let me put forth two very different (though not mutually exclusive) views of the Eagles that illustrate that point.
In the first, the problem that the team has faced is really that Andy was given bad players in the offseason. The front office thought it had a MLB, but didn’t really. The front office thought it had a pro bowl caliber rookie guard, and didn’t really. The front office thought it could reach a deal with the star WR and keep him from going off the rails, but couldn’t. The front office thought it had great safety depth because Nate Allen is a quick healer and Jarrett is a star, and was so wrong. The front office planned to flip one of the three CBs for value and didn’t.
In that case, taking this out on Andy Reid doesn’t fix the real underlying issue with the organization. Yes, he is the face of the organziation, there is fatigue among the fans, and he is what his record says he is. But what coach do you bring in who would solve that problem? You are throwing away a lot of good things when the bad things that have gone on this year aren’t really his fault.
In the second view, Andy Reid failed to put together a coaching staff that could coach adequately at the NFL level. That doesn’t just apply to Juan Castillo, but also to Reid’s proclivity towards offense and his own inability to understand defensive coaching and schemes and how they can and should be applied in the NFL. It applies to the hiring of Howard Mudd, who is a great coach but forced us to focus time and resources on overhauling the style and personnel of an offensive line that had the talent in place already to be a good line using the prior style. Andy Reid has continually failed to put his team in the best position to succeed because of baffling offensive play calling, poor in game management, and failure to make adequate adjustments in game. He is loved by players but they have reached the point where they take advantage of it — he has lost the ability to keep players any more disciplined than they are inclined to be themselves. Reid can no longer identify who on his team is good and who is not, and the top notch self-scouting that used to be the hallmark of this team has disappeared. And none of that even gets into how much influence he has with respect to front office decision making.
In that second view, there is a pretty clear reason for making a change and a pretty clear image of the coach you need to come in and fix things: a guy who can present a cohesive plan for the entire team, who can manage a game while that game is being played, who is not so much of a player’s coach but is a disciplinarian, and who has a strong eye for talent. A guy who is a Head Coach, not a glorified coordinator.
That’s why you make a move, if you choose to make it. Because Andy Reid is fundamentally flawed in a way that can no longer be masked with talented, expensive players.
So Tommy is right. You need to have a plan. You can’t just make a change because you want to shake things up. You have to know how you want your organization to be set up, and what the skills that a head coach has to have in that organization. And you have to know that Andy Reid is, in fact, not the guy with those skills.
That isn’t saying that you keep him as a default, or you keep him because you are afraid you might do worse. It is saying that you have to know very clearly what you want in a new head coach before you decide whether you should get rid of your old one.
A fun, Space Jam-inspired look at the best NFL players.
Only one question for Jimmy: where is Chad Hall?
Tommy Lawlor, at Iggles Blitz:
A factor that gets largely ignored is that firing Andy Reid is only half the issue. Who do you replace him with? You do not make a change for the sake of making a change. That’s a dumb way to run an organization. Jeff Lurie and Joe Banner need to have some ideas about who might be brought in to replace Reid if they decide to fire him.
Is that true? Take the flipside. Is it smart to keep an employee who isn’t the right person for the job just because you don’t have a candidate to replace him yet? That seems like a poor management philosophy.
Phil Sheridan, for the Inquirer:
It’s one thing to be a bad team. Indianapolis without Peyton Manning is a bad team. Jacksonville, which fired coach Jack Del Rio on Tuesday, is a bad team. Bad teams lose to better teams. Pretty simple.
But this team has shown that it can be very good. And that makes an effort, or a lack it - as in Sunday’s game against New England - all the more galling for fans.
I don’t disagree with the overall point of Sheridan’s column, but his definition of a bad team is questionable. For starters, there isn’t one monolithic version of a bad team. At 4-7 and in line for a top ten draft pick, the Eagles are bad. Just because they’re not as bad as the hapless Colts, you can’t classify them differently.
Furthermore, I’m not sure how good the Eagles have shown themselves capable of being. They beat St. Louis (2-9) in the least convincing 31-13 win of the year. They beat Washington (4-7) when Rex Grossman mistook Kurt Coleman for one of his wide receivers. Then one fluky blowout of a flawed Dallas team (7-4) and one squeaky victory against the Giants (6-5). That’s not a high ceiling.
On this short week, it’s a perfect time to throw a bunch of quick Eagles stats conclusions at you. All the data is from Pro Football Focus.
* * *
Vince Young is throwing pretty well to all parts of the field except one — deep down the sideline.
Standard caveats apply: small sample size, DeSean-itis. Still, it’s a striking discrepancy. Maybe Marty Mornhinweg should call fewer fly routes.
For what it’s worth, Michael Vick has gone 6/20 for 169 yards with one touchdown and one interception throwing that same way.
* * *
It’s easy to see why Jim Washburn was mad at Marty Mornhinweg. His defensive linemen each averaged just under 10 more snaps in the Patriots game, compared with the previous week against the Giants. No wonder they wore down as the game went on.
By the way, the correlation between Eagles defensive linemen snaps and LeSean McCoy’s carries (inverted) is rather high:
* * *
Owen Schmitt, ostensibly the Eagles fullback, saw the field five times against the Patriots. All five were passing plays.
* * *
Turns out Asomugha did pretty well in his limited role, but Tom Brady picked apart the rest of the pass coverage. There’s not much to smile about here.
* * *
But don’t despair, the Eagles still have a 2.5% chance of winning the division!
Photo from Getty.
Nnamdi Asomugha, as reported by Yahoo Sports’ Doug Farrar:
“You can move around all you want and line up and take a guy out of the game, but things change when you’re moving around and the coverages are changing and now you’re fitting off of the next guy and it’s not just about stopping the guy in front of you. That’s been the transition.”
Asomugha has had some major lapses this year (hello Victor Cruz), but I doubt his physical ability has declined this much in one year. The next defensive coordinator needs to let Nnamdi play the way he he did in Oakland. If he still fails, then you have a problem.
(Via Christian - @xtiandc)
Amusing column from Bob Ford at the Inquirer:
With 2011 in the rearview mirror, it’s time to look ahead and get things moving in the right direction for 2012. Fortunately for the Eagles, the organization has been clever enough to schedule five exhibition games before the offseason officially begins. Andy Reid and his staff, along with the front office, can use these five games to put in place a plan for 2012 that works out even better than the one they devised for 2011. I know it seems impossible, but these are some can-do guys.
Also, tight ends coach Tom Melvin for defensive coordinator!