The Philadelphia Eagles are broken – here’s how to fix them
By David Esser
Analytics are a tool, not a religion.
A common theme during The Athletic’s article, analytics have become gospel around the NovaCare Complex. Spearheaded by the likes of Howie Roseman and Jeffrey Lurie himself, it almost sounds like the Philadelphia Eagles are trying to “Moneyball” their way to success, completely ignoring all traditional football models while they attempt to outsmart the league with their advanced analytics department.
This type of over-reliance on analytic models has become specifically prominent during some of the team’s recent drafts. Selecting JJ Arcega-Whiteside over DK Metcalf, Jalen Reagor over Justin Jefferson, and Jalen Hurts in the second-round are all picks that can be singled out as moves that very much went against traditional NFL evaluation processes.
The Reagor-over-Jefferson pick in particular has come under a ton of fire over the last 12 months, as it’s been repeatedly reported that the team’s actual scouting department wanted Jefferson, whereas Roseman and the coaches sided with Reagor.
As someone who classifies themselves as a baseball writer first (make sure to check out our Phillies page!), I’m fairly pro-analytics. However, there’s obviously a limit to which you should rely on them.
Specifically in football, where the season is only 17 games long, it’s really hard to use analytic models successfully because the sample size is just so small. While they can undoubtedly be used as a tool to make decision making processes easier, they should almost never outweigh one’s scouting department.
Jeffrey Lurie has repeatedly bragged about his team’s successful analytics usage, but he’s going to have to reign things in if he wants his team to stop butchering drafts moving forward.
Regardless of if Roseman stays as GM or not, analytics should be used as a tool – not as some sort of moral code that causes in-fighting and division.