NFC East holdouts/contract problems

No way... they may still be the team to beat in the NFC East, but I predict they finish no better than 3rd in the division this year. Towards the end of October, two things will be obvious:

1) TO does not guarantee wins; and
2) McNabb, while a very good QB, is not as good as he looked last year. He will revert to his 2003 stats.

Trust me when I say I hate the Eagles as much as anyone possibly can. I have to deal with their annoying fans every day living here in Philly. But I really don't see any way the Eagles don't win at least 10-11 games.
1) I'm not sure I understand your point about TO not guaranteeing wins. The Eagles have been the class of the NFC for years before him, and they were again last year with him. Certainly having him on the team doesn't make them any worse.
2) If McNabb returns to 2003 form, the Eagles would potentially be looking at 12-4 and another NFC Championship game, wouldn't they? That's what they accomplished in 2003. Nevermind the fact that now McNabb has T.O. and in 2003 McNabb had, basically, zero receivers.......I just don't see McNabb falling that far that fast.......and even if he does, the Eagles have won with him playing mediocre in the past.

Again, I hate the Eagles with a passion, but I don't think any amout of off-season controversey takes them off of the NFC East pedistal (sp?). They are clearly the team to beat in the NFC East and I fully expect them to win at least 10-11 games (as much as I hate to say it).

No way... they may still be the team to beat in the NFC East, but I predict they finish no better than 3rd in the division this year. Towards the end of October, two things will be obvious:

1) TO does not guarantee wins; and
2) McNabb, while a very good QB, is not as good as he looked last year. He will revert to his 2003 stats.

No better than 3rd?

I really wish that would happen but I just don't see them dropping off that much.

The TO and McNabb combo was deadly last year, as long as they can iron out their differences on the field, which I think they will, I don't see how they won't have as good of a connection this year if not better.

Even if McNabb's numbers fall off a bit which they just may, he's still one of the top QBs in the league. Even before TO he was taking the Eagles to NFC Championship games.

I think that a bigger deal than T.O. (I know, it's hard to believe) are the absences of Brian Westbrook (holdout) and Corey Simon (refuses to sign franchise tender). There isn't an every down back on the Eagles roster (including Westbrook, come to think of it) and the absence of the prohibitive starter has to be a concern. Simon may not be the lynchpin of the Eagles D, but they think enough of him to pay him the average of the top three at his position. It's hard to believe that they don't have plans for him.\

I definitely think that the absence of Westbrook is a much bigger problem. He and Owens fed off each other because they both drew coverage. Say Westbrook isn't there, other teams only have one receiver to cover.

Good post

I thought Westbrook signed a one year deal back in the spring?

I thought Westbrook signed a one year deal back in the spring?
He did, Adam Schefter said today on NFL Total Access that if Westbrook does not show up by Aug. 8 that due to the terms of the collective bargaining agreement, Westbrook must show up in camp 30 days before the NFL's first game -- otherwise he will lose an accrued season and could not become an unrestricted free agent after this season.

The Eagles can fine him like $6,000.00 a day until he comes to camp. The funny thing is that Westbrook agreed to the terms listed above when he signed his contract... :biggthump

He did, Adam Schefter said today on NFL Total Access that if Westbrook does not show up by Aug. 8 that due to the terms of the collective bargaining agreement, Westbrook must show up in camp 30 days before the NFL's first game -- otherwise he will lose an accrued season and could not become an unrestricted free agent after this season.

The Eagles can fine him like $6,000.00 a day until he comes to camp. The funny thing is that Westbrook agreed to the terms listed above when he signed his contract... :biggthump
Almost a quote from Schefter's NFL.com article (http://nfl.com/nflnetwork/story/8698928):
BETHLEHEM, Pa. (Aug. 2, 2005) -- Mark this one down: Eagles holdout running back Brian Westbrook will end his holdout by Aug. 8.

He has to. Under the terms of the collective bargaining agreement, Westbrook must show up in camp 30 days before the NFL's first game -- otherwise he will lose an accrued season and could not become an unrestricted free agent after this season.

Westbrook subjected himself to this rule when he signed his one-year tender during the offseason. Now that he is under contract, the Eagles can fine Westbrook $6,000 for every day of training camp he misses. Assuming he is out of camp until Aug. 8, Westbrook faces losing another $42,000 in fines in what is an ill-advised holdout. And he risks losing a lot more if he is not in camp anytime soon.


It appears that Westbrook was under the (mistaken?) impression that he was signing his RFA offer to guarantee his staying with the Eagles, and wanted to negotiate a long-term contract thereafter.

I think the difference between McNabb's stats in the following areas are directly related to TO being added to their roster last year:

2003:
PCT: 57.5
TD: 16
Rate: 79.6

2004:
PCT: 64.0
TD: 31
Rate: 104.7

I know, I know... the Eagles have made it to the NFC Championship for four straight... I know there's more to being a Championship caliber team than simply the McNabb/TO chemistry. However, I think a big part of their success last year was due to that chemistry, and the fact that defenders had to account for TO, giving Westbrook good production.

My assertion is that the chemistry between McNabb and TO is gone now, and McNabb's numbers will be closer to his 2003 stats, leaving the NFC East open to more competive teams now.

I know, I know... the Eagles have made it to the NFC Championship for four straight... I know there's more to being a Championship caliber team than simply the McNabb/TO chemistry. However, I think a big part of their success last year was due to that chemistry, and the fact that defenders had to account for TO, giving Westbrook good production.

My assertion is that the chemistry between McNabb and TO is gone now, and McNabb's numbers will be closer to his 2003 stats, leaving the NFC East open to more competive teams now.
The other thing about those 2003 numbers is that the supporting cast was much deeper then. Staley, Buckhalter, and Westbrook all had productive seasons, combining for 20 rushing TDs. The top receivers on the team were Thrash, Westbrook, Pinkston, Staley, Mitchell, LJ Smith, and Chad Lewis. Two of those players are on this team, one of which is in a holdout.

I'm sure there are players ready to step up and be weapons. I'm obviously not counting the Eagles out. I'm just saying their path to success is not guaranteed.