[kyro]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ok, so if those 2 onside kicks hadnt been recovered by the eagles, and none of those trick plays worked, than I am assuming by you the score would have still been a 3 point differential?

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, I saw one onside kick, so either I completely missed one or you saw an extra one that I didn't see. Second of all, I saw one flea flicker, and that was it. What other trick plays are you talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]

You forgot planning for McNabb instead of Feeley also. And are you saying that it wouldn't be a 3 point difference, which was my question. In close games decided by 3 points, yes 2-3 plays make a very big difference. I didn't discredit anything that the Eagles did tonite, or anything the patriots didn't do for the loss, all I said that is that Pittsburgh would have to run really well to execute the same gameplan as the eagles and come out with a victory.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for avoiding my point which shows you didn't even watch the game and are making up stuff about onside kicks and trickery.

The Eagles didn't score on the onside kick. They gained very little with their "trickery", and McNabb is a better QB than Feeley, and probably would have performed about the same, maybe a little worse if you account for game planning.

So no, I don't think all that was the only reason the Eagles kept it close. I think it's because they played as well as New England did.