On Thursday we solicited questions for an Eagles mailbag via Twitter or whatever it's called now. Thank you as always for doing half the work for me. This is Part I of a two-part mailbag. Let's just get right to it.

Question from @AvoidTheNoid: Can you talk sense into the growing contingent of Eagles fans convincing themselves the 2 seed and only having to play one of DAL/SF to get to the SB is better than getting the 1 seed and probably having to play both?

I didn't even know that folks were making that argument. Let's pretend for a moment that the Eagles beat either one of the Cowboys or 49ers these last two weeks and still held the 1 seed. If the season then ended today, the wildcard round would look like this:

• BYE: (1) Eagles

• (7) Packers at (2) 49ers

• (6) Vikings at (3) Lions

• (5) Cowboys at (4) NFC South winner

In the divisional round, the Eagles would not play the (2) 49ers or (3) Lions, no matter what, because they would get to play the lowest remaining seed. For them to have to face the Cowboys in the divisional round, all three of the following would have to occur:

1. The 49ers would have to beat the Packers.
2. The Lions would have to beat the Vikings.
3. The Cowboys would have to beat the Buccaneers.

Individually, all three of those outcomes are likely. Cumulatively, they are not.

Now let's look at a scenario where the Eagles have the 2 seed. It'd look something like this:

• BYE: (1) 49ers

• (7) Wildcard team at (2) Eagles

• (6) Wildcard team at (3) Lions

• (5) Cowboys at (4) NFC South winner

To begin, if the Eagles get the 2 seed, they very likely will not have rested starters the final week of the regular season. If they win their games down the stretch, they'll keep playing starters to try to get the 1 seed. And then of course they'd also be fending off the Cowboys from behind.

The contenders for the 7 seed are the Packers, Rams, Vikings, and Seahawks. Whoever has earned that seed will presumably be closing their season on something of a high note just to get into the playoffs. The Eagles would be favored over any one of those teams, but, you know, more wear and tear on a team that desperately needs a week off.

So let's say the Eagles get through the wildcard round. If the Lions beat their opponent in Round 1, the Eagles would host them. Again, the Eagles would be favored, but that game is not a gimme. 

If the Lions lose to their opponent in Round 1, which is certainly a possibility, the Eagles would likely host the Cowboys. In other words, the idea that the 2 seed would help the Eagles avoid playing both the Cowboys and 49ers isn't necessarily true.

And then in the NFC Championship Game, they'd likely face the 49ers, but, you know, on the west coast.

That first round bye is gold.

1. The importance of an extra week of rest at that part of the season cannot be overstated.
2. You don't have win a game to advance to the divisional round (duh).
3. All home games until the Super Bowl (duh).

There's just no reasonable argument that the 2 seed is the better option.

Question from @BirdsfaninKS: If the Cowboys and 49ers win their next two, and the Eagles drop one of their next two, should they just rest their starters for the last two weeks and accept their 5th seed finish?

If they are locked into the 5 seed with one game to go, they will absolutely rest their starters. I wonder if they would rest starters if they were locked in to the 5 seed with two games to go. My guess is no, because it will have meant they're still losing games, and they'll want to head into the playoffs with at least some positive momentum. No matter what you or I think they should do, they will not rest starters if there is any chance of still getting the 1 or 2 seeds, or if there's a chance of falling further than the 5 seed.

Question from @KBeckEagles: Was Sean Desai one of the Eagles' top candidates for the defensive coordinator job or do you think they settled since they were behind the eight ball during the interview process?

The Eagles brought in Vic Fangio to be an unofficial consultant last year. While I'm sure they valued whatever insights he gave them during the 2022 season, the real value in bringing him in was that he already had a foot in the building and could replace Jonathan Gannon if Gannon left to be a head coach somewhere else. My understanding is that the feeling was mutual. 

When Gannon communicated to the team that he was staying in Philly, Fangio took the open defensive coordinator job in Miami. And then, of course, Gannon had impermissible contact with the Cardinals in between the NFC Championship Game and the Super Bowl and took their head coaching job, thus wrecking all the foresight and contingency plans the Eagles had in place if they needed to fill his job.

So in that respect, one could argue that they were "settling" on literally anyone they hired thereafter.

Question from @CharlesLaLaLa7: Brian Johnson looks overmatched in using the Eagles' huge amount of offensive talent. How much do you chalk up to his lack of experience vs. concern he is not capable of being a coordinator?

• It's Nick Sirianni's offense. He has the loudest and most powerful voice in the organization when developing gameplans each week for the upcoming opponent.

• Brian Johnson is the offensive coordinator, and while he calls the plays, if Sirianni wants a play called in a particular situation, well, guess what... that's the play.

• Kevin Patullo is the passing game coordinator.

• Jeff Stoutland is the run game coordinator.

Blame for the Eagles' offensive inconsistency has fallen squarely on Johnson, and seemingly Johnson alone, probably because he's the guy who is new in his position. 

• MORE EAGLES
• Eagles-Seahawks Week 15 injury report, with analysis
  
• Report: Anonymous Eagles player calls offense 'very predictable'
  
• How are recent former Eagles playing this season (version 2.0)?
  

The Eagles' scheme last season was a well-oiled machine, and part of that was because Jalen Hurts made major leaps from his first full year as a starter in 2021 to his second starting season in 2022. Their opponents had four or five days to prepare for them each week, and that was about it. Certainly, nobody was wracking their brains on how to stop the Eagles during the 2022 offseason when the answers at the time seemed pretty obvious. In 2023, you can be sure as hell that teams around the league were watching a whole lot of Eagles film during the offseason (a) to see what they could steal, and (b) to try to figure out how to stop them. Defenses always figure out a way to catch up, and to some degree this season with the Eagles' offense, I believe they have.

Ultimately, I think that what is happening is fans are overestimating Johnson's importance to the success of the offense. It's Sirianni's menu, with help from Johnson, Patullo, Stoutland, and others. Johnson is picking off that menu on gameday, and on some plays, not even.

Maybe Johnson isn't good. I'll be honest — I don't know. It's tough to tell, honestly. But he just feels like an extremely easy and convenient target, when the players haven't always executed and none of the other coaches seem to catch any shrapnel at all when the offense has a bad game.

Question from cocoeagles88: In regard to the Eagles' losses the last two weeks, were they a product of the schedule, the teams they played, the offensive and defensive game plans, or they're just not as good as they were last year? Or a combination of all of those factors?

Yep, all factors. I'd weight your list like so:

1. The teams they played
2. Not as good as they were last year
3. Gameplans
4. Schedule (rest disadvantages)

Question from @nicknuggett: The Athletic ranked Lurie as the 10th best owner in the league. Where would you rank him? 10 seems to low IMO.

Lurie is a really good owner. He'll spend on players, coaches, analytics, and really any other competitive advantage the front office deems worthwhile. He has also mostly done a good job with head coaching hires, and has been willing to pull the plug when appropriate. He badly wants to win, and puts him money behind all efforts to achieve that end. If I were to have one gripe, it's that he seems to fall short of other owners when it comes to being an influential voice within the NFL, despite having owned the team for a quarter century. 

That's the kind of exercise that is nearly impossible to undertake. It's not like ranking head coaches or general managers. There's so much nuance to consider with ownership, and you kind of have to follow teams really closely to have a truly informed opinion. I could have strong opinions of Lurie, Jerry Jones (Cowboys), John Mara (Giants), and Josh Harris (Commanders, but really, Sixers), but I'd just be pretending if I claimed to have a deep understanding of the inner workings of every NFL team. That said, it's kind of laughable that they have Gayle Benson (Saints) at 2 and Jim Irsay (Colts) at 7.

Question from MSavage901: What’s up with the lack of transparency about Rashaad Penny? Has anyone asked the coaches about him and why they don’t think he would make an impact?

Yep, they've been asked about Penny. Usually a simple response: "He's the RB4," or some such version of that. I'd be curious to see what he could do with some legitimate touches. He's been hurt a lot, but when healthy he has a proven track record of success. It's weird that he can't get a look.

Question from @killakow: PHLY’s own Zach Berman predicted before the 2023 draft that Nolan Smith would be the team’s only first round draft pick at 10. Given how the draft turned out, would you say it is legitimate for him to say that he predicted that Smith would be the team’s pick?

I published an Eagles writer mock draft roundup the morning of the draft in April. 

Sheil Kapadia, Tommy Lawlor, and I (💁‍♂️) all had Jalen Carter as the Eagles' pick at 10. Actually, Sheil and I had them trading up for him, which they did. So Sheil and I win, and Tommy gets the bronze.

A lot of people had Nolan Smith as the No. 10 pick: Brandon Gowton, John McMullen, Chris Franklin, and as you mentioned, Zach. They can all have honorable mentions, I suppose, and if they want to say that they "predicted that Smith would be the team’s pick" if it makes them feel better, then I won't stand in their way.

Three people had Bijan Robinson, which was never going to happen. They all come in last.

Question from Zach: I hope you don't take offense to this but I noticed that a while back you changed "gambling degenerates" to "gambling enthusiasts" for a while and now we're back to "degenerates" What gives?

No offense taken. I enjoy Joe Pesci scolding a "degenerate gambler" in Casino (link NSFW), so that's why I use the word "degenerates." Anyway, we had a gambling sponsor that understandably did not want to call their potential clientele "degenerates" so we changed it to "enthusiasts" for them, lol. We no longer have a gambling sponsor, so I changed it back.

Follow Jimmy & PhillyVoice on Twitter: @JimmyKempski | thePhillyVoice

Like us on Facebook: PhillyVoice Sports

Add Jimmy's RSS feed to your feed reader