A Season of Struggles Comes to a Head
The Philadelphia Eagles’ playoff loss to the San Francisco 49ers did more than end their season. It crystallized months of frustration around an offense that never found its rhythm. After the defeat, head coach Nick Sirianni avoided singling out individuals, insisting there would be time to evaluate everyone involved. That evaluation, however, appears inevitable, and all signs point toward significant change.
Throughout the season, the Eagles’ offense was criticized for being overly simple and predictable. Drives stalled in familiar ways, sequencing rarely improved, and adjustments were slow or nonexistent. When those same issues resurfaced in a playoff environment, patience wore thin. For a team that returned nearly its entire offensive core from a recent Super Bowl run, the regression was impossible to ignore.
Sirianni’s comments reflected empathy for players, coaches, and the organization as a whole. But empathy does not erase results. The Eagles entered the year with championship expectations. What they delivered was an offense that looked stuck, unable to adapt as opponents caught on.
The Spotlight on the Offensive Coordinator
Much of the criticism has centered on offensive coordinator Kevin Patullo. Promoted into the role, Patullo replaced Kellen Moore, and that transition has been cited repeatedly as the defining change from the previous season. Fair or not, the coordinator position is often where accountability lands when an offense underperforms.
Players have publicly pushed back on the idea of placing blame on one coach. Offensive linemen pointed to execution issues, missed blocks, and breakdowns that go beyond play calling. Quarterback Jalen Hurts echoed that sentiment, emphasizing collective responsibility and the need for improvement across the board.
Those defenses are understandable. Football failures are rarely the result of a single decision or voice. Yet when the same problems persist week after week, coaching inevitably comes under scrutiny. The Eagles previously dismissed an offensive coordinator after a season that, by most measures, outperformed this one. Against that backdrop, it becomes difficult to argue that continuity alone is the right answer.
Patullo’s supporters inside the locker room note that he handled criticism professionally and did not allow it to fracture relationships. That matters, but the NFL is a results driven league. Professionalism cannot compensate for an offense that fails to evolve.
Sirianni’s Role and Organizational Pressure
Responsibility does not stop with the coordinator. Sirianni, who prides himself on his offensive acumen, promoted Patullo and oversaw the scheme. When the offense struggled to adjust, it raised questions about oversight as much as play design. As head coach, Sirianni is accountable for the direction of the team, even if he is not calling every play.
That said, Sirianni carries significant credibility. He is a Super Bowl winning coach, and his job security appears far stronger than that of his coordinator. Hurts, likewise, remains the unquestioned leader of the offense. In an organization with established cornerstones, change is most likely to occur further down the hierarchy.
The Eagles’ front office now faces a familiar dilemma. Maintaining the status quo risks repeating the same issues. Making a change offers hope of improvement but also raises the question of whether replacing one voice is enough to fix deeper structural problems.
Around the league, coordinators are often the pressure valve. When expectations are high and results fall short, someone has to absorb the consequences. In Philadelphia, that reality is becoming increasingly clear.
A Scapegoat or a Necessary Reset
If Patullo is removed from his role, it will be viewed by many as a form of scapegoating. Players have openly acknowledged that blaming a coordinator is easier than confronting widespread execution failures. There is truth in that. But there is also truth in the idea that leadership changes can reset habits, messaging, and accountability.
The Eagles’ offense did not improve over the course of the season. That alone is a damning indicator. In a league built on constant adjustment, stagnation is often worse than failure. From that perspective, change feels less like punishment and more like necessity.
The bigger question is what comes next. Will a new coordinator bring a more dynamic system, better sequencing, and clearer answers against elite defenses. Or will the same issues resurface under a different name. That uncertainty looms over the organization as it enters an offseason defined by introspection.
What is clear is that doing nothing is not an option. The Eagles’ expectations demand action. Whether that action is sufficient to restore the offense to championship level remains to be seen. But after a season of familiar frustrations and a playoff exit that mirrored them, the message from the outside is unmistakable. Something has to change, and everyone in the building knows exactly where that change is most likely to begin.
