As The Philadelphia Eagles Rebuild, Is This Their "New Normal?"

There's a lot going on in the world right now. By the time you read this, the U.S. will likely be inaugurating its 46th president, just two weeks after a historic insurrection at the nation's Capitol. In response to that same insurrection, government officials are preparing to implement strict surveillance laws, clamping down on extremist discourse on both sides of the aisle. Meanwhile, a global pandemic rages onward as largely incompetent state officials struggle to distribute the COVID-19 vaccine in a timely and efficient manner.

And yet, amidst all this, all I can really think about is football. Are my priorities out of whack? Maybe, although the NFL has been a welcome, if problematic, distraction from the rest of the world in recent months. I made my first foray into sports writing earlier in the season, discussing the league's poor handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, and expressing my concerns over the leaguewide treatment towards quarterbacks. Not to toot my own horn, but the article proved alarmingly prescient, as Philadelphia Eagles QB Carson Wentz continued his downward trajectory, eventually getting benched in favor of rookie QB Jalen Hurts during the team's Week 13 matchup in Green Bay.

Wentz' benching was the first of many dominos to fall towards the end of the Eagles' season, eventually resulting in the firing of head coach Doug Pederson, who led the team to its first Super Bowl in franchise history just a few years ago.

Jeff McLane of The Philadelphia Inquirer recently released an excellent piece on Wentz, Pederson, and the overall turmoil that defined the Eagles' 2020 season. The article does not paint Wentz in a very good light, highlighting a quarterback who refused to take responsibility for his or the team's regression in 2020. Ever since the Eagles drafted Wentz in 2016, he and Pederson were seemingly attached at the hip, with the coach-quarterback duo drawing inevitable comparisons to Bill Belichick and Tom Brady of the New England Patriots, who Philadelphia would beat just one year later in Super Bowl LII. McLane's article, however, notes that their once dynamic relationship had devolved into a "pissing match," in which Wentz would kill plays at the line of scrimmage simply out of spite. Whereas Pederson's emotional intelligence and cool demeanor had once enchanted the entire Eagles roster, Wentz didn't even feel comfortable approaching his coach after his benching against the Packers, chatting with owner Jeffrey Lurie and general manager Howie Roseman about the situation instead. McLane paints Wentz as a sort of diva, someone who expects everyone in the organization to work for him.

Obviously, McLane is one of the most well-sourced writers in Philly sports. You can trust his work because it is coming from reliable sources, and his latest piece is no exception. And yet, I can't help but sense a certain agenda in McLane's writing. It's the same agenda that many in Philadelphia, fans and media personalities alike, have followed. McLane's piece, among other things, reads like a takedown of Carson Wentz and the organization that has enabled his selfish behavior.

Nevermind the fact that Wentz is just a year removed from setting an NFL record by throwing for over 4,000 yards despite not having a single receiver go over 500 (Wentz' 2019 season, by the way, also marked the first time in Eagles history that a QB threw for over 4,000 yards.) Nevermind the fact that his MVP-caliber 2017 season remains one of the most historically impressive amongst any QB to ever play the game, resulting in a franchise-record 33 passing touchdowns. And nevermind the absolute dedication that Wentz has demonstrated to communities in the Philadelphia area, as well as his home state of North Dakota. Beyond proving himself to be a good quarterback, Wentz has proven himself to be a good person, and yet the city of Philadelphia is bound by its short-term memory.

No doubt, Wentz' 2020 season was putrid, and deserves to be criticized as such. If Wentz truly did fail to recognize how his poor play led to the Eagles' abysmal 4-11-1 record, that is certainly an indictment of his ability to assess his on-field performance, and something that needs to be addressed by a future coaching staff.

But McLane's article, and the broader criticism of Wentz that followed, remains confounding to me. Wentz' behavior, by and large, is what I would expect from a franchise QB. Sure, when a player is struggling like Wentz was throughout 2020, you might expect them to be a little more receptive of coaching and critique. I also recognize that, even at his best, Wentz is not quite an elite player at his position. Tom Brady can exert his control over an organization. So can Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, and Patrick Mahomes. Heck, it seems like Deshaun Watson just might be able to as well.

Can Carson Wentz?

Apparently not, at least as far as McLane and a large chunk of the Eagles' fanbase is concerned. The villainization of Wentz is likely rooted in some degree of reality, but it has also required certain contortions that ignore the 28-year-old's history of success both on and off the field. Wentz is among the eight highest-paid QBs in the NFL, ahead of several former MVPs. Indeed, a contract does not paint a full picture, but from a monetary standpoint, Wentz is entrenched as a foundational piece for the Philadelphia Eagles. As a foundational piece, and as a QB in particular, Wentz therefore deserves a certain degree of pampering. Perhaps this perspective enables Wentz' more shallow tendencies, just as Lurie and Roseman have been accused of doing. But doesn't Wentz deserve to run plays that he likes and feels comfortable running? Doesn't he deserve to work with coaches whom he believes can help him grow as a player? I don't view much of Wentz' behavior as inappropriate. If anything, it's what I would expect from my franchise QB. For better or worse, you don't become a starting QB in the NFL without some kind of ego.

Of course, the dissonance surrounding this issue stems from whether or not one views Wentz as a franchise QB. His contract certainly suggests he is, but his recent play suggests otherwise. But why should one bad season force the Eagles to move on from a guy in whom they have invested over $120 million? 2020 was a uniquely terrible year for Wentz, and it wouldn't necessarily surprise me if it was indicative of who he is moving forward. I am not writing an all-out defense of the guy. Rather, I hope to provide some levity in a conversation that seems to be severely lacking in that department.

Wentz isn't the first high-profile QB to struggle deep into his career. Ben Roethlisberger threw 23 (!) interceptions in 2006, his third year in the league. Kurt Warner famously combusted towards the end of his tenure with the St. Louis Rams, before revitalizing his career years later in Arizona. Ryan Tannehill has experienced a similar rehabbing of his career in Tennessee, after becoming a relative "bust" with the Miami Dolphins.

Wentz may never return to 2017 form, but a return to relative stability is not out of the question. He can still be a top-15 player at his position. You don't just let go of a guy like that, unless you're really confident in your other options.

In truth, I have some semblance of confidence in Jalen Hurts. He performed well in his four starts at QB for the Eagles. Granted, he was working with a limited playbook, and was given the freedom to run the ball whenever possible. He provided a much-needed jolt to the Eagles offense, but he also wasn't the lights-out performer that some would have you believe (no matter how many fantasy points he scored for your championship team.) He struggled with ball security, throwing three interceptions and losing two fumbles across four starts, and completed only 52% of his passes. Hurts' dynamic ability certainly makes a decision regarding Wentz more interesting, but it does not make it any easier.

Of course, Hurts' role in the situation may not matter very much. Reports suggest that Lurie and Roseman want a new head coach to prefer Wentz over Hurts, who the team selected with a 2nd round pick just a year ago. Even I, who has dedicated the entirety of this article thus far to championing Wentz, understands why that is not only a terrible idea, but an impossible one. Whomever the Eagles hire as their next head will reserve the right to determine who they think is the best player at every position, especially QB. If Lurie and Roseman cannot concede this point, the organization has a lot more to worry about than the development of Carson Wentz.

Indeed, the Lurie-Roseman dynamic is already a troubling one, and it has been for a while now. Roseman has whiffed on several draft picks in recent years, and to make matters worse, has signed several aging players to expensive contracts, landing the Eagles in one of the worst salary cap situations in the NFL. Their roster is talentless, with very few players one could confidently label as cornerstones of the organization. Even the mainstays on the roster - Brandon Graham, Fletcher Cox, Jason Kelce, and Lane Johnson - are all on the wrong side of 30. Kelce may not even be on the roster next season, with retirement becoming an increasingly likely option for the future Hall of Famer.

Sure, young players like Miles Sanders, Jalen Reagor, Derek Barnett, and Josh Sweat could entice an incoming head coach, but none of those guys are guaranteed to be in Philly for the long haul, not to mention Reagor remains an unproven commodity.

Howie Roseman has constructed a bad, aging roster, and now the team has to pay for it, both literally and figuratively. Who in their right mind would want to come and fix this mess?

At least one guy seemed prepared to do it, and his name was Doug Pederson. As a persistent defender of Wentz, I understand why Pederson had to go. As the rift between the coach and QB widened, it was clearly only one could stay, and the money invested in Wentz made that decision obvious. But Pederson is still a Super-Bowl-winning head coach. He is still a guy who brought the Nick-Foles-led Eagles to the biggest stage in sports and came away victorious. His playcalling undoubtedly grew stale in recent years, and his game management became increasingly suspect. And yet, it is difficult to justify the firing of a coach who won a Super Bowl just four years ago. It's clear Roseman was the one who needed to leave above all else, but he had established a power structure in which Pederson simply had to take the fall for the Eagles' struggles.

So, who is next for the Eagles? The team has ran through three head coaches in the last nine seasons, a far cry from the longevity of the Andy Reid era. It would require some wishful thinking to believe that their next hire will finally stabilize the organization. Even Pederson, whose statue is erected outside Lincoln Financial Field, couldn't remain here long-term; why would an incoming coach feel even the slightest sense of job security?

Of course, Lurie is known for paying his coaches handsomely, and there is a certain prestige to coaching in Philadelphia that a franchise like, say, the Houston Texans cannot match. The Eagles are likely the more desirable of the two remaining head coach vacancies in the NFL, if only because the Texans have a real-life supervillain in their front office. The Eagles have also cast by far the widest net of any franchise in search of a head coach this offseason, interviewing over 15 candidates and counting. It's somewhat surprising the Eagles' search is taking on the scale that it is. After all, it has never been more transparent what Lurie and Roseman are looking for. The owner and his right-hand-man are in search of a "yes man," nothing more. They want a coach who is willing to cede personnel, and who will follow through on the various other decisions that the duo already has in mind. It's a rather disgusting situation, one in which a franchise believed to be a budding dynasty just a few years ago desperately searches for an identity, a direction, a shred of optimism in an era defined by an overwhelming lack of it. The team aims to rebuild, or in Lurie's words, "retool" in the years ahead, but it has neither the youth nor the resources necessary to do so in earnest.

And so, if the the coaches interviewed thus far are any indication, the Eagles seem intent on making a bad situation worse. They've interviewed Josh McDaniels, arguably the frontrunner for the job. McDaniels, who previously served as the head coach of the Denver Broncos from 2009-10 and infamously recanted on his decision to helm the Indianapolis Colts in 2018, has served as the offensive coordinator for the New England Patriots since 2012. He has been with the Patriots for every one of their six Super Bowl victories. In that sense, McDaniels offers a lot of upside as a hire. His first stint as a head coach was a disaster, but, having grown under the tutelage of Bill Belichick, McDaniels could very well provide a long-term answer at head coach for the Eagles. On the other hand, reviews from his former players in Denver have been less-than-stellar. Not only was McDaniels implicated in a videotaping scandal at the time, but several of his former players have referred to him as standoffish or even flat-out disrespectful. Characterizations of McDaniels remind me a lot of Chip Kelly, perhaps the most disastrous hire in Eagles history. Of course, over a decade has passed since McDaniels was in Denver. He has almost certainly grown since then, although it is worth wondering if the Eagles are genuinely interested in McDaniels as a candidate, or if they are simply acting out of some pathetic jealousy towards the Patriots dynasty. Part of me does believe McDaniels could be a good hire for the Eagles, although he doesn't necessarily feel like what this organization needs right now, when a disastrous hire could suddenly place the franchise in the NFL's basement for several years to come. There's one person in particular who I would like to ask about McDaniels: Brian Dawkins. The Eagles legend played for McDaniels at the end of his career in Denver.

If organizational jealousy is not the diagnosis, perhaps hubris is more accurate? How else would you characterize some of the interviews that the Eagles have conducted? Cowboys special teams coordinator John Fassel? Saints defensive coordinator Dennis Allen? Sometimes, there is a reason that the rest of the league is interested in the same six or seven guys. Fassel and Allen may not be bad hires in and of themselves, but the Eagles' interest in these guys is indicative of the same organizational hubris that made them feel comfortable enough to draft a backup QB in the second round of the draft last April, or resign washed-up veterans like Jason Peters and Jordan Howard during the 2020 season. The Eagles won a Super Bowl, and then concluded they are smarter than the rest of the NFL, stringing together several years' worth of ill-advised decisions.

In recent weeks, I've asked myself if the Super Bowl win was worth it. Of course, the answer is yes. But as more and more time goes on, it seems that the franchise sold its soul to the devil in exchange for its first Super Bowl victory, and won't be sniffing the league's championship game again anytime soon. Of course, Lurie and Roseman continue to make fruitless attempts to recapture the magic of 2017. Their latest attempt of this variety seems to be interviewing Colts offensive coordinator Nick Sirianni for their head coach position. Like Fassel and Allen, Sirianni could very well be a great hire for the Eagles. However, I can't help but think of their consideration of the 39-year-old as an attempt to reconnect with Colts head coach Frank Reich, who served as the Eagles' offensive coordinator during their Super-Bowl-winning 2017 campaign. But if the team does want to look towards its past to find its future, the ousting of Pederson is an even more bizarre move in hindsight. If Lurie and Roseman are indeed scrambling to pick up the scraps of Pederson's first couple of seasons in Philly, they are even more lost than I thought. Again, Sirianni could be a good coach! I actually admired a lot of what he was able to do with a washed-up Philip Rivers in 2020, and he was fairly instrumental in some of Rivers' more successful seasons back in San Diego. Sirianni also got a lot more out of Jacoby Brissett than any coach probably should. But if he's anything like Reich, who I also admire as a coach, there is reason to believe he and Wentz won't quite see eye to eye.

So, Jeffrey. So, Howie. What's it going to be? You want Wentz to be the QB of the future. So do I! But you also don't seem to have many new ideas, relying on old friends or even older fascinations in your quest to correct the face of your franchise. You do all this, mind you, as those around the league lament the despicable lack of black head coaches in the NFL. Not only is this topic eternally relevant (and increasingly dire in a league that is over 70% black) but it is especially applicable this offseason when some of the hottest names available happen to be men of color.

Still want to play your old tricks and pluck from the Andy Reid coaching tree? Call up Eric Bienemy.

Want a young, flashy coordinator with a lot of upside? What about Tampa Bay offensive coordinator Byron Leftwich?

The team has interviewed their own longtime running backs coach, Duce Staley, as well as the Bucs' defensive coordinator Todd Bowles, who previously served as the Eagles' interim defensive coordinator in 2012 and has further Philly ties as a graduate from Temple University, where he played under his current boss in Tampa Bay, Bruce Arians. Bowles would be a decent hire, even if his previous stint as the head coach of the New York Jets was a mixed bag. But there is one final name I would place on Lurie and Roseman's long list if I could: Buffalo Bills defensive coordinator Leslie Frazier.

Like Bowles, Frazier delivered rather uninspiring results during his first stint as a head coach. Frazier's Minnesota Vikings had just one winning season in his three years there, and never won a playoff game. But if the Eagles' head coaching search makes one thing clear, it's that they are all for second chances. As a defensive coordinator, Frazier has been consistently excellent. He has made defenses better wherever he goes, and even had a similar impact on the Eagles from 1999-2002 when he served as the defensive backs coach under Andy Reid. As a player, Frazier won a Super Bowl with the Chicago Bears, leading the team in interceptions that season. An injury cut his career short, but his experience as a former player should come in handy when relating with a veteran locker room, something the Eagles consistently admired about Doug Pederson. Buffalo Bills head coach Sean McDermott, who first connected with Frazier as the linebackers coach for Reid's Eagles, has quickly cemented himself as one of the best coaches in the NFL, and I am confident Frazier offers similar potential, particularly considering how well-connected he is within the NFL. Frazier has already interviewed for the Houston Texans' job, although I'd have to imagine he'd prefer the Eagles' if given the opportunity. At 61 years old, Frazier likely wouldn't be a long-term answer for the Eagles, but very few coaches are considering the state of the franchise, or, in truth, the NFL at large.

Upon bringing home the first Lombardi trophy in franchise history, Eagles head coach Doug Pederson referred to Super Bowl contention as the team's "new normal." At the time, it was a perfectly reasonable claim. Of course, history would very soon prove Pederson very, very wrong. It's an unfortunate time to be an Eagles fan, and as long as Roseman is so heavily involved with the organization's decision-making, the Eagles might have a very different kind of "new normal" on their hands.