Is everyone in agreement that McNabb looked sharp, Jackson was impressive in his debut, that everyone turned off their TV sets with a general feeling of happiness with the Eagles performance? Mark me down as a yes on all three counts.
My boss, well mark him down as a no on all three counts. He thinks we all are being a little too Dave Spadaro-like in our evaluation. His arguments...
- Most fans were pleased with McNabb's performance. Did McNabb really shine or was he successful in large part because he was going up against the Steeler's 2nd team defense? Didn't the offense again sputter in the red zone (see 2007 season) when they went up against the 1st team defense? Wouldn't you hope that your starting offense would be able to punch it in against back-ups, as the Eagles did? Unfortunately the Eagles won't be facing back-up units in the regular season. [My opinion is that you can't overlook the fact that Eagles were without Westbrook, Brown, and Andrews (best RB, best WR, and best OL). So 10 pts. isn't too shabby without some of your top weapons.]
- Didn't the Steelers marching down the field on their opening drive bring back painful memories of seasons past? How many times last year were the Eagles in a hole before their offense even took the field? Where is this so called elite Eagles defense? [The Eagles have to face the Steelers during the regular season so they would of been nuts to show the opposition anything outside of some basic defensive schemes.]
- Was DeSean Jackson's strong performance the result of him getting open or the coaches telling the QBs to force feed the ball to Jackson to prove the team was wise in trading out of the first round and stealing Jackson in the 2nd round? Isn't it odd that Curtis (a proven vet) had only one catch? And where were Jackson's skills on punt returns? The area that the coaches supposedly couldn't control for Jackson, he failed to shine. [Pure conspiracy theory!]