'91 Eagles (w McMahon) vs rest of the NFC

[74_75_78_79_]

Had SF just lost one less game hence making the playoffs in '91, I think they would have been the conference's 2nd-best team going in. This although they and Washington very likely would only get to meet in the divisionals as opposed to the CC. The Eagles even with McMahon - and at home - couldn't beat SF and one can only speculate if Dallas would have still beat Philly that December even if McMahon played. Considering that Philly also didn't have McMahon in their loss vs the Saints, how do you think they stack up - WITH Jim - vs NO and those remaining NFC playoff participants such as Detroit, Chicago, and Atlanta (Dallas as well)?

[lastcat3]

The Eagles of the early '90's and late '80's had great defensive talent. Good offensive talent. And average coaching. I don't think it would have made much difference if it was McMahon back there or Kemp. The Eagles had a habit of not stepping up when the stakes became bigger. A lot of that probably had to do with the fact that they were in the same division as Joe Gibbs, Bill Parcells, and in the early '90's Jimmy Johnson, who were all great motivators and whose teams tended to have a habit of playing their best ball towards the end of the season instead of puttering out like the Eagles did.

[CSKreager]

While SF could have lost 1 less game (the only close call they had during their hot finish was a late comeback at Seattle), the Eagles had two REALLY bad losses where just one of those gets them a playoff spot- losing to 3-13 Tampa and 4-12 Phoenix.