Posted on 10/06/2003 7:34:25 PM PDT by AlwaysLurking
Bill Lyon | McNabb gets by By Bill Lyon Inquirer Columnist
Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb hurdles the Washington Redskins’ Rashad Bauman on his way to a first down during the Eagles’ successful touchdown drive in the fourth quarter. JERRY LODRIGUSS / Inquirer.
In the shadow-streaked gloaming of a golden October day, at the end of one of the most combustible weeks in Philadelphia sports history, the Eagles finally won a game in their new, $512 million playpen.
They did so by the shortest of hairs on their chinny-chin-chins, 27-25, over the pesky and persistent Washington Redskins, and it was as ugly as ugly gets. But at this point, having failed in their first four attempts at the Linc, the Birds were in no position to be picky.
Besides, there are no bonus points for aesthetics. All the Birds know is that they prevailed in one of those games that is played with leg-breaking ferocity. "Physical," these kinds of games are called. Translation: It'll be Wednesday before you can get out of bed without help.
Frankly, the Eagles won this without a spectacular production from their franchise player. They won, in fact, almost in spite of the embattled Donovan McNabb, rather than because of him.
McNabb, embroiled in a controversy not of his own making, bruised his right leg early and was scattershot in his performance, his passes frequently more erratic and sporadic than accurate, and it was difficult not to believe that, even if subconsciously, he was affected by the firestorm that had been ignited by Rush Limbaugh, and perhaps was trying to force the issue.
Certainly such a reaction would only make him human.
McNabb's numbers were pedestrian, and while he threw for one touchdown, he also threw two interceptions, one leading directly to a Redskins touchdown.
Among other assertions, Limbaugh the provocateur had said on a pregame TV show, from which he has since resigned, that McNabb was overrated. This charge flew in the face of facts. But yesterday McNabb was, once again, a subpar shadow of his former self. He has improved only marginally from his first two gruesome games, and is yet to play up to his form of the past.
What matters most is that the Birds have been able to weather his struggles.
After losing their first two, they have won their last two. There seems to be less uncertainty in their effort. Yesterday, they were shaky, to be sure, unable to hold a 10-point lead early and then losing all but two points of an 11-point lead late.
But at least their alarming slide that began this season appears to have been braked. Those Super Bowl aspirations still seem unrealistic off their performance so far, but their season is also only one-fourth done.
They also have deodorized at last the Stink at the Linc. The new place was officially broken in yesterday in true Iggles style - not just with a win but with crowd that was raucous and passionately supportive. Plus, the first fistfights in the stands broke out. So the veneer is gone. Put sawdust on the floor.
For the second game in a row, the Birds got by using a patchwork defensive secondary of rookies and second-year players. Their defense, in fact, schemed and dreamed by wily coordinator Jim Johnson, played heroically.
That defense got to the Redskins' young quarterback, Patrick Ramsey, early. Buffeted about in a three-Eagle maelstrom, he walked woozily to the sideline, and though he played gallantly the rest of the game, there were times when he seemed to show the effects of that battering.
Like McNabb, Ramsey threw two interceptions, one of them a wobbler that was gathered in by defensive end N.D. Kalu, who then loped into the end zone.
With 3 minutes and 10 seconds of the game remaining, Brian Westbrook slithered through a hole at left tackle and 19 yards later was in the end zone.
That made the score 27-16, Birds, and you noted the time, for history purposes: 7:16 p.m. in the East. The Birds had clinched their first Linc win. The Linc Jinx was dead. The crowd agreed. It began to file out.
Oops.
In the ensuing 2 minutes and 57 seconds, Washington scored a field goal and then a touchdown and then was going for the 2-point conversion to get a tie and force overtime, and there was the Redskins receiver, Laveranues Coles, brushing off his defender and pulling away, free in the end zone, the Eagles defensive back Roderick Hood in desperate, flailing, hopeless pursuit, and...
... and Ramsey overthrew him.
By such a slender margin did the Birds prevail.
As for McNabb's conduct during a storm-tossed week, this assessment was forthcoming from the Birds' new fullback, Jon Ritchie, who caught the touchdown pass: "I thought No. 5 handled it like a gentleman. You have to admire the guy. He took something that was swirling around him all week and took it for what it was worth, which wasn't much."
Which is exactly right.
McNabb was X-rayed at halftime, to make sure a bruised right fibula was that and nothing more. He ran with no discernible limp, and in the second half executed a violent, pinwheeling conclusion to a scramble, and rose from that wreckage no worse for the wear.
Then again, this is one tough cookie. Remember that he played a game last season with a broken leg. That, Eagles fans can appreciate.
You didn't read my post #19 like I asked you to, did you?
Someone should X-Ray his throwing arm. He passes like his arm is broken. They should also check his ears as he doesn't seem to be able to hear as he totally screwed up what RUSH said.
I think you're wrong. I don't think everything is a conspiracy.
And watching the sports reporters go the way of the news reporters in a liberal, agenda driven bias in their writing.
Well yeah, sports reporters are asses and have been for a long time. But that doesn't mean everything is a set-up. If you're so angry that professional athletes make a lot of money, why do you spend money to watch movies? Actors and actresses are rich too.
The purpose of professional sports is (1) to provide the gambling industry something to bet on and (2) to give brainless people something to express brainless opinions about.
You mispoke? I don't think the purpose of sports is what you said here.
Clarification? You made a clear statement, no clarification necessary. The only thing you can do is issue a retraction if you now regret saying it. You said the purpose of sports is for gambling and to give brainless people something to talk about. Is that the purpose of sports or not in your opinion? I don't think that's the purpose of sports. I think that there is entertainment value and regional pride involved.
Based upon this experience with you, a most emphatic YES.
Had McNabb turned in a performance like he did Sunday at any other time, Collingsworth and everyone else would have said he was "off his game." But he did turn in a poor performance and was lauded for his feats of athleticism.
Even more telling, the reactions and diatribes of the four ESPN analysts trying to cover their collective butts. The reason they missed it when it happened, they knew that even if Rush wasn't right in this instance, there is a great deal of "Some of my best friends are black" that goes on in the media.
I'm glad you can go to the theater and watch liberals like Clooney and be entertained. I haven't went to a theater in 15 years, I don't see why someone would want to watch something made up. Each his own though, you watch your movies and I'll watch my sports. I just think you're being a hypocrite to put someone down for enjoying what they enjoy while you do the same thing with movies.
All I have said is that I have watched sports change in the last 20 years and not for the good. I do not participate anymore but that is not to say you can not. It is not a conspiracy, it is a social developement that has touched every aspect of our lives including sports. It shocks me how politically correct sports is. And this Rush/McNabb issue just throws the spotlight on it.
I think you're wrong. I think that it is what it always was, a group of people trying to do something better than anyone else. Liberal sportswriters notwithstanding.
And for the record...I go to less and less movies all the time....maybe one a year these days. I don't like supporting Hollywood either. For all of the very obvious reasons.
I don't see any reason to spend money at a theater, but hey, to each his own.
So maybe you'll answer my question now: Do you have any interests outside of politics? Do you watch movies?
I do all sorts of brainless things, I'm just not ashamed of it like you obviously are.
If I were ashamed of it why would my handle be what it is? You make no sense. But of course I would expect that from someone who doesn't have diverse interests. People that have to concentrate on just one thing all their lives probably fit the discription of "brainless" more than anyone.
And you can just keep on watching your shallow liberals on the silver screen, keep pumping out those 50 bucks at a time for it funding the left. Who's making you do anything? You started the insults, I'm only replying by showing your hypocrisy. You two knew what you were doing went you went into this "brainless" discussion. You are both hypocrites.
Pick fights? I'm not the one that brought up the "brainless" namecalling. That was an offense to anyone that's ever posted on a sports thread here and you knew what you were doing when you said it.
I bet you are one of those sports fans who likes to destroy things when your team wins.
You're a false accusor. Why in the world would you think that? I'm simply responding to your namecalling. People are just supposed to take namecalling without pointing out the namecaller's hypocrisy?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.