The Eagles were outplayed by Tampa Bay, but it’s still too soon to panic | Early Birds

Good morning. I'm writing this from Tampa after the Eagles' 27-21 loss to the Buccaneers, and I'm flying home Monday as long as the sky is not falling. (It's not. More on this in a minute.) Doug Pederson will have a noon news conference, when he might announce that Carson Wentz has been cleared to return.

This is the Early Birds newsletter, which will arrive in your inbox Monday through Friday for the rest of the season. If your friends haven't subscribed to Early Birds, it's free to sign up here. I want to know what you think, what we should add and what you want to read, so send me feedback by email or on Twitter @ZBerm. Thank you for reading.

— Zach Berman

There are certain losses when teams can lament a game they could have won, when they played better than the score suggests.

Sunday's 27-21 loss to the Tampa Buccaneers was not one of them. The Eagles were outplayed by an opponent they were favored to beat. They were not the better team, which is a sobering reality considering the Eagles had extended rest and Tampa Bay was missing key players, too. (Then again, Ryan Fitzpatrick is on the hot streak of his life.) But my guess is come December, this game will be viewed as an anomaly during the season. The Eagles are going to be a better team than the version that played in Tampa.

That might make it easier to rationalize, but it was still an ugly showing.

In Friday's Early Birds, I wrote that "if you want to know how the Eagles defense did Sunday, check the longest plays after the game." So open up the gamebook and look at the longest plays. They were the Bucs' two 75-yard touchdowns.

That wasn't the only reason the Eagles lost, but after spending the week talking about stopping big plays, the Eagles fell victim to one on the first snap of the game. That was a bad sign.

The most encouraging news in Philadelphia on Monday morning is that Carson Wentz could return in Week 3. Big picture, this loss should not cause many alarms. In fact, there was more concern leaving Kansas City after the Week 2 loss last season than there was leaving Tampa Bay on Sunday. The reason isn't just because the Eagles rebounded one year ago; it's that the offense is going to be much better when Wentz, Alshon Jeffery, and Darren Sproles return (not to mention if/when Mike Wallace and Jason Peters are healthy) and the defense is one of the best in the league.

You might think otherwise about the defense after those two big plays, but look what the Eagles did a week and a half earlier against Atlanta. Their home/road splits were noticeable a year ago (they allowed nearly 13 more points more on the road than at home). They need to get to the quarterback more than they did Sunday. Of course, that often comes when playing with a lead, which the Eagles didn't do against the Buccaneers. But it's not as if the Eagles are going to give up 75-yard touchdowns every week.

If the offense looks like this with Wentz and Jeffery back, that would be a major concern. But Jeffery will make the wide receivers better, and Wentz has special talent that can elevate the offense. No one knows how he'll look from Day 1, and Zach Ertz said the Eagles can't just expect him to come in and be "superman." He's right, although if Wentz struggles, the Eagles have far bigger problems than just fixing a lackluster offense.

"My message is I won't let anybody with a recorder or a pen define who we are as a team," safety Malcolm Jenkins said. "We're a group of fighters, and we gave ourselves a chance late in that game. If we continue to fight like that, regardless of the mistakes, we'll be fine."

Time will tell if Jenkins is right. The Eagles' success last season should buy them the benefit of the doubt. Week 3 will be a big test. If the Eagles rebound (with Wentz in the lineup), the Tampa Bay game will be forgotten. If they fall to 1-2, though, then there would be more reason to panic.

The way the Eagles used Dallas Goedert (or didn't use him) captured some attention, and I get it. I thought he'd play more. Goedert played 22 percent of the offensive snaps. That was less than Joshua Perkins, DeAndre Carter, and Kamar Aiken.

As for why the Eagles played Perkins, look at how Perkins was used. It was more like a wide receiver than a tight end. My guess is after Mike Wallace's injury, the Eagles needed someone who can play a receiver spot.

Goedert is more of an in-line tight end right now. But certainly, I thought Goedert would be a bigger contributor. As I wrote last week, keep it in perspective because rookie tight ends are not historically big contributors. It's hard to make an assessment after two games, although the Eagles could have used him.

I see the appeal of Josh Gordon's talent, but the non-football issues must be explored and could sway teams away from acquiring him. If the Browns are moving on from Gordon after being patient for so long, there needs to be a reason. The Eagles believe they have a strong culture and can make it work with players who have had issues elsewhere, but I don't know if the Eagles will go down that path at this point.

I think once Alshon Jeffery returns, the wide receivers will be fine. However, the wide receivers are a problem right now. It shows just how valuable Jeffery is. The Eagles tried to hit on a low-risk lottery ticket such as Markus Wheaton and Kamar Aiken, but the Eagles haven't had the same success that they did with Patrick Robinson last year.

Not anytime soon. Jalen Mills was a starter on a Super Bowl defense, and he's a good cornerback. He's not a star, and at that position, the big plays allowed are most memorable.

But Mills is better than he gets credit for, even though he allowed some key catches Sunday. Mills had an outstanding summer. The Eagles would need a larger sample size to make that type of move. However, they could always consider playing Mills in the slot and Sidney Jones on the outside when in the nickel.