This season’s evaluations of the Philadelphia Eagles defense have been anything but predictable. My opinions seem to oscillate between overly optimistic and disappointingly critical. Just last week, I praised their performance, yet I must reiterate that I remain skeptical about their overall defensive strategy, especially in light of their matchup against the New Orleans Saints.

It’s important to highlight that the Saints employ a significantly different offensive approach compared to the Falcons. This divergence made it somewhat easier for the Eagles to deploy their 5-man fronts, primarily because the Saints utilized a lot of 12 and 21 personnel groupings.

Unfortunately, this week, the analysis leans towards the negative. The Eagles’ defense displayed a dismal performance against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, and I feel that a considerable amount of the blame falls on Vic Fangio. The overall strategy was lacking, and it’s crucial we delve into the specifics.

Assessing the Eagles’ Defensive Strategy

On the very first play of the game, a defense aims to establish an early tone, sending a clear message to the opposing offense that they are facing a formidable, physical unit. However, the Eagles opted to give Mike Evans, a seasoned 31-year-old receiver, a generous 10-yard cushion, even with a safety positioned behind him. If your goal is to communicate that your defense is soft and willing to concede easy completions, then starting the game this way is the perfect approach. My disdain for this style of defense runs deep, and it’s essential to clarify that this critique isn’t solely an anti-Fangio sentiment. You can indeed implement the Fangio scheme while still allowing your cornerbacks to play closer to the line of scrimmage. In this particular game, the Eagles’ passivity was palpable and ultimately detrimental.

In a recent interview, Fangio admitted that the defensive strategy was unexpected for the Eagles. At least he displayed some honesty in acknowledging this shortcoming.

Nevertheless, if the entire viewing audience could see this glaring issue, it baffles me why the Eagles did not make any adjustments or alterations to their game plan. I could count on one hand the instances of press coverage I witnessed from the Eagles’ cornerbacks.

I could have compiled several clips showcasing C.J. Gardner-Johnson from this matchup. His performance was subpar, and while I typically refrain from questioning any player’s effort, I must say he appeared lackadaisical at times, particularly when tackling or reacting quickly. If Sydney Brown had been healthy and available, I might have advocated for CJGJ to take a seat on the bench. His overall play was not up to standard, illustrating yet another instance of the Eagles’ cornerbacks playing too far off the line. Avonte Maddox was positioned so far away that it became effortless for the Buccaneers to exploit him, allowing easy completions to the slot receiver and tight end. CJGJ needs to react more swiftly in these situations. Thankfully, Nolan Smith made a remarkable play to save a potential touchdown.

Having observed numerous Fangio defenses over the years, I find it hard to recognize this particular performance. It did not resemble the typical structure of a Fangio defense. Usually, Fangio prefers to have an extra defender on each half of the field. While I acknowledge this is a broad simplification, consider that if there are three receivers on one side, Fangio likely wants four defenders covering them. Now, examine this specific play. The Buccaneers only sent out three receivers, while the Eagles countered with four defenders on that side. However, there was a complete lack of communication and flow in their coverage. If you think Fangio’s scheme hinges solely on two-high safeties, I urge you to watch this film. The Eagles frequently reverted to single-high coverage, which proved ineffective, culminating in plays where Blankenship found himself matched up against Mike Evans. This is far from ideal and not what I anticipated to witness.

Another significant frustration from this game was the level of confusion on the field. Numerous snaps were marred by players appearing bewildered post-snap, leading to complaints among themselves. Regardless of your stance on Fangio’s scheme, it’s unacceptable to be in week 4 with players still struggling to grasp the fundamentals. If the scheme is too intricate, it’s time to simplify it. If players are making repeated mistakes, it indicates a need for better coaching. The reasons for this confusion remain unclear, but it’s certainly not acceptable. CJGJ clearly played as a split safety, leaving the middle of the field vulnerable, while Slay was positioned with outside leverage.

I have consistently expressed my dislike for defensive line stunts. While they can be effective in certain situations, they are often overly aggressive and can backfire. In this game, the Eagles struggled to generate pressure on the quarterback, and I attribute this more to the scheme than the players. It’s immensely challenging to pressure the quarterback when the cornerbacks are positioned so far off the receivers, allowing for easy completions. If Fangio intended to be creative in this game, I would have preferred to see more simulated pressures and creepers instead of relying solely on defensive line stunts. However, I must admit, when they do work, they can look spectacular.

Let’s take a moment to highlight a positive aspect: I believe Quinyon Mitchell was the standout defensive back for the Eagles in this game (though I understand that’s not saying much). His coverage against Mike Evans in the red zone was commendable. Evans thrives in contested situations, yet Mitchell executed a textbook rep. While he may not have been flawless, his start to his career with the Eagles has been promising.

Now that I’ve shared a positive note, let’s revert to the negatives. What transpired on 4th and 1? The Buccaneers executed a standard read-option play. Brandon Graham correctly crashed down on the running back, forcing Baker Mayfield to keep the ball. At this moment, Reed Blankenship needed to recognize the situation and pursue the quarterback aggressively. Even if he were to miss the tackle, it would have been better than his actual approach. Making a low tackle on the ball carrier at the 1-yard line is utterly pointless. This play encapsulates the Eagles’ passive defense. While I’m not personally criticizing Blankenship, as he may not have been feeling well, the coaching staff must emphasize aggressiveness in short-yardage scenarios.

Surprisingly, I have another positive to share! Beyond Quinyon Mitchell and Brandon Graham, I find it hard to identify other players worthy of praise in this analysis. I can’t believe I’ve reached this point without discussing the Eagles’ numerous missed tackles! This topic warrants a controversial perspective, so let’s dive in.

Here’s my bold opinion: the missed tackles stemmed more from the Eagles’ passive scheme than from individual player failures. Don’t misunderstand me; there were certainly several Eagles defenders who did not perform well in this game. However, the high number of missed tackles can be attributed to the defensive backs having to sprint out from 10 yards deep to tackle running backs. If the defense allows the offense to routinely check down to running backs and receivers in the flat, missed tackles will be inevitable! While I’m not absolving the Eagles’ players of responsibility, the scheme failed to position them for success. That’s the essence of effective coaching and strategic planning.

Here’s yet another mistake I observed. While I can’t definitively pinpoint the cause without inside knowledge, I suspect that this is another error on CJGJ’s part. It appears to be a five-man rush with a fire zone coverage behind it, which would typically require CJGJ to cover the flat. However, he neglected to do so. It’s important to note that I can’t know the exact call made on this play.

This was the moment I completely lost my patience. I can understand why, in response to specific motions or shifts, an offensive coordinator might instruct an EDGE player to drop into coverage. I have no issue with an EDGE rusher dropping back while an off-ball linebacker rushes the quarterback. However, this needs to be executed with subtlety. There was no disguise here whatsoever! It was glaringly obvious pre-snap that Nolan Smith was in coverage, indicating a linebacker would be tasked with rushing the passer. The Buccaneers were handed a significant advantage. The only silver lining is that Nolan Smith managed to hold his own against Chris Godwin, or else the situation could have been even worse for Fangio.

It remains unclear whether this issue arises from player decisions or coaching directives, but it must be addressed. Quinyon Mitchell should never be giving such a significant cushion to any wide receiver, especially Sterling Shepard on 2nd and 12. While Fangio often emphasizes that players can choose to press or not, at this point, the coaches need to intervene and make that decision for them. It doesn’t matter if Mitchell or Darius Slay feel more comfortable in off-coverage; granting this much space to any receiver undermines their chances of success. This has become a recurring theme over the past three years.

Finally, let’s address yet another instance of miscommunication. It’s evident that Avonte Maddox and Kelee Ringo were not aligned at all. Maddox was visibly frustrated after the play. Additionally, there seemed to be uncertainty regarding who was responsible for rushing the quarterback, leading to Zack Baun acting as a makeshift spy, a strategy that serves no purpose against Baker Mayfield on a 3rd and long situation. Such miscommunication cannot occur, especially in crucial moments, as it results in giving up easy completions. The regular season is well underway; these games carry weight.

Lastly, I must express my dissatisfaction with the personnel choices here. If I’m going to use some DIME and bring in Kelee Ringo, there’s no circumstance where I’d position him in the slot. Ringo should be utilized on the outside, employing physical press coverage. This play was fundamentally flawed.