So Seriously, What's Up With the Playcalling?

As this point, the notion that Andy Reid passes too often is pretty much an established fact:

1. Despite Reid's bizarre claim to the contrary, no Super Bowl winning team has ever passed as often as Andy Reid's teams do (most aren't even close).
2. By at least some measures, the Eagles have the most productive running back in the entire league.
3. Overuse of Westbrook shouldn't be an issue because the Eagles also have one of the most efficient spell backs in the entire league (same link).
4. Donovan McNabb is making too many mistakes right now to be entrusted with the same percentage of the offensive load he used to carry.

I'm not telling you anything you don't already know.  But just to be systematic about this, that's our starting point (yes, I know we could come up with a much longer list of reasons to run the ball -- that's good enough for now).

So the question then becomes, why doesn't Reid realize all this as well?  It's fine to say he's just stubborn and doesn't want to change, but that doesn't really get us very far in understanding what's going on.  After all, people aren't generally stubborn because they think they're wrong, but rather because they think they're right.

So with which elements of the above four-part premise would Reid disagree?  Based on his actions over the past 12 or so months, you'd have to say numbers one, three and four. 

1. This goes back years and years.  Reid clearly believes he's right and everyone else is wrong when it comes to how you win football games and championship.  So, if we're trying to get into Reid's head for this year, maybe he's thinking the following: a) It doesn't really matter what the team does this year because they're not winning the Super Bowl anyway, so b) I'm not going to revamp my whole attack just to try to squeeze out a few more wins when next year I want to go right back to the bombs-away approach to make a run at a ring. 
2. Reid agrees with this one.  He's pretty much called Westbrook the best back in the league. 
3. Reid seems to agree only partially with this one.  He's not worried about overuse, because in the games they need Westbrook to step up (like last week), Reid doesn't hesitate to increase his workload.  On the other hand, Buckhalter is only averaging about three carries in the games he plays when Westbrook is healthy.  I don't get this.  It's one thing to keep the rookie Tony Hunt nailed to the bench; it's another thing entirely to tell a seven-year vet averaging just about five yards a carry that you just can't find any snaps for him.
4. Reid's disagreement with this one is self-evident from the playcalling.  Or is it? 

Maybe Reid does realize that the current McNabb isn't able to carry the offense like he used to be, but he's going to keep giving him chances to do so. 

And if he can't, that means he's gone.

We've all been assuming for awhile now that Reid would eventually apply the Jeff Garcia template to McNabb.  Surround a veteran quarterback with enough talent and a conservative gameplan so all he needs to do is make a couple of plays a game and protect the football.

But consider point #1 above.  What if Reid doesn't think he can win a Super Bowl with that approach?  He's then got to decide soon whether or not McNabb can be the guy he was before.  In Reid's world, if McNabb can't execute his pass-heavy gameplan as a top five quarterback, then it's time to go looking somewhere else.

That would make this year (and maybe next) an audition.  He's not going to change his system to fit his "Super Bowl quarterback," he's going to change his quarterback to fit his system.

(How is this different from what everyone else is saying?  It's because most people assumed Reid would try to win as many games as possible with McNabb, and if that didn't work he'd have to move on.  This theory says instead that Reid doesn't care how many games McNabb wins and he's not going to accommodate his veteran quarterback at all.  If McNabb can't win as many games as he used to in the exact same way he used to then it's time to move on.  Depending upon what you think about the state of McNabb's recovery, you could argue that Reid's simply setting him up to fail.) 

Admittedly, this is kind of a crazy theory.  But it certainly explains a few things, like why Reid won't adjust to fit the new McNabb reality, but is happy to shift gears when someone else is at quarterback.  It also makes more sense than just believing that Andy Reid, who's been coaching a long time and is well-respected as one of the league's top coaches, somehow can't see the stupendously obvious truth that's so apparent to all the rest of us.

And like all good theories, it comes with its own built-in falsifiable prediction.  At some point, Kevin Kolb is going to take the reins for this franchise.  It might be sooner rather than later, but it now seems inevitable that it will be within the next three years.  When the kid takes over, the obvious move will be for the Eagles to shift to the same type of conservative, run-heavy offense that teams like the Chargers and Steelers used to bring along their young quarterbacks. 

If this theory is correct, Reid won't.  However the depth chart shakes out, Kolb is going to be anointed the "Super Bowl quarterback."  Which means Reid may start out a little carefully just to help get Kolb's feet wet, but almost immediately he's going to be dumping the offense on the kid and telling him it's up to him to make plays.    

Here's the bad news for you McNabb haters.  The quarterback may change, but I bet the offense doesn't.

Comments

[BrianS]

Kevin Kolb, may God have mercy on your soul.

"However the depth chart shakes out, Kolb is going to be anointed the "Super Bowl quarterback." Which means Reid may start out a little carefully just to help get Kolb's feet wet, but almost immediately he's going to be dumping the offense on the kid and telling him it's up to him to make plays."

If this happens, Reid needs to go, not the QB (or maybe they'll both need to go). With all due respect to everything he's accomplished here, does he really think he knows better than almost every coach in Super Bowl history how to win a Super Bowl?

I think Ben Rothlisberger is a good QB (I haven't watched much of him this year), but more importantly, I think in his first and 2nd years, Cowher did a great job of protecting Big Ben with the running game. If he's going to go all Air Reid, the Eagles will need both an elite QB,and elite WRs again.

Isn't it more reasonable for the eagles to use either their own 2003 season as a template (I think our WRs are better than those) as well as 2nd half of last season, and rely on having an effective to great running game, than it is to basically hope that Kolb is a better QB than McNabb in his prime?

/rant (for now)

***Here's the bad news for you McNabb haters. The quarterback may change, but I bet the offense doesn't.***

WOW. I CANNOT believe, that by sheer chance, I found someone who knows EXACTLY WTH they are talking about here. I completely and totally agree with this entire post and that final sentence sums it all up perfectly. It's a shame that it seems only a tiny percentage of fans realize what's staring them right in the face. Although, I wonder when the QB DOES change, if Kolb will get the quality receivers that McNabb has been denied *nearly* his entire tenure in Philly. It's crazy how pass happy Coach Reid is, yet where are the receivers? For a passing game to be successful, you need a man to throw the ball where it needs to be and men to catch it as well. Not one or the other.

[Boss Hot Sauce]

Great post. There's also an economic factor at play, here, too. McNabb's going to cost a lot of money to keep around. If he can't run the offense the way Reid believes it needs to be run to win a title, then they need to make the change. Scaling back the offense in order to make would only mask that problem.

Personally, though, I don't know how Reid can justify putting so much emphasis on throwing the ball while at the same time treating wide out as a disposable position and drafting road graders on the offensive line.

Still, I think you may have nailed a rationale for what's going on. I hope you haven't, though, because it's a terrifying thesis (considering the failure rate of NFL quarterbacks). Seems to me to be a little batty to put all your eggs in a super star QB theory -- particularly when guys like Dilfer, Rothlisberger, and Brad Johnson have rings and at any given time there are only two to three really great QB's in the league. Again, scary.

[bigmyc]

Is it wrong of me to suggest that this McNabb/Kolb thing is waaaayyyy over analyzed? It isn't about a Super Bowl Qb. It isn't about setting McNabb up to fail. It's about finding the right guy for Andy's scheme. Period.

You know, Kolb is billed as a much better pure passer than McNabb ever had been....So what's the friggin big deal about NOT changing the pass first offense? I'd rather he run the ball more, but this problem only began once McNabb showed he can't throw that much and not make crucial errors....There's nothing saying that Kolb will be the same way.

Keep that in mind.

By the way, in his day, Johnson was a fine QB and Rothlisberger is among the league's best. It's all about making plays and NOT making bad ones. Kolb might just fit that better than McNabb.

[Me]

The best coaches adjust their schemes to fit their players.