For Ravens defense, mission accomplished
It was great to see the Ravens' defense bounce back with a strong effort against the Eagles, especially after the way they got bounced around by the New York Giants nearly a week ago. But please, let's not get too carried away.
That was the worst Eagles team I've seen in quite a while. Quarterback Donovan McNabb started the season off strong, but he was atrocious, and refuses to make plays outside of the pocket with his legs anymore. Running back Brian Westbrook, bothered by injuries, was not a factor and the Eagles don't have a quality receiver or a quarterback who can get him the ball.
With all that said, the Ravens went out and did what they needed to do. They squashed a really bad Eagles football team at home, especially in the second half. The Ravens did ease some concerns about some of their veteran players running out of gas down the stretch, especially on the defensive side.
Those guys looked pretty fresh to me.
Comments
I'm no Eagles expert, but this team beat the Steelers earlier this years and kept them out of the end zone, so how are they a "bad team"?
Two passes that we snatched from them could have gone the other way and this ballgame would have been very, very different! DeSean Jackson may only have one touchdown catch but the kid has a great future
It is an affront to the Ravens defense to downgrade the Eagles all of a sudden, despite their dismal outing against the Bengals. It is apparent that they didn't bounce back from that poor performance and the media swirl that dogged them the rest of the week about McNabb's comments.
Posted by: SC_Raven_fan | November 24, 2008 10:23 AM
I'm simply tired of hearing how bad a team is once the Ravens beat them. We beat the Browns, twice, and we kept heraing there such a bad team. While they were the only team to actually beat the GIANTS. Now we hear the Eagles are awful, when they have a tough defense, that sends a blitz on every defensive play. They also beat a really good Steelers team.
Lets just give the Ravens there due props, and the league in general. Any team in this league can win on any given Sunday. To be little a win, is absurd. A win in the NFL is very hard to achieve. If we had beat the Titans, the media would have said Collins is old, and we beat a team with a mediocre offense.
Posted by: Ravens_Fan | November 24, 2008 10:39 AM
Mike, come on. Much of the reason why the Eagles were so bad is because the Ravens played so good.
Posted by: Scott Thomason | November 24, 2008 11:48 AM
DEFENSE DEFENSE DEFENSE You guys Rock!!!!
Posted by: grey32 | November 24, 2008 11:53 AM
Funny Mike because if this team was so bad then why did you have the Ravens barely beating them and most of your colleagues had us losing to them? I remember you talking about the NFC East teams last week like they were invincible. Didn't the Eagles lose to the Giants two weeks ago by a last minute play?
Posted by: jeff | November 24, 2008 12:24 PM
Tha's not an affront, it's the plain and simple truth. The Eagles were perennial contenders in the NFC East, and in fact, they used to the class of the conference. McNabb never recovered after Terrell Owens got inside his head, and frankly, this isn't close to being the same team. Yes, they beat the Steelers, but the Browns beat the Giants - and they're certainly not an elite team. No disrespect, but you're using faulty logic. That's like saying the Dolphins weren't that bad last year, after all, they did beat our precious Ravens.
Posted by: Bryan | November 24, 2008 12:49 PM
I'm usually on your side Mike, but I think you are going overboard with the negativity. Why not mention this was the first team the Ravens beat with a winning record? The Eagles did look bad but maybe it was because the Ravens defense did so well?
Posted by: Jake | November 24, 2008 1:10 PM
I am constantly amazed when the football experts in the media use the phrase, "but they have only beaten teams with loosing records", as if it's the winning teams responsibility to play only teams with winning records.
We can agreee that in 2008 Cleveland, Cincinnati,Philadelphia, and Houston are not having good years. In 2007 these teams posted a combined record of 33-31 9(.515 winning percentage) while the Ravens finished 5-11(.313 winning percentage). The Ravens probably won't reach the Superbowl this year may not make the play-offrs, but let's give them credit for they way they have played this season and for ..WINNING!!!
Posted by: Ed | November 24, 2008 2:15 PM
Yes you are correct the Eagles 2 weeks ago went up and down the field agianst the Giants with no problem and lost in the last seconds. But I guess in the last 2 weeks they became one of the worst teams in football according to Mike Preston. There is no way it could have been that we played well.... never that
Posted by: Tony | November 24, 2008 2:17 PM
Wow, the team that was supposed to finish last in the AFC North looked tired after 3 straight road games. There only loss on that trip was to the one loss reigning super bowl champs.
The come back home and dominate on defense and survive on offense. Although the pass play to clayton was probably one of the best qb/offensive calls/execution in the past 10 years. The way the set it up with the heap out on the play before and how flacco rifled the ball right to clayton after looking right was BEAUTIFUL!
Yea, I'm drinking the COOL AID but I'm guessing the ravens are favored in 4 of the last 5 games. They won't be favored in BIG d. Yes I think they will be -1 favorite against Pburgh at home assuming they win the next to very winnable and winnable games!
LET's GO FLACCO
Posted by: jamaltimore | November 24, 2008 3:34 PM
The column sort of reminds me of the stuff I read on message boards. It is never the Ravens that do well, it is always te other team that plays poorly.
Posted by: Fells Point Craig | November 26, 2008 7:11 AM