What Giants win DOESN'T mean for Birds
Philly.com, Inquirer, and Daily News coverage of the Eagles
What Giants win DOESN'T mean for Birds
I'm guessing you aren't up today for any long-winded, chin-stroking analysis of what the Giants' Super Bowl victory last night means for the Eagles.
That's good, because I'm not up for writing one.
All through the buildup for what to me became an inevitable Giants victory, I kept thinking about last year's big Super Bowl "lesson," and the bogus concept that every Super Bowl winner produces some sort of blueprint that ensures a Lombardi Trophy next season, if only another organization can copy it.
Last year the Packers won, despite an impressive log of injuries. Backups stepped in at key spots and Green Bay kept going. So the big revelation was that depth is super-important; Eagles management talked about this as part of its offseason planning. This is the "trend" that brought you Ronnie Brown, Steve Smith, Donald Lee, Jarrad Page and others who contributed next to nothing to an 8-8 season.
I dunno what the Eagles will take out of the Giants winning the Super Bowl, despite having lost to Vince Young in November. If the lesson is that drafting guys who are really physically dominant, like Jason Pierre-Paul and Hakeem Nicks, is maybe more important than drafting guys who are captains and good citizens, that might be an OK thing. If the lesson is that "hey, that could have been us, the Giants were 7-7 at one point," well, that would not be a good thing.
I think the Giants won the Super Bowl for two reasons: What should have been a dominant defense all year long woke up, got healthy, or whatever, in December. And Eli Manning was the best quarterback in the postseason.
That last part was the most important; it was what separated the Giants from, say, the 49ers. Eli was sacked 11 times in the playoffs - more than any other quarterback. He still completed 65 percent of his passes, threw for nine touchdowns and was intercepted exactly once. His QB rating was 103.3. He averaged 304.8 passing yards per game.
Good luck copying that "blueprint," NFL GMs. And Eagles fans, do you really see Michael Vick throwing for nine touchdowns and one interception?
In asking the question, don't think I'm mindlessly bashing Vick. I'm not -- Tom Brady didn't do what Manning did, quite, which is why the Patriots aren't the team providing the "lesson" for everyone today. Brady made exactly two Super Bowl mistakes -- the first-play safety and then the interception, when his team was rolling. Otherwise he was spectacular. It wasn't enough.
Manning, for all his foibles, is the reason the Giants have two Super Bowl rings the past five years, an era in which they have never really been a dominant regular-season team. He is lethal, a stone killer, on the biggest stage. The Eagles just don't have that guy. Most other teams don't, either. Including the Patriots.
Also, teams that want to copy the Giants' blueprint should practice having their fumbles bounce straight into the arms of teammates. That helps, too.
To answer your question Les, yes. Vick is capable of going on a six or seven game streak like that. We've seen it with him here already. The trick is timing it correctly. Andy calls it "perfecting the peak." We saw it done in 2004 until the 2nd half of the last game. I'm not sure the supporting cast has it in them.— dragoon6- The Eagles will NEVER win a Super Bowl with Michael Vick as their starting Quarterback. He is a turnover machine. Careless with the football. You can't consecutively beat 3 or 4 playoff teams with that kind of play. The defense would have to throw shutouts for that to happen!! — FetchDixon
- dragoon- you're seriously delusional if you think Vick can perform like Manning in the postseason. Perhaps in the first five or six games of the season, but not in the last half. No way. He wears down and is too small to handle a season of battering. He's not the guy you want at the helm late in the season because his play deteriorates as the season drags on. Eagles will never win a SB with AR and/or Vick at the helm. N E V E R— Sam Crow
- Vick won't win a Super Bowl. Reid won't win a Super Bowl. It's really that simple. Hopefully both will be gone next season. Whether you like it or whether you don't like it...you know the rest.
- "To answer your question Les, yes. Vick is capable of going on a six or seven game streak like that." - Nonsense. Vick is utterly incapable of beating playoff caliber defenses on a consistent basis or winning games when the pressure is on him. He's had 8 years as a starting qb to prove it and hasn't. The rest of this pathetic team is just as incapable. The Giants are far better everywhere except for CB and RB, are coached better and play a better team game. Next year is undoubtedly more of the same for the Birds. Meh.
— philliesphan79 - Specifically, Vick threw 11 touchdowns and no interceptions in 7 games before throwing his first INT against Chicago in 2010.— operagost
- and we saw that guy only a few more times in the rest of 2010, NOT in the 2010 playoffs, and NOT in MOST of 2011. Vick has looked great, but not very often. Most of his time in an Eagles uniform he's been looking like a slightly better version of the old Vick that still turns the rock over - lots of highlights blinding people from seeing what he's doing overall. I'd love to see Vick consistently make plays from the pocket and not turn the ball over, but he hasn't been doing that. — mx55
- Turnovers and takeaways is what both the Eagles season and the Superbowl came down to. With two high powered offices and very poor defenses, if either team played very well, they would have scored many more points then the 21 to 17 score.
So the question is, Can the Eagles turnover the ball two times less per game than they take it away next year? I don't know.... when asked, Vick says yes but than falls back on...but I got to play my game?? the way I always have??— dennismithusa - @sam crow. i give eli manning as much credit as anyone, what he did this year was remarkable. but keep in mind that last season eli manning was one of the worst QBs in the nfl - he was absolutely horrific all season long, whether it was the 1st quarter or the 4th quarter. so while your statement about vick's proneness to injury is legitimate, it is ridiculous to say that vick cannot go on a postseason run, just look at eli's turnaround as an example.— CosmoK
- The difference is that Eli overall gets a little bit better every year - Vick does not. Not saying Eli is an HOF shoo-in nor even 'elite', as if that matters at the end of the day. What Eli has done, though, is deliver 2 SBs in 4 years - so they missed the play-offs for 2 years running....ok...2 titles in 4 years. As a Giants fan I can live with that. — GMEN7777
- At this rate, who cares?? The Eagles, as always, are a bridesmaid and never a bride. Think we're winning it next year? Not likely. An since that is the case.................GO PHILLIES!! Philadelphia's ONLY chance in getting another championship as it stands!— Panthro2011
Comment removed.- Nice parting shot about the fumbles Les. All I could think during the game was how every critical Eagle fumble this year seemed to bounce directly to the OTHER team and how Wes Welker does not drop that pass against the Eagles.— dawkbeast20
