THIS JUST IN: Andy Reid is stubborn.
Big Red wasn't giving an inch yesterday on the run-pass business. The Eagles ran the ball so much (38 called runs vs. 34 called passes) at the Meadowlands because the wind was howling. Learn a valuable lesson about sticking with the ground game? Whatever could you be talking about?
It was just Friday a week ago that Reid tried to explain his philosophy of "efficient balance,'' in which he posited that he wasn't going to bang his head against the wall running the ball if the run wasn't working. Then Reid sheepishly agreed with a questioner that he had no such qualms about sticking with the pass when it wasn't working.
So Sunday at the Giants, the Eagles gained minus-5 yards on their first eight called runs. What did they do then? They kept running, and eventually Brian Westbrook broke a 30-yarder for a touchdown against a safety blitz.
Afterward, Westbrook seemed to understand that something rare had occurred, even if Reid did not.
"He was very committed to it, and I give a lot of credit to him because usually we're not that committed to it," Westbrook said after Sunday's game. "He saw that we were getting it done. We always try to tell him 2 or 3 yards is not that bad, and we had a couple carries where it was just 2 or 3 yards, but he stayed committed to it, and sooner or later that turned into 5 or 6 yards, then we had the big run down the middle.''
This was not exactly Reid's perspective, a day later - that he'd been talked into doing anything out of the ordinary.
"I wouldn't say I was beating my head against the wall. I thought we ran the ball pretty good,'' Reid said. "Beating the head against the ball is when
you're gaining 1 yard per carry. When you're gaining like we were [Sunday], I'm good with that."
But, see, you weren't gaining . . . that is, until, well . . . oh, just never mind.
So, run-starved fans should pray for wind the rest of the way?
"I think the fans really just want to win,'' Reid said. "They don't really care if we throw it or run it, they just want to see W's."
Gee, from the gist of our e-mails, we could have sworn they were a bit more discerning than that. Guess not.