NFL Week 12

[Guest Vitamin X]

So, how about that Philly game next week? If their weakness is run defense, Green Bay has three guys (hopefully if Ahman's good to go for next week) who can run at will on them. I'm feeling good about our chances.

 

Run defense has been much better in the past few weeks ever since Simoneau was replaced with Trotter. Giants gained 135 yards on the ground, but most of that was in the 1st drive and in garbage time. The run D contained Tiki quite well other than that. I think Green Bay needs to worry about who can cover Owens in their secondary. Also Green Bay has to travel after a short week.

 

I don't EVER want to hear anyone hyping the Rams up again. I think the Eagles might hang 50 on them in the dome in a few weeks.

Bah, fuck Jeremiah Trotter. Harris and Sharper can blanket T.O. just like we have to deal with Moss every year. Aside from that, I've figured the best way to beat the Packers is to:

 

#1. Win the battle in the trenches against the Green Bay O-Line. Easier said than done.

 

#2. Establish the slot receiver as a huge threat. That's Green Bay's achilles heel. While they have Harris, Sharper, Roman, and whoever the fuck covering, the #3 has consistently gotten open and made huge plays. Witness Shaun McDonald and Isaac Bruce having great games (while Torry Holt was shutdown by Harris). I don't think the Eagles have anyone who really scare anyone regarding the run, so they've gotta do what they do best and keep at it: Pass, pass, pass.

 

#3. Win the battle in terms of time of possession. Green Bay will definitely be coming out to run like hell in this game. I wouldn't be surprised if they used a gameplan similar to what they did against Carolina in Week One. Bore the everloving shit out of the Philly crowd, take them out of it early, and let T.O. catch and celebrate all he wants. If Green Bay shuts down Philly's running game, like they should, it comes down to how long McNabb's arm strength can keep from underthrowing his receivers like he does when he has to throw too much and too often. If it turns into a shootout, that might not be good for Philadelphia.

 

Rams are now giving up 8.3 YPC on defense and Davenport is averaging an insane 9.4.

 

While the Rams run D is atrocious, Davenport is an awesome back. Gotta give him that much credit.

[therealworldschampion 0]

Harris and Sharper can blanket T.O. just like we have to deal with Moss every year.

 

If you're hoping that Al Fucking Harris is going to be able to blanket Owens without at least 3 pass interference flags throughout the game, then GB is in trouble. Believe me, I saw Harris play as an Eagle, there's a reason his name was Al "Throw The Flag" Harris. Sharper will be a tough one, which is why Pinkston and Chad Lewis need to play well.

 

#1. Win the battle in the trenches against the Green Bay O-Line. Easier said than done.

 

Means that they'll have to dominate Kearse, easier said than done. And the D-Line is a lot healthier than they were last year in the playoffs, so the Eagles will be able to rotate their defensive linemen more.

 

#2. Establish the slot receiver as a huge threat. That's Green Bay's achilles heel. While they have Harris, Sharper, Roman, and whoever the fuck covering, the #3 has consistently gotten open and made huge plays. Witness Shaun McDonald and Isaac Bruce having great games (while Torry Holt was shutdown by Harris). I don't think the Eagles have anyone who really scare anyone regarding the run, so they've gotta do what they do best and keep at it: Pass, pass, pass.

 

You're forgetting about Brian Westbrook, who has really come on since coming back from the injury, scat back who is deadly when catching the ball out of the backfield(didn't play in the playoffs last year, he was injured). And I'm sure Packer fans remember our #3 reciever, First Down Freddie.

 

#3. Win the battle in terms of time of possession. Green Bay will definitely be coming out to run like hell in this game. I wouldn't be surprised if they used a gameplan similar to what they did against Carolina in Week One. Bore the everloving shit out of the Philly crowd, take them out of it early, and let T.O. catch and celebrate all he wants. If Green Bay shuts down Philly's running game, like they should, it comes down to how long McNabb's arm strength can keep from underthrowing his receivers like he does when he has to throw too much and too often. If it turns into a shootout, that might not be good for Philadelphia.

 

Green Bay cannot let the Eagles get on them early, as the Eagles have shown that if they get on a team early, then the opposing team has to throw most downs and that frees up the pass rush. If the Eagles can do a serviceable job on Ahman, and can get Westbrook going early, then they've got a good shot at winning this game.

 

What I'm worried about as an Eagle fan is if the O-line can hold up. Mayberry is banged up and I'm not sure if Artis Hicks will be ready this week. Steve Sciullo did a decent job last week, but they need to be healthy there.

 

Also there is the small matter of how much Simoneau will decide to suck this week, as Bubba Franks scares me.

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

John Navarre is going to be starting for Arizona next week.

[Guest Vitamin X]

*sigh* Eagles fans...

 

If you're hoping that Al Fucking Harris is going to be able to blanket Owens without at least 3 pass interference flags throughout the game, then GB is in trouble. Believe me, I saw Harris play as an Eagle, there's a reason his name was Al "Throw The Flag" Harris. Sharper will be a tough one, which is why Pinkston and Chad Lewis need to play well.

 

That's funny. Al Harris was able to shut down Marcus Robinson, Andre Johnson, and Torry Holt in three consecutive weeks without drawing a single P.I. flag. The key to the Eagles offense will be either Freddie Mitchell or Todd Pinkston, whoever decides to play #3.

 

Means that they'll have to dominate Kearse, easier said than done. And the D-Line is a lot healthier than they were last year in the playoffs, so the Eagles will be able to rotate their defensive linemen more.

You DO realize Green Bay's offensive line is among the best if not the best in the league, right? Apparently not. This'll be tougher than the Vikings or the Texans D-Line, but the Eagles defense is on par with the Rams defense from what I've seen.. in terms of personnel talent, at least. Jim Johnson will be the man counted on to confuse the Packer offense. And it doesn't matter if the D-line wasn't healthy in the playoffs, they still got dominated in the Monday Night game last year. It'll take a hell of a defensive line to get a push, believe me.

 

You're forgetting about Brian Westbrook, who has really come on since coming back from the injury, scat back who is deadly when catching the ball out of the backfield(didn't play in the playoffs last year, he was injured). And I'm sure Packer fans remember our #3 reciever, First Down Freddie.

 

You mean that Brian Westbrook who only shows up big to play the Giants and disappears against everyone else? Yeah I know him. And he played in the MNF game last year, SURPRISE! he wasn't that great in that game either. First Down Freddie? Oh, you mean Bad Spot on 4th and 26 Freddie (watch the game tape, he was down one yard short of the first down and the refs spotted it an extra couple feet. Doesn't make the play any less amazing, though). Yeah, he'll be important.

 

Green Bay cannot let the Eagles get on them early, as the Eagles have shown that if they get on a team early, then the opposing team has to throw most downs and that frees up the pass rush. If the Eagles can do a serviceable job on Ahman, and can get Westbrook going early, then they've got a good shot at winning this game.

 

If Philadelphia gets on Green Bay early, it can turn into a shootout. Which I'd love to see considering Green Bay was able to hold their own against Indianapolis in a shootout.

 

Also there is the small matter of how much Simoneau will decide to suck this week, as Bubba Franks scares me.

 

Eh, I wouldn't be all too terribly worried about Bubba. He's been a terribly average player this season. Even in the redzone they've been looking in the strangest places, usually a running back out in the flat or Javon or Donald in the corner of the endzone. HERE'S A NOVEL IDEA: Run the ball inside the 5! (I hate passes in the redzone, especially with the interceptions that Brett Favre is liable to)

[therealworldschampion 0]

That's funny. Al Harris was able to shut down Marcus Robinson, Andre Johnson, and Torry Holt in three consecutive weeks without drawing a single P.I. flag. The key to the Eagles offense will be either Freddie Mitchell or Todd Pinkston, whoever decides to play #3.

 

Agreed about Pinkston and Mitchell having to step up, and Owens does line up in the slot at times, so whoever is covering the slot reciever has to be ready for that. I guess with Harris I've seen him get burned sometimes and his emotions have been known to get the best of him, which gets him in big trouble.

 

You DO realize Green Bay's offensive line is among the best if not the best in the league, right? Apparently not. This'll be tougher than the Vikings or the Texans D-Line, but the Eagles defense is on par with the Rams defense from what I've seen.. in terms of personnel talent, at least. Jim Johnson will be the man counted on to confuse the Packer offense. And it doesn't matter if the D-line wasn't healthy in the playoffs, they still got dominated in the Monday Night game last year. It'll take a hell of a defensive line to get a push, believe me.

 

The Green Bay line is quite good, so if they can handle the blitzes Johnson will send, then they should be fine. And don't compare the d-line from last year's Monday night game to this one, this defensive line is quite different from the one last year.

 

Eh, I wouldn't be all too terribly worried about Bubba. He's been a terribly average player this season. Even in the redzone they've been looking in the strangest places, usually a running back out in the flat or Javon or Donald in the corner of the endzone. HERE'S A NOVEL IDEA: Run the ball inside the 5! (I hate passes in the redzone, especially with the interceptions that Brett Favre is liable to)

 

You don't understand how bad Simoneau can suck. There's a reason they replaced him at MLB, AND Eddie George burned him 2 weeks ago if it wasn't for that strip.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Westbrook is no better than Moe Williams/Mewelde Moore/Michael Bennett, Domanick Davis, and is certainly not better than Marshall Faulk/Stephen Jackson, and they were all held under 100, and close to or around 50 yards or less. Considering the Eagles O-line is also banged up, I'm not concerned about the running attack as much as I am about the pass.

[therealworldschampion 0]

Considering the Eagles O-line is also banged up, I'm not concerned about the running attack as much as I am about the pass.

 

It's only the guards that are banged up. Thomas, Runyan, and Fraley are all healthy. My guess is Mayberry should be good to go on Sunday and Hicks maybe, he's done a good job in place of Andrews.

[therealworldschampion 0]

Another thing about Pinkston, he's been decent this year, another good side effect of Owens being in the offense.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Y'know, I think the Eagles and Packers can both beat the Falcons, so if we keep it up for the rest of the season, and god forbid make it to the Super Bowl, I think the Eagles have a better chance against the Patriots and Steelers, but the Packers have a better chance against the Colts, and I think they might be able to put up a fight against the Steelers as well. The Falcons would get demolished by any actual team, lord knows how they got to 8-2.

[therealworldschampion 0]

You know, I'd love to play Atlanta in the playoffs, only because I'd love to see Vick get creamed by Dawkins again like 2 years ago in the divisional playoffs.

 

This is very much a preview of the NFC Championship game on Sunday, I could definitley see Green Bay beating Atlanta in the Georgia Dome(I mean come on, Atlanta having to sell playoff tickets, comedy writes itself there.) I think one of these 2 teams are coming out of the NFC as:

 

1. Atlanta won't win the NFC with a first-time head coach, I think they're losing 2 more times this year before the playoffs, and the Eagles defense is tailored to stop QBs like Vick.

 

2. Seattle is way too much of a schizophrenic team to win the NFC, though I wouldn't want to face them because of Alexander.

 

3. Minnesota needs HFA to get to the Super Bowl unless they play Atlanta on the road, I can't see them winning in Philadelphia or Green Bay in January.

 

4. St.Louis......two words: Mike Martz.

 

Indy won't get to the Super Bowl, I could see them possibly beating Pittsburgh but definitley not New England, the Patriots seems to be the new Florida Gators for Manning.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Personally, I would love for Green Bay to beat Atlanta and Philadelphia in the playoffs this year to atone for past playoff failures. Especially Atlanta in the Georgiadome. The Lambeau Field mystique was never meant to be broken.

 

Indy won't get to the Super Bowl, I could see them possibly beating Pittsburgh but definitley not New England, the Patriots seems to be the new Florida Gators for Manning.

 

Well Indianapolis is playing a lot like the 1984 Dolphins, and they made it to the big game with just pure offense. It's that Manning is playing at such a ridiculously high level, noone can stop the Colts, shootout or not.

 

I'd love to see Green Bay-Pittsburgh in the big game. I don't remember the last time we've played them, although from what I remember I don't believe it was pretty. Philly-New England is what I had pegged for the Super Bowl last year until the Eagles choked again in the Championship game. The Eagles really have to win or at least show up in the big game SOMETIME. It's kind of like the late 90's Bucs or the Gannon-era Raiders. They were both so consistently good for so long they had to get there eventually, and they did.

 

I think we'll maybe see Philadelphia-Indianapolis in the Super Bowl a couple years down the line, and it'll be a scary game.

[therealworldschampion 0]

I'd love to see Green Bay-Pittsburgh in the big game. I don't remember the last time we've played them, although from what I remember I don't believe it was pretty. Philly-New England is what I had pegged for the Super Bowl last year until the Eagles choked again in the Championship game. The Eagles really have to win or at least show up in the big game SOMETIME. It's kind of like the late 90's Bucs or the Gannon-era Raiders. They were both so consistently good for so long they had to get there eventually, and they did.

 

I will say until the day I die that had Troy Vincent been healthy and not had a groin injury in 2001, the Eagles would've beaten the Rams in the NFC title game. Losing Correll Buckhalter in that game hurt too since he was killing the Rams on the ground, and N.D. Kalu just missed blocking a punt in the 4th that would've definitley gotten the Eagles more points and had won it.

 

2002 was just a Stomach Punch Game x3,000. There is no reason Blaine Bishop should've been in on that 71-yard Jurevicius pass play or the Keyshawn TD catch if he was injured, he was getting killed out there. Almost 2 years later and that game still haunts me.

 

Last year was less depressing since I thought Carolina had a good shot at winning anyway, I personally wanted the Rams because Mike Moron would've found a way to lose.

 

I really want the Eagles to win it all this year simply because I've never seen a Philly championship in my lifetime(Sixers won their last title a month before I was born.) The Phillies will probably never win a championship thanks to their dumbass ownership, the Sixers can't compete with Detroit or the Western Conference, and who knows whether the Flyers are ever coming back or not.

[Gert T 0]

I am against the flex schedule for MNF, but with Dallas at Seattle and Kansas City at Tennessee on the horizon......

[cabbageboy 0]

In all fairness those teams all made the playoffs last season, so there was some plausible reason for them being scheduled for MNF. You would THINK a KC/TN matchup would be good before the season since they went 13-3 and 12-4 last year.

 

I can't help but think with T.O. or without him, the Eagles will just find some way to lose in the playoffs. Oh, and I can certainly see the Falcons winning out from here on, albeit none too impressively. All they have left are jobbers like the Saints, Bucs, Panthers, Raiders, etc. The last game vs. Seattle might be tough if Seattle SHOWS UP, but that is certainly debatable.

 

Thus the question becomes: If Philly loses to GB or maybe the Rams and the Falcons win out, who gets home field? Both would have the same record in conference (each would have one loss in conf., one loss out of conf.), and both would be perfect in the division. There isn't the sort of head to head tie breaker that would determine Pittsburgh and NE.

[Slayer 0]

Go fig, when I actually root for the Rams and need them to win... they get blown out.

 

Next up: hoping Philly beats GB like they did us.

[Slayer 0]

Indy won't get to the Super Bowl, I could see them possibly beating Pittsburgh but definitley not New England, the Patriots seems to be the new Florida Gators for Manning.

If it's anything like Peyton and Florida, the Colts won't beat the Patriots until after he's gone.

 

Well Indianapolis is playing a lot like the 1984 Dolphins

A team which got shut down when they played a real defense led by an excellent coaching staff (which could be compared to the modern Patriots)

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Thus the question becomes: If Philly loses to GB or maybe the Rams and the Falcons win out, who gets home field? Both would have the same record in conference (each would have one loss in conf., one loss out of conf.), and both would be perfect in the division. There isn't the sort of head to head tie breaker that would determine Pittsburgh and NE.

 

Strength of victory. In which case, Green Bay having beaten Philly, St Louis & Minnesota would probably win out.

[therealworldschampion 0]

Strength of victory. In which case, Green Bay having beaten Philly, St Louis & Minnesota would probably win out.

 

Don't the tiebreakers for HFA go like this?

 

1. Head-to-head

2. Conference record

3. Record against common opponents

4. Margin of victory

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Strength of victory. In which case, Green Bay having beaten Philly, St Louis & Minnesota would probably win out.

 

Don't the tiebreakers for HFA go like this?

 

1. Head-to-head

2. Conference record

3. Record against common opponents

4. Margin of victory

I know it came down to strength of victory last year, because Green Bay needed to win the division outright (via Minnesota's loss to Arizona), because both Minnesota & Seattle had beaten tougher opponents. I think they brought it in not too long ago, possibly last year was the first time they used it.

[The Man in Blak 0]

EDIT: Nevermind, wasn't paying attention.

[Guest The Winter Of My Discontent]

Whoever thinks the Packers (barring a complete fluke) can beat the Eagles...or even match up to them, is completely fucked in the head. In every facet of the game, the Eagles are better than the Packers. McNabb is much better than Favre is now. Once Westbrook gets healthy, he'll once again be a dangerous threat from the backfield. Let alone with the pressure taken off Pinkston with T.O there, now he can just be a dangerous #2 weapon. And don't get started on Owens, who'd be MVP if it wasn't for Peyton. Their only weakness coming into the season looked to be in the secondary, and even those guys are outplaying Taylor and Vincent on their respective teams. I don't think the Patriots could beat them...nor do i think the Steelers could if they played again.

 

And Peyton will NOT lead his team to the super bowl. I don't see how he's been deemed as being so great as his past 12 TD passes have been on subpar defenses. Their defense alone is quite regretable. And I wish people will stop with the Peyton = Marino talk. Edgerrin James totally opens up the passing game by being a dangerous threat from the backfield. Once he walks after this yera, they won't be nearly as good. Has anyone noticed when James struggles, so does Peyton? Its not a coincidence.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Thus the question becomes: If Philly loses to GB or maybe the Rams and the Falcons win out, who gets home field? Both would have the same record in conference (each would have one loss in conf., one loss out of conf.), and both would be perfect in the division. There isn't the sort of head to head tie breaker that would determine Pittsburgh and NE.

If GB and Atlanta win out (which would obviously include Green Bay beating Philadelphia as well), they would still get the #3 and #2 spots, respectively, due to their record. Philly's only lost one game all season, to the Steelers, so if they lose this weekend, it would only be their second loss. The only tiebreaker to consider there would be between Philly and Atlanta in that case for homefield advantage but Green Bay would still get only the #3 spot, still good for one home playoff game, but no bye.

 

Whoever thinks the Packers (barring a complete fluke) can beat the Eagles...or even match up to them, is completely fucked in the head.

I didn't know ESPN posted here!

In every facet of the game, the Eagles are better than the Packers. McNabb is much better than Favre is now. Once Westbrook gets healthy, he'll once again be a dangerous threat from the backfield. Let alone with the pressure taken off Pinkston with T.O there, now he can just be a dangerous #2 weapon. And don't get started on Owens, who'd be MVP if it wasn't for Peyton. Their only weakness coming into the season looked to be in the secondary, and even those guys are outplaying Taylor and Vincent on their respective teams. I don't think the Patriots could beat them...nor do i think the Steelers could if they played again.

 

So in other words, the Eagles are better than the Packers, although you don't state WHY, and if the Packers win this weekend, regardless of how well they play or how decisive their victory, it would be a complete fluke? That doesn't seem to make a whole lot of sense. Believe it or not, there's a lot of similarities between the Eagles and the Rams, the two noticeable differences being 1. The coaching, obviously, and 2. Philadelphia's pass offense is better, but their rush offense isn't as good (I don't care how many people hype up Brian Westbrook, he is no better than Stephen Jackson and Marshall Faulk combined). On defense, they're certainly better, but the Packer offensive line isn't going to give up many plays in the backfield, and the Packers have three guys who can go for 100 yards (and have before) on any given day in the backfield. Is McNabb REALLY playing all that better than Favre is? I doubt it. On the season, Donovan has only more TD and 2,892 yards to Favre's 2,841. Stat-wise, they're dead-even. Of course Favre has almost twice as many interceptions, but you have to remember not only the 4 game skid, but just that Favre always plays that recklessly.

 

Here's another interesting stat: The Eagles have allowed defenses to get to McNabb 23 times already, while Favre has only been sacked 5 times all season.

 

It'll be a good game, and to say they don't match up evenly is ridiculous.

[Guest The Winter Of My Discontent]

Are you honestly trying to compare McNabb and Favre right now? Really?

 

McNabb has thrown 23 TDs and 5 INTs

Favre has thrown 22 TDs and 11 INTs

 

Favre's INT number is closer to the bottom of the league than it is to McNabbs.

 

So what if McNabb has been sacked more than Favre? Judging by the numbers, Favre probably would've been better been sacked than to throw more interceptions.

 

Here's the QB ratings

 

McNabb 105.8

Favre 95.2

 

And as far as the Packer's go. In their streak, Green Bay has defeated St. Louis (who is the most inconsistant team in the league), Houston (a below .500 team, barely beat them), Minnesota (another inconsistant team who played without Moss, and still barely beat them), Washington (need I explain?), Dallas (again, need I explain), and Detroit (yep.)

 

They've lost to the Giants (a team the Eagles have handled fine twice), the Titans (who are playing horrible football), and then destroyed by the Bears.

 

Besides, the Vikings, the Packers have wne t on their winning streak against below .500 teams. Thats nothing to really get excited about. Favre is tremendous, don't get me wrong - but he's past his prime. He's done extremely well with very little to work with. But you cannot compare him to McNabb right now. Plus Donovan has so many more weapons in his offensive arsenal.

 

And as far as the defense goes:

 

Against the Rams last night, the Pack gave up a whopping 400 yards which they cannot do against McNabb, even against Vick and the stingy Falcons defense.

 

Did I back up my belief that the Packers streak is somewhat misleading, and that Favre's offensive production isn't actually that close to McNabb's? Did I mention that the Packers defense got torched last night, and that the dominant Eagles offense would be able to rip it to shit?

 

So yes, I am going to be ridiculous and say it isn't close. They don't match up that closely. If you need me to go position to position I'll do it, even though it'll be a laboursome ordeal to prove a point I've been contending for awhile.

 

Eagles are the top of the class in the NFC, and really, its not even close.

[The Man in Blak 0]

You know, they're 10-1 and, on paper, they're a great matchup for anybody...but it's hard to really endorse the Eagles as a hands-down winner for any game, given their propensity for chokery at the most inopportune time. They're just one TO/McNabb sideline blowup from being right back where they've been the last four years.

[Guest The Winter Of My Discontent]

The Eagles have choked on offense every time. McNabb had frigging James Thrash as his #1 receiver. Pinkston was dropping catches. But they have T.O now. But I'll agree they will have a greater chance of choking without a healthy Brian Westbrook. He's the key. This is by far the best unit the Eagles have put on a field in the Andy Reid years. We'd be doing them a great disservice by not putting that kind of pressure on them. They are the superior team in the NFC. Barring injuries, I just do NOT see them not representing the NFC in the Super Bowl. In some ways, I don't see them losing the Super Bowl. I expect them to be in the Super Bowl.

[Cartman 0]

Well seeing as they will be playing the Patriots, who will be on am 11 game win streak(32 of 33), in the Super Bowl...don't get your hopes too high.

[Guest The Winter Of My Discontent]

Well seeing as they will be playing the Patriots, who will be on am 11 game win streak(32 of 33), in the Super Bowl...don't get your hopes too high.

I never have my hopes up against the Patriots. In fact, if the Steelers would to play them again, I'd take the Pats. But as the injuries are piling up on defense, the Eagles offense may be able to exploit it.

[UseTheSledgehammerUh 0]

I'm going to be mature and address this to all the Green Bay fans...

 

 

*****4th and 26!!!!!!******

 

 

 

Ha ha ha.

 

 

Ha ha ha.

 

 

Ha ha ha.

 

 

"Team of destiny!"

 

"Favre is unstoppable!"

 

"Doing it for his father!"

 

WORST. FUCKING. INTERCEPTION. EVER.

 

4th and 26.

 

Fuck off, Green Bay, you're a joke.

 

I'll be at the game Sunday and I can't wait 'til your team gets violently dropped back down to Earth.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Are you honestly trying to compare McNabb and Favre right now? Really?

 

McNabb has thrown 23 TDs and 5 INTs

Favre has thrown 22 TDs and 11 INTs

 

Favre's INT number is closer to the bottom of the league than it is to McNabbs.

 

So what if McNabb has been sacked more than Favre? Judging by the numbers, Favre probably would've been better been sacked than to throw more interceptions.

 

Here's the QB ratings

 

McNabb 105.8

Favre 95.2

 

Did I back up my belief that the Packers streak is somewhat misleading, and that Favre's offensive production isn't actually that close to McNabb's?

 

I don't believe so. Anytime you throw 11 interceptions, the QB rating is still going to be lower than the other, and McNabb plays a different style of ball than Favre does. Favre's a gunslinger, he'll make the impossible throw and sometimes whiff it into double coverage because he believes he can make any kind of throw from anywhere on the field.. And he's been right 65.1% of the time this season (which is higher than McNabb's 64%). The sack total is EXTREMELY important, because McNabb is an easier quarterback to rattle than Favre, and it's also important because of Green Bay's weakness in the secondary. There's two ways to beat a good passing offense, and that's to either get a ton of pressure on the quarterback (like Carolina was able to do last year despite not having a great secondary) or play well in coverage, obviously. The only way Philly on defense can match up well against Green Bay's offense (who, by the way, are one of only three teams- the other two being San Diego and Indianapolis- to have over 300 points scored so far this season..although the Eagles are close at 293) is to play tough on the receivers.

 

Did I mention that the Packers defense got torched last night, and that the dominant Eagles offense would be able to rip it to shit?

 

Since when was giving up 17 points "getting torched"? I understand the yardage, but that was a simple case of Green Bay's best cover corners not being able to match up with the speed of the Rams receivers. Not to mention that Martz called something like 60+ pass plays, and they've got the weapons to do it. But they couldn't come away with points, which, last I checked, is what wins football games. The 3 turnovers probably didn't help matters much either, although one came in garbage time.

 

And as far as the Packer's go. In their streak, Green Bay has defeated St. Louis (who is the most inconsistant team in the league), Houston (a below .500 team, barely beat them), Minnesota (another inconsistant team who played without Moss, and still barely beat them), Washington (need I explain?), Dallas (again, need I explain), and Detroit (yep.)

 

Funny. Philadelphia has played the exact same opponents, with the only two opponents with winning records being Baltimore- who they barely beat 15-10 -and Pittsburgh, who absolutely demolished them 27-3. The only other non-common opponent between them is Cleveland, another subpar team whose head coach was just fired today because they were so bad, and they still took the Eagles to overtime.

 

Don't get me wrong, Philadelphia is a great team and they're easily the class of the NFC. But to think Green Bay won't give them problems and that they don't have the ability to beat them is asinine. And what's with all the hype you're giving Westbrook? This guy doesn't show up to play against anyone not in the NFC East. He's not on the same level as a great deal many other halfbacks in the league. Philadelphia's key to beating Green Bay on Sunday will be whoever mismatches the Packer secondary in the slot, since that's been a consistent target to move the chains against the Packer defense.

[Guest The Winter Of My Discontent]

Lets no get silly. Favre is unquestionably one of, if not maybe, the greatest QBs of alltime. He's down magnificent things for the Packers. Even in the winter of his career, he's better than 85% of the QBs in the league. McNabb is just in that 15% better than him.