Skip to main content

Philadelphia Eagles 49 Oakland Raiders 20

After tonight, we'll have made it through Week 9 of the regular season, and after nine games, I'm still clueless on how to accurately evaluate the Philadelphia Eagles, who are 4-5 following their 49-20 crushing of the Oakland Raiders. 

Prior to this game, the Eagles had been outscored 32-10 in their previous two games - both losses. In those two games, Michael Vick re-aggravated his hamstring injury, Nick Foles suffered a concussion, and rookie Matt Barkley looked like a definite rookie. LeSean McCoy was ineffective in the running game. DeSean Jackson seemed to limp over to the sidelines every third play. The special teams unit was more inconsistent than Mitt Romney during election season. The lone bright spot for the team appeared to be their improving defense. But, my, how things can change in a week.

With Vick still nursing the hamstring injury, Foles was cleared by doctors to start the game, and following the worst outing of his NFL career in the team's 17-3 loss to the Dallas Cowboys two weeks ago, Foles had his best showing in the team's demolition of the Oakland Raiders defense. For the game, Foles completed 22 of 28 pass attempts for 406 yards (14.5 per), and 7 touchdowns - tying an NFL record. His quarterback rating for the day was a perfect 158.3 - the first such rating of the NFL season. He didn't turn the ball over, was sacked two times for five yards, and also ran the ball three times for 14 yards (4.7 per). He spread the ball around very nicely, as seven Philly receivers caught passes, with DeSean Jackson and Riley Cooper leading the way, each catching 5 passes for over 100 yards a piece (150 for Jackson and 139 for Cooper). The running game still wasn't incredibly effective. For the third straight game, LeSean McCoy was held to less than 4.0 yards per carry, as he finished with 44 yards on 12 carries (3.7 per). To his credit, he did also catch four passes for 36 yards and a touchdown. What's really amazing about the Eagles' offensive performance is the fact they gained 542 yards in just 57 plays (9.5 per). Oakland ran 35 more plays than Philadelphia. The Eagles only had the ball for a little over 22 minutes in the game. 

It's difficult to properly evaluate Philly's defense in this game considering they were up by so much throughout most of it. Oakland did gain 560 yards for the game, but were limited to 20 points. The Eagles were also +2 in the turnover department, which is always critical. No matter how one wants to spin it, though, the Eagles defense has only allowed 93 points in the past five games (18.6 per) after allowing 138 in their first four (34.5 per).

With this win, the Eagles were able to keep pace with the Dallas Cowboys, who came back to beat the Minnesota Vikings yesterday to improve to 5-4. The Eagles, still a game back of Dallas at 4-5, will have to travel to Green Bay to take on the Packers, before coming back home to face the Washington Redskins. While it's difficult for me to see Philly going to Lambeau Field and beating the Packers, I also didn't expect the Eagles to put up 49 points yesterday in a route of the typically pesky Oakland Raiders. Week in and week out, I don't know what to expect from this team. Given that, thank goodness I'm not a gambling man, because I wouldn't have any idea how to pick these Philly games. I would probably just flip a coin. Heads, Nick Foles goes 11 for 29 for 80 yards and tails, he completes 22 of 28 passes for over 400 yards and 7 touchdowns.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun
2 comments
Read more

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i
Post a Comment
Read more

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"
Post a Comment
Read more