Boston Scott hints frustration with the Eagles' offense may be misplaced

Sometimes, the loudest criticism misses the bigger picture. As conversations continue about the Philadelphia Eagles' offensive inconsistency, a familiar voice stepped in to offer a different perspective. Former Eagles running back Boston Scott didn't deliver a long explanation, but he didn't need to. A repost said enough. Recently, Jeff Stoutland was a guest on Jason Kelce's New Heights podcast. He gave a blunt assessment of Philadelphia's offensive woes last season.

“It’s execution. It’s calling the right play at the right time and not running bad plays into bad defenses. It ain't that hard.”

In response, Scott shared the clip and added a simple caption: "25’, 23’, half of 21’.." It raised eyebrows, and it sparked interpretation. Context matters more than criticism, and Scott's message wasn't random. If anything, it was pointed. By referencing previous seasons, he appeared to suggest that offensive inconsistency isn't a new development.

That theory grows legs when reading his response to an Eagles writer's criticism.

Scott may have a point. The same issues being discussed now, timing, execution, and rhythm, have surfaced before, even during years that ultimately ended in success. That complicates the narrative. It does so because if the problem isn't new, then the blame might not be as straightforward as it's being presented. Much of the criticism has been directed toward play-callers and assistants in recent seasons. Names change, roles evolve, but the structure remains. And as Scott later hinted in a response to an Eagles writer, perhaps more attention should be given to Nick Sirianni. It's not a new take. Sirianni's influence on the offense has always been present, regardless of who holds the play-calling sheet.