I mentioned the injury because I guessed some people aren't aware that he's the best player on the team and his departure and return exemplified his value.

He screwed up and the Saints were ready for it because he has screwed up in the same way in the past. That's your point.

 

The OP suggests the Eagles should be upset with Cox for making the same error repeatedly enough for the Saints to key on it. 

From what I finally caught, you thought my mention of his injury was to excuse his laziness.  It's funny that it took me so long to figure out that you misunderstood me in that way.

Cox did far more good  than bad for the Eagles in that game.  That was my point.  When you see what happened when he exited the game and later returned, it's obvious.

 

It's a shame that Cox is so bad on returns, but I'm sure the Eagles are very happy with their best player.

That was my point. Your tangent about me allegedly making an excuse for him had me confused until I finally noticed that you misread my "He was injured on the play." My intent would have been clearer if I hadn't mentioned that the play that got him hurt was the same play that he screwed up on for the nth time 

 

At the time of the injury, I was upset because he was obviously worthless on the play and it got him hurt. It would have been better if he'd been on the sideline. The Eagles probably would have won.  No, not because the Eagles gave up a 1st down on the play, but because Cox is the most important piece of that defense and his injury was so costly.

 

 

 

My WHOLE point is that I doubt the Eagles want Cox gone or that they hate him or are angry with him. I mention how great he is to support that idea. You're so blinded by thinking I made an excuse for him that you missed my only point entirely.