But as painful as that playoff loss was for us, Philly’s loss the next week had to be worse for them: We still had our ring; they had just blown a late lead and a shot at the Super Bowl, and once again saw their quarterback not get it done in a big spot.

The bad news is that they’ll be back, possibly better than ever. Obviously, we feel like we’ve improved ourselves this offseason, and will be better in than the banged-up, our-of-sorts bunch we were at the end of ’08. But two facts remain:

1) The Eagles were better than us by the end of last year. In fact, their cumulative DVOA of 31.7% ranked 1st overall, a smidgen better than our 29.4%, which ranked 3rd. But their weighted DVOA – which accounts for trends as the season progresses, and doesn’t even include the playoffs – wound up at 30.5%, comfortably better than our 23.8%. I suppose we can take solace in the superiority of our record – 12-5 vs. 11-7-1 — but they can point to beating us in our last two games, in our place.

and 2) They had a tremendous offseason, with the possible caveat of Westbrook’s health (more on that later).

First, let’s do a quick overview of this team’s strength’s and weaknesses, using Football Outsiders’ DVOA stats.

Their offense was pretty good, posting a 9.3% DVOA that ranked 12th in football. Because of Westbrook’s off-year, their passing game (12.2%) was better than their running game (5.4%). (By comparison, our offense was awesome: Our offensive DVOA was 23.7%, which ranked 5th)

The Eagles’ defense was elite: Its DVOA of -20.7 ranked 3rd in the league. It was almost equally good against the pass (-22.1%) as the run (-19.1%). (Our defensive DVOA was -4.8%, which ranked 8th.)

Philly’s defense finished with DVOAs of -3.7% in 2007 and -6.4% in 2006, and because defense is known to be more inconsistent from year to year than offense, will likely see some regression to the mean. But keep in mind that the key players on that defense – Asante Samuel (28), Sheldon Brown (30), Mike Patterson (25), Broderick Bunkley (25), Trent Cole (26), Stewart Bradley (25), Chris Gocong (25), and Akeem Jordan – are all in their prime.

Much media attention will focus on the loss of Brian Dawkins, but the 35-year-old is far from the player he once was, according to Bill Barnwell of Football Outsiders, who wrote:

“Dawkins had little left in the tank and won’t be missed, with Quinton Demps competing with new acquisitions Sean Jones and Rashad Baker as the likely replacement.”

But while we’ll expect some regression from their defense, we can also expect an equal amount of improvement from their offense.

As the cliché goes, it will all start up front. Given that the only relative weakness of their team was their rushing attack, it is not surprising that Philly’s offseason moves focused on improving their offensive line: They picked up Pro Bowl tackle Jason Peters (2007, 2008), will see the return of Pro Bowl guard Shawn Andrews (2006, 2007), who will move to right tackle alongside his newly acquired brother, Stacy Andrews (no Pro Bowls, but he’s good).

All three acquisitions represent improvements at their respective spots. Peter will replace Tra Thomas, a longtime stalwart, but one whom the Eagles made no effort to retain this offseason. Stacey Andrews will play right guard, replacing the two backups who replaced brother Shawn, who got injured and missed all but two games last year. Shawn will slide over to replace Jon Runyan, another longtime stalwart who broke down towards the end of the year, necessitating off-season microfracture knee surgery.

Last year, Philly’s O-Line represented a moderate strength: Their Adjusted Sack Rate – a pretty self-explanatory Football Outsiders stat – ranked 6th in the league at 4.3%, no doubt a reflection of McNabb’s rediscovered elusiveness resulting from his return to health and weight loss. But their run blocking, as measured by Adjusted Line Yards, ranked only 16th at 4.20 yards. They particularly struggled in short-yardage situations, a flaw that cost them a game against the Bears and snuffed out a potential comeback against the G-Men in the teams’ first meeting. Their 55% percent success rate in “Power” situations – defined by FO as goalline runs or runs on 3rd or 4th down with two or fewer yards to go — ranked 31st in the league.

They particularly struggled on runs to the left side of the line, according to FO stats: On runs off the left end, their ALY was 3.54 (25th); off left tackle, their ALY was 3.20 (30th). Was this Thomas’ fault, and will replacing him with Peters necessarily help? I don’t know, but the point is that there’s a very good chance that the Eagles’ acquisitions have turned this slightly above-average unit into a big-time strength.

This would obviously improve the Eagles running game, which stumbled last year. After posting a 16.1% DVOA in 2007, the running game slipped to 5.4% last year, still above-average, but a far-cry from the levels that the line and Westbrook had established in years past.

His game-breaking screen-pass scamper against Minnesota notwithstanding, last year was Westbrook’s worst as a full-time back: Battling an ankle injury that caused him to miss two games, he averaged 4.0 yards per carry, down from 4.8 in 2007 and 5.1 in 2006, while his personal DVOA tumbled to 6.9 from 19.9 in ’07 and 23.9 in ’06.

He had his knee scoped at the beginning of this off-season, then recently went under the knife for his ankle problems. Though he is expected to be 100 percent by mid-August, Westbrook’s future is an open question. Will he be as good as new after the surgery? Or is Westbrook, who turns 30 in September, officially on the downside?

Either way, it’s hard to expect the Eagles running game not to improve. Even if Westbrook is not fully healthy, he should be no worse than he was last year. And while Correll Buckhalter did yeoman work last year (11.0% DVOA, 4.9 YPC), Eagles fans are excited about second-round draft pick LeSean McCoy, billed as a good short-yardage runner and a good receiving running back.

But make no mistake: As every NFC East fan knows, as Westbrook goes, so go the Eagles. His health will go a long way toward determining Philly’s destiny, as well as ours.

The same statement can apply to Donovan McNabb. McNabb is a divisive athlete: Some people insist he’s a huge bitch, while others rail against those who insist he’s a huge bitch. I happen to think both cases have merits, but let’s focus on some objective stats.

McNabb’s DVOA (15.6%) ranked 12th in the league, but his DYAR, a more cumulative Football Outsiders stat as distinguished from the “rate” stat of DVOA, ranked 7th. Whichever stat you look at, he’s basically a top-third quarterback. And but for two straight horrific games – the Bengals tie (Huh? That’s even possible?) and the Ravens game in which he was benched — he would have had a top five in DVOA. (But if my aunt had balls, she’d be my uncle, McNabb detractors would reply.)

Even leaving aside the matter of clutchness, McNabb’s health is a perpetually open question. We are, after all, talking about a guy who sustained season-ending injuries in 2005 and 2006, and missed two games in 2007. What are the chances he’ll play a full season?

If he and Westbrook are healthy, however, this could be a dangerous offense, especially because they’ve accumulated some talent at wide receiver.

DeSean Jackson was better than I had realized last year: he had 912 yards on 62 catches and can be expected to do nothing but improve, although his 52% catch rate tempers enthusiasm slightly. Kevin Curtis, a talented deep threat, will return after an injury-marred 2008 in which he played only nine games. He will be pushed by Jeremy Maclin, for whom the Eagles traded up to draft with the 20th pick. Jason Avant, Hank Baskett, and Reggie Brown are all adequate in the best sense of the word, (as distinguished from a throwaway compliment to prove my point that the Eagles have good receivers).

Tight End Brent Celek posted a 21.9% DVOA and a 71% catch percentage, emerging as significantly better than LJ Smith. Celek completes the picture of an offense without any real weaknesses if guys stay healthy.

Looking at the offense as a whole, it seems likely that both the running and passing games should improve. Even if the defense takes a step back, if the offense goes from “pretty good” to “very good,” this team can match its statistical awesomeness of last year. There’s always the small matter of converting a high DVOA into a high win total – something the Eagles have struggled with in recent years – but there’s no way around the fact that the Eagles should be a real contender.

As much as we all suspended judgment after the Eagles game, it’s now time to face the facts: During the past two games, a Giants Super Bowl title has gone from probable to possible. Yes, I know, calling a Super Bowl ring “probable” is a little illogical. But let’s just say that going into last week’s game, we would have been absolutely crushed if the Giants continued their success only to come up short in the playoffs. That outcome, a nightmarish worst-case scenario eight days ago, doesn’t seem unlikely now.

As evidenced by last year, championships are determined by which team is playing its best when the playoffs come. After Week 15, with only two games to reverse the trend, it’s safe to say the Giants are not playing as well as some other teams. The Panthers are kicking some serious ass. The Cowboys and Eagles just beat us soundly. The Vikings have started to peak, and the Falcons are no cakewalk.

So we’ve fallen from the lofty perch we’ve occupied all season. The dream-like run in which wins came easy is over. We are now immersed in the same desperate struggle as every other team.

That’s the bad news. The good news is that Tom Coughlin’s Giants are uniquely equipped to weather this situation. Perhaps during that 11-1 start we forgot that this is the Giants we’re talking about, a franchise whose identity is tied to a belief that anything worthwhile does not come easy. It didn’t come easy last year, and it didn’t come easy in 1990, the most apt historical comparison if you want to be optimistic.

That year, a 10-0 start gave way to a 3-3 finish, with losses to the Eagles, 49ers, and Bills and thoroughly uninspiring wins against the mediocre Vikings, the lowly Cardinals, and the pathetic Patriots. We were written off, dropped by the experts from the ranks of the elite, but we kept grinding, eventually winning a championship that, like, 2007, owed itself to the team’s mental fortitude. Indeed, at their best, the Giants don’t dazzle, they grind.

Tom Coughlin’s Giants are a proud bearer of this standard of resilience. So while it may not look like it now, this is where we want to be. We don’t want to be above the fray, entering the playoffs with a dazzling 15-1 record. We want to be in the fight. Because there isn’t a team I like more in a fight than the G-Men.

Gui Buck:

While I appreciate your original take and empathize with your Thursday morning boredom, I disagree with your argument.

First of all, even though the incident where Plax’s wife called the cops was first reported when Plax was suspended, it actually occurred over the summer.  So it doesn’t seem like domestic problems were the cause of the missed meeting or treatment, though who the hell really knows?  And while I agree that employees – athletes included – should be cut a little slack in extreme cases of domestic problems, why do you assume his antics this year are as a result of this?  To me, these incidents are a continuation of the chronic disrespect for authority that has resulted in 40-50 fines during his Giants career.

I also disagree that Tom’s taking too hard a line.  You seem to be suggesting that the Giants escalated things when they sat him on Sunday.  I think Plax escalated the situation by missing the treatment.  Coming off the suspension, that was basically a big “Fuck You” to Coughlin and his rules – Plax basically forced Tom’s hand on this one.

But I hear your overall point: Because Plax is, in the end, a solid enough teammate and because this seems like a manageable enough situation, it’s incumbent on Coughlin to play it tactfully.  If they can, they should go out of their way not to embarrass Plax, lest the Proud Man react the wrong way.  But if Plax is gonna keep asking for it, Tom has no choice.  As he wrote in his book, A Team to Believe In, “I don’t fine players.  Players fine themselves.”

Also, this is football.  If you hate regimentation and rules so much, you’re free to make your living elsewhere.  We just gave the guy a new contract – all we ask is that he doesn’t completely blow off the rules.

**

According to Mike Garafolo’s article, Wade Phillips said his team will double-team Plax this Sunday, just like they did for at least those last two games last year (after Plax torched them in the season opener.)  You have to think that announcing the coverage schemes is nothing but a bit of gamesmanship by Phillips – what possible advantage it might confer, however, I don’t know.

According to Mike Garafolo’s article, Plax has been being double-teamed all season, which explains his sub-par numbers – he’s averaging 35.5 yards per game over the last four games.

So while Plax is struggling to get untracked, it doesn’t necessarily mean he hasn’t been a crucial part of our attack this year.  Quibble with Plax’s numbers all you want, but there should be no issues with our overall passing attack.

“Well I think you expect that we’re gonna play well when the pressure’s on, and we’re gonna find a way to win the game.  And we did that today, although it was a difficult game.”

–Tom Coughlin

We’ll get into specifics later in the week, but for now, here are some general thoughts on today’s game:

It wasn’t the sharpest performance, but how can you not be very happy? Sure, the Bengals were a bad team in the previous two games, and having slipped to 0-3, there’s a good chance they’ll be a bad team from this point forward.  But make no mistake: they were a very good team today, led by a quarterback and an offense that didn’t look far removed from 2005, when they were one of the decade’s best.  As Coughlin and a lot of the players have said, give credit to the Bengals for playing an excellent game and putting our defense on its heels.

Last week, I wrote: “Two games into the season, the Super Bowl Champs couldn’t be more encouraging.”  Does this statement hold true three games into the season?  It’s an interesting question.

On one hand, for the first time this year, we didn’t play that well.  (Digression: Some have said we didn’t play that well in the first two games, but they’re wrong.  We did.  Even though the score was a little too close to comfort at points during both of those games, we dominated on a play-by-play basis.  Footballoutsiders.com, which calculates play-by-play stats based on situation and opponent, put us in the top spot in their advanced rankings this past week.  This is cold, scientific stuff, not some ex-jock bloviator being like, “They’re the champions, and until they’re not, they’re number one in my book.”)

Back to the point.  We didn’t play that well today for the first time all season.  I suppose if we had blown the Bengals out, that would’ve been a little more encouraging than gutting out a game we could have very easily lost.

But…  doesn’t this hard-fought win answer questions that weren’t addressed during our two dominant performances to start the year?  Pardon the cliche, but wasn’t there something “character building” about this game that is both a building block and a source of optimism going forward? After today, don’t you have a really good feeling about this team?

Going into the bye, we are where we wanted to be: 3-0 and healthy (though I’m not sure what happened to Aaron Ross’ shoulder…).  If anything, the struggle today will keep us grounded during the bye week as we prepare for the second half of our easy six-game opening stretch.  At this point, you’d have to say that a 6-0 start is likely, and anything less would be a disappointment.

**

Is there anyone out there who isn’t thankful Eli Manning is our quarterback?  At the 4:39 mark, was anyone not utterly confident Eli would take us down for the go-ahead touchdown?

Giants fans, do not take this feeling for granted.  Though it may be too early to call Eli Manning a “great quarterback” – the Super Bowl notwithstanding, there isn’t quite enough evidence yet to support this claim – there’s no doubt that he’s a clutch quarterback, a quality somewhat distinct from greatness.  By the end of the year, NYGMen predicts we will be able to count Eli as one of the game’s great, clutch quarterbacks.

I happen to be reading Ralph Vacchiano’s book, Eli Manning: The Making of a Quarterback, which I plan to review/discuss some time in the near future.  The book’s intro is written by Ernie Accorsi, who was famously smitten with Eli ever since laying eyes on him as a junior at Ole Miss in a game against Auburn.

The roots of Accorsi’s infatuation with Eli date back to 1970, his first year as the PR coordinator for the Baltimore Colts.  It was then that Accorsi first encountered John Unitas, the Platonic ideal for a quarterback whose form Accorsi has been trying to capture ever since.

Accorsi tells the story of noticing in Colts training camp in 1970 that Unitas has lost velocity on his ball, attributable to an elbow surgery two years before and old age.

“I turned to Milt [Davis, a Colts scout] and said, ‘Milt, he can’t throw like he used to.  Can we win with him throwing like that?’

“Milt, quite fatherly, turned to this brash rookie employee, put his hand on my shoulder and said: “Ernie, listen to me.  You evaluate the great quarterbacks on one element alone: Can they take their team down the field, with the championship on the line, and into the end zone?  That’s how you evaluate a great quarterback.

That, Unitas could still do.  We won the Super Bowl that season.”

And so Accorsi paid a King’s ransom for Eli Manning.  And three years later… “17-14 is the final score.  One touchdown, we are world champs.  Believe it, it will happen.”

(No, I’m not forgetting about the Asante Samuel and Brandon Meriwether near-picks on the final drive.  But you have to admit, Ernie was right: there’s something about Eli.)

**

So this was the trap game, it turns out.  It didn’t take the form of a flat performance against a bad opponent as we had feared heading into last week.  Instead, it was a flawed performance against a desperate and dangerous team.

**

I would be remiss if I didn’t acknowledge how easily we could have lost this game.  Sure, there are plenty coulda-woulda-shouldas we Giants fans could break out, but the Bengals clock management at the end of regulation was egregious.  If you’re a Bengals fan, you’re very, very pissed: your team just squandered its last, best shot to save its season.

You saw it, but to rehash: With 32 seconds left and a timeout remaining, the Bengals had just completed a 9-yard pass to Houshmenzadeh, giving them 3^rd and 1 at the NYG 14.  But they took 20 seconds before snapping the ball for the next play, which became an 11-yard pass to Antonio Chatman.  This gave them first and goal at the 3, but left them with only 4 seconds.  They had no choice but to bring in Graham to kick the field goal.

So in the span of 32 seconds, with a timeout to burn, the Bengals ran just two plays.  Based on how they were moving the ball on that drive, is there anyone out there who thinks they wouldn’t have won the game if they had run a third play during that time?  Shit, they could have easily run four plays.

**

Today’s game added to the mounting pile of evidence that Brandon Jacobs is the third best running back on the team.

Yes, I know the Bengals game-planned against the run, which makes Jacobs’ 14 carries for 35 yards (2.5 YPC) a little misleading.  And of course Ward’s draw-plays were more conducive to success, which makes his 80 yards on 9 carries (8.9 YPC) a little misleading too.  As Jacobs-apologists would have you believe, it was Jacobs’ bulldozing his way to a succession of 2.5 yard-runs that “softened” up the defense for Ward.  (As for his latest dropped past… well, that’s beyond even their excuses.)

But my question is this: Is there anything that can happen on the field that can change the coaching staff’s preconceived notion that Jacobs is our best back deserving of the vast plurality of carries? 

Alas, probably not, and the egregious misallocation of resources will continue.  Today, Jacobs got 56% of the carries.  Ward got 36%.  Bradshaw got 8%.

This week – during which we nearly lost, and all three of our division rivals won impressively – proved it: We cannot rest on our Super Bowl laurels.  We need to improve this team if we want to beat out the tough-ass teams in our division.  Earth, Wind and Fire in its current proportions is not a “winning formula,” as the coaches and many in the media might think, but rather something that might preclude us from being as good as we need to be to defend our crown.

If you weren’t happy with the Washington win, is there anything to complain about now?  Sure the Rams suck, but one of the hallmarks of great NFL teams is that they blow out the scrubby ones.  This game is a reassuring sign that we are among the NFL elite.  Two games into the season, the Super Bowl Champs couldn’t be more encouraging.

Yes, it was a seven-point game as late as the fourth quarter.  But to say that the final score did not reflect the feeling of the game is bullshit: the Giants dominated this game on a play-by-play basis from start to finish, but it wasn’t until the final minutes of the fourth quarter that the scoreboard reflected this.  Look at it this way: we outgained them 441-201. 

At halftime, the score was only 13-6, yet the Rams had not advanced past the Giants’ 36-yard-line.  It was only those two 54-yard field goals by Brown – one of which was enabled only by Tuck’s facemask penalty [on a play he was held on, no less] – that kept the Rams in the game.

The G-Men seemingly put it away by mounting an emphatic 97-yard drive on their first possession of the third quarter, but the lucky bomb to Holt – who probably didn’t even catch the ball – meant that the G-Men had to keep the can of whoopass open.  To their credit, they did for the rest of the game. 

Offense: 

Eli was excellent, going 20-29 for 260 yards and three touchdowns, averaging 9 yards per attempt – for perspective, realize that his career YPA is 6.3.  He made a couple of bad throws, but didn’t seem to make any dangerous throws or bad decisions like the near-picks last week, which is an important distinction. 

The square-ins and back-shoulder fades to Plax, the hitches to Toomer, the touchdown on the post to Toomer – that’s the throw Eli routinely makes the best, in my opinion – the catchable passes to the backs, that pass to Boss that got called back, that gorgeous touch-pass to Hixon down the sideline, and last but not least, the lefty toss to Jacobs that set up Carney from 33…  Great job, Eli.

The pass protection was solid overall, save for a brief period near the end of the second quarter when Long sacked Eli and then McKenzie got a holding penalty on the next series.  Overall though, they did a good job. 

But the pass protection had nothing on the run-blocking, which is probably the single best facet of this team.  Jacobs had 93 yards on 15 carries, Ward had 58 on 8, and Bradshaw – in addition to his touchdown catch – had 5 carries for 32.  Overall, we had 203 yards and averaged 6.8 yards a pop.  Much of the credit for that goes to the fatties up front.

Like a lot of Giants fans, NYGMen has long beat the pro-Bradshaw drum, wondering why the clear-cut best back on our team doesn’t get more burn.  Once again, Ahmad was electrifying.  On his touchdown run, when he exploded through the hole with one man to beat, was there any doubt he was gonna beat that guy?  And after today, is there any doubt he’s criminally underutilized?  Please Tom, since we know you’re reading this, FREE AHMAD! 

As for Ward, he was very effective too.  Ward hits the hole decisively and he hits the hole hard.  With our physical offensive line and our physical fullback, he’s a good fit.

And now Jacobs…  Look, I know his overall numbers were good today (though much of his totals came from one perfectly blocked 30-yard run at the beginning of the third quarter).  And I know his overall numbers last year (5.0 yards per carry) were good too.  But please, how much more effective are the other two backs when they enter the game?  To put it another way, when was the last time you remember Jacobs being more effective than Ahmad or Ward? 

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, but the coaching staff’s insistence on making Jacobs the featured runner is holding this team back.  Yes, there’s a place for Jacobs on this team; it’s just a lot smaller than the coaching staff thinks. 

Moving on, the receivers were very good too.  Plax abused whoever covered him, and Smith made a couple great plays, one of which was called back on the down-by-contact call.  Amani, for some reason, was featured, and he acquitted himself well.

I’m not sure why Amani got so many looks – probably because Plax was being double-covered, though I’m not sure – but some of those plays showed pretty clearly that he’s lost almost all of his speed.  Amani is a very skilled receiver, adept at finding creases in the zone and a master of the toe-tap.  But at this point of his career, he’s just too slow to run by defensive backs.  There were at least two plays yesterday where he was isolated one-on-one against a corner, but the defender was able to run stride for stride with him.  Amani still has his uses, for sure, but he also has his limitations.  Going forward – and by forward, I mean possibly as early as the second half of this year – we’re going to be happy that we have Maningham, Hixon, and Moss on the roster. 

Defense: 

201 yards of total offense, and only 68 allowed against a ground game that boasts Steven Jackson, one of the best backs in the game.  6 sacks and pressure on Bulger all day.  The Tuck touchdown.  For the second straight game, what a performance by the D.

As was the case on offense, it all started up front.  Tuck, who has become the face of the defense after the Osi injury, was a beast.  Big Fred, who has late-bloomed into a star, was beastly as well. 

The pressure on Bulger was constant, and Jackson didn’t have any success running between the tackles.  The only success Jackson did have was running outside, but that’s a small thing to complain about.

The starting corners, Webster and Ross, were absolutely phenomenal.  How exciting is it that we have two potentially awesome young corners?  Who could have predicted this before last year? 

And even though the Rams’ touchdown came at Phillips’ expense, wouldn’t you even say that that play was overall encouraging?  I mean, here was our rookie safety running stride for stride with one of the best receivers of the era.  He made a smooth attempt at the ball, and although he didn’t haul it in, it was only an unpredictable bounce of the oblong ball – and a highly questionable call – that made that anything worse than a nice break-up.

Not so spectacular was Butler, who was late arriving in safety help on a big play during the series on which Holt scored the touchdown.  Yes, I know safeties are always left holding the proverbial bag, but doesn’t it seem that way too often, Butler is nowhere to be found on deep help?  He seems to lack the range you want from your deep safety – you have to think it’s only a matter of time before its Johnson and Phillips getting the majority of the burn. 

And Dockery had a bone-headed pass interference to keep that touchdown drive alive: on third down, he laid a hit on a receiver before the marker.

Special Teams: 

This was an underrated aspect of this game.  The punt and kickoff coverage was excellent, which was a relief after the brutal kickoff coverage last week.  And Hixon’s punt return in the fourth quarter should finally close the book on the R.W. era.