Skip to content

ESPN Writers Hate the Eagles, Love Andy Reid

Sep 4, 2013, 3:33 PM EDT

USA Today Images USA Today Images

ESPN.com’s stable of NFL writers released their “expert” guesses predictions for the 2013 season ahead on Tuesday, and believe it or not, the Eagles didn’t receive a whole lot of love. Not a single one of them chose the Birds to come out on top in the NFC East this year, and by my count only one out of 36 even has Philly in a wild card spot.

The one would be David Fleming, who also by the way rather insanely chose Michael Vick to be the league’s Most Valuable Player. I’m not even going to touch that one.

Obviously Ashley Fox, formerly of the Philadelphia Inquirer, did not pick the Birds. You changed, Ashley. You used to be cool.

Granted, most Eagles fans aren’t expecting much from this season, either. So like everyone else, ESPN’s writers are probably justified in not awarding the team any respect. Still, I guess I thought more people would be excited about the possibilities considering Chip Kelly’s somewhat unique vision. It’s not like the NFC East is full of powerhouses, ya know.

And while the Eagles appear to be an afterthought, the Chiefs under Andy Reid are not. 15, or nearly half the panel, like Kansas City to make the playoffs, including one nutjob (Grantland’s Bill Barnwell) who has them as AFC West Champions over the Broncos.

I suppose the Chiefs in the postseason is fair as well, as Reid actually inherited a roster with some talent out there. A fair number of people picking them clearly must be counting on Big Red’s influence turning that franchise around, because 12 chose him to win NFL Coach of the Year honors.

Votes for Chip: 0, or zero. Okay, what kind of odds would you give me that Chip Kelly finishes ahead of Andy Reid for Coach of the Year? Because I may consider that action.

>> Experts’ NFL predictions for 2013 [ESPN]

  1. mysportsrumors - Sep 4, 2013 at 3:37 PM

    I’ve got both teams at 7-9.. improved but not quite there

    Reply
    • lyle - Sep 4, 2013 at 3:49 PM

      chiefs will make the playoffs this year. they were banged up last year, they got weapons and a nice d

      Reply
      • willh888 - Sep 4, 2013 at 4:05 PM

        questionable QB? Weapons at RB and WR? Sounds like another team I know. Chiefs have a better defense though, but their division is doo doo so who knows how well they’ll finish.

      • Steve - Sep 5, 2013 at 9:57 AM

        “they got weapons.”

        “We sure do.” – Jovan Belcher

  2. philliephan88 - Sep 4, 2013 at 3:42 PM

    I highly doubt the eagles make the playoffs. Way too many holes on defense. Chiefs on the other hand have a pretty good chance making the playoffs especially with the number of pro bowl players last year and a better defenseive coordinator. This isn’t ESPN writers hating the Eagles, it just makes sense.

    Reply
  3. jay peezo - Sep 4, 2013 at 4:13 PM

    finally someone else agrees with me. why do people love andy so much??? In the coming years we will all come to find out that this man is a total peice of shit! He is not the good guy that people make him out to be. andy is a fraud

    Reply
    • Andrew Kulp - Sep 4, 2013 at 4:18 PM

      I don’t agree with you at all. I don’t think Andy is a bad coach, and I’m certainly not attacking him personally.

      Reply
      • jay - Sep 4, 2013 at 4:43 PM

        yeah just delete my comment. i kind of took my agreement with your article and transcended it into my own personal politics. haha i realize and want to say for the record that I know your not bashing andy. i wrote a poorly written comment!

      • Neil Brennan - Sep 4, 2013 at 11:30 PM

        Please review the 2010 and 2011 drafts. Don’t even think about the terrible clock management, bad game day decisions, inability to adjust to another teams winning game plan. Sheeeesh!!

      • Andrew Kulp - Sep 4, 2013 at 11:43 PM

        Yet somehow Reid has compiled a 140-102-1 record as an NFL head coach. Obviously Reid was far from perfect, but that doesn’t happen by accident.

        P.S. We’re all good, Jay.

  4. Jay D - Sep 4, 2013 at 4:17 PM

    also remember that ESPN the Mag picked the skins to win 41-0 in week one…soooo yeaaaaa “experts”

    Reply
    • Mike - Sep 4, 2013 at 8:41 PM

      Yea, what a bunch of maroons! 41-0 means that the Eagles defense twice forced the Redskins into kicking field goals. (Or missed an extra point. The missed extra point seems more likely.)

      Reply
  5. Greg - Sep 4, 2013 at 5:02 PM

    I don’t have as much an issue with this as I do ESPN interviewing Redskins players in their locker room asking if they think the Eagles will try to destroy RG3′s knee since there’s such a rivalry, then going on right after to say that based on last season alone, theres no rivalry in the NFC east because clearly the skins are the best, disregarding every year after 2001 that they fished no better than 2nd and many years finished in the basement.

    Reply
  6. Dudes - Sep 4, 2013 at 5:17 PM

    I don’t think this is the Eagles year. But with football anything can happen because all the players are already at an insanely high level. So I will root like crazy but this team has a ways to go before I think they can win the super bowl. And that includes dropping Mike Vick. Maybe the birds can have an awful year this year and go get Aaron Murray out of UGA…

    Reply
  7. clubberlangphila - Sep 4, 2013 at 7:56 PM

    i still do not understand how reid has a job. one of his strength and conditioning coaches died at training camp last year and was found with hundreds of hypodermic needles, narcotics, and steroids. “the nfl is taking a hardline stance on p.e.d.-use and banned substances” and this guy gets off without any penalty and a minimal investigation? different standards, i guess. i hope the chiefs suck and their whole offensive line gets caught juicing. go birds. m.vick.p.

    great photo too. the stall should say eagles fans on it though. watkins in the first round? i’m still sour.

    Reply
  8. caliphornian - Sep 5, 2013 at 2:02 AM

    I hate ESPN and love the Eagles. We’re even.

    Reply
    • psudrozz - Sep 5, 2013 at 9:13 AM

      best answer, really

      Reply
  9. Sgt. Hulka's Big Toe - Sep 5, 2013 at 10:47 AM

    This article is really all about how you define success. Andy’s first year the Birds went 5-11, but they finished the season on an encouraging note, drafted well in the off-season, and laid the foundation for 5 or 6 high quality seasons. If the Eagles go 6-10, show the offense can work, establish a nucleus of young talent on a sub-par defense and position themselves to draft the QB of the future with a pretty high 1st round pick, I will view this season successful.

    Reply
  10. mikeytrapp - Sep 5, 2013 at 11:30 AM

    National writers and columnists have always loved Reid. But they aren’t around week-in-and-week-out for his questionable in-game tactics and his tired act . The facts are a) he never closed the deal with the Eagles, even though he had plenty of decent chances (say what you will about Tom Coughlin, the old man has won 2 Super Bowls with ordinary teams) and b) his last 2 teams here absolutely quit on him.

    Time is yours.

    Reply
    • phillyfan - Sep 9, 2013 at 1:33 PM

      Not to mention the fact that he systematically destroyed the Eagles with his asinine personnel decisions and terrible drafting (particularly on defense) from about 2008 on. He’ll be exposed in Kansas City unless he undergoes some major philosophical changes.

      But let’s not let the facts get in the way.

      Reply
  11. Simmonds17 - Sep 5, 2013 at 5:35 PM

    Don’t know why I remember this but the talk from ESPN going into the 1999 season, Reid’s first year, was that the Eagles might go 0-16. A far cry from 5-11 and clearly on the rise.

    The 41-0 pick is ridiculous but unless the Eagles win the game, we can’t make them eat too much crow.

    And oh yeah, I hate ESPN too. I only watch live sports events from them now – no highlights or pregame or whatever. I am very thankful for channels like the MLB Network that are making a lot of ESPN’s programming redundant, if not obsolete.

    Reply

(email will not be published)