Should the Eagles Completely Rebuild Their Running Game Philosophy?

The Zone Scheme Temptation

With Sean Mannion's hiring comes natural speculation about schematic changes, particularly in the running game. Given his background in the Shanahan/McVay coaching tree, many expect a shift toward the outside zone concepts that have made those offenses so successful. But as discussed on Birds 365, this assumption might be fundamentally flawed.

Watch the full breakdown on YouTube to understand why scheme changes aren't always the answer.

The Power vs. Zone Debate

The Eagles have built their identity around power running concepts - duo schemes, pin-and-pull plays, and physical downhill rushing that maximizes their personnel strengths. This approach helped produce one of the historically great rushing attacks during their 2022 Super Bowl run.

Contrast this with the outside zone schemes popularized by Kyle Shanahan and Mike McDaniel, which emphasize lateral movement, cutback lanes, and different skill sets from both linemen and running backs. These systems have produced spectacular results in San Francisco and Miami.

The question facing the Eagles is whether they should abandon what has worked in favor of what appears trendy.

Personnel Fit Matters

The most compelling argument for maintaining their current approach centers on personnel. Landon Dickerson, for example, is a mauling interior lineman whose strength lies in moving defenders off the line of scrimmage. In a power scheme, he's dominant. In an outside zone system that requires more lateral movement and finesse, he might be less effective.

This principle applies throughout the offensive line. Lane Johnson and Jordan Mailata have thrived in schemes that utilize their size and strength. Moving them to concepts that emphasize different skills could diminish their effectiveness rather than enhance it.

Saquon Barkley presents an interesting case study. While he's certainly capable of running outside zone - he did it effectively in New York - his greatest strengths align more naturally with power concepts that allow him to use his vision and burst through created gaps.

The 2023 Lessons

The Eagles' struggles in 2023 provide important context for this discussion. Their running game collapsed not because of schematic issues but due to injuries along the interior offensive line and execution problems. The concepts that had worked brilliantly the year before suddenly produced too many negative plays.

When you're consistently facing second-and-12 instead of second-and-6, it changes everything about your offensive approach. Even the most efficient passing games struggle to overcome consistent negative plays in the running game.

This suggests the problem wasn't the scheme itself but rather the execution and health of key personnel. Fixing those issues might be more important than wholesale schematic changes.

The Complexity Question

There's also the question of whether scheme differences are as dramatic as people assume. The discussion on Birds 365 highlighted that while outside zone and inside zone look different, the fundamental skills required aren't necessarily that different.

Running backs still need vision, patience, and the ability to make decisive cuts. Offensive linemen still need to create movement and work in coordination. The angles and aiming points might change, but the core requirements remain similar.

This suggests that adapting to minor schematic tweaks might be more realistic than completely overhauling the approach.

What About the Coordinator's Background?

Mannion's experience in Green Bay and exposure to different systems certainly gives him insight into various approaches. But great coordinators adapt their schemes to their personnel rather than forcing players into uncomfortable roles.

When Sean McVay took over the Rams, he didn't immediately implement his preferred concepts. He evaluated his roster first and built around what they could do effectively. Similarly, when he acquired different types of players, he adjusted his approach accordingly.

This year, McVay emphasized tight end usage and 13 personnel groupings more than in previous seasons because that's what his roster construction demanded. It wasn't what he preferred stylistically, but it was what worked best for winning games.

The Running Backs Coach Factor

One area where changes might make sense is at the running backs coach position. Jamal Singleton has been with the organization during both successful and unsuccessful periods for the ground game. If Mannion truly wants to implement different concepts or techniques, bringing in someone with expertise in those areas could be beneficial.

However, this should be based on actual schematic needs rather than change for change's sake. If the plan is to maintain similar concepts with better execution, continuity might be more valuable.

The Saquon Factor

Saquon Barkley's presence adds another layer to this discussion. He's shown he can be effective in multiple schemes, but the Eagles signed him specifically because he fit what they wanted to do offensively. Changing their approach dramatically after acquiring a player who thrived in their system would seem counterproductive.

The focus should be on maximizing Barkley's strengths within frameworks that also suit the rest of the personnel. This might mean minor adjustments and wrinkles rather than wholesale changes.

For exclusive analysis on how the Eagles might evolve their offensive approach, check out JAKIB Sports membership.

Finding the Right Balance

Ultimately, the most successful approach will likely involve evolution rather than revolution. Taking the power concepts that have worked well and adding complementary elements from other systems could provide the best of both worlds.

This might mean incorporating some outside zone looks to give defenses different things to prepare for while maintaining the physical, downhill approach that suits the personnel. The key is ensuring that any changes enhance rather than replace the foundation that has been successful.

The Bigger Picture

The running game discussion also connects to broader questions about offensive philosophy. If the Eagles truly want to become a higher-volume passing team, then scheme changes in the running game become more important because the ground attack becomes more of a complementary element.

But if they want to maintain their identity as a physical, ball-control offense that can impose its will on opponents, then preserving and improving their current approach makes more sense.

This is where Mannion's vision for the offense becomes crucial. His decisions about running game philosophy will signal what kind of offense the Eagles plan to be moving forward.

Stay Connected

Catch the full episode of Birds 365 and never miss a take. Watch on YouTube, or listen on Apple Podcasts | Spotify.

For exclusive Eagles coverage and analysis, check out JAKIB Sports membership.