Full disclaimer: I have no idea what the Eagles’ offense will look like in 2026. Sean Mannion has never called plays over a full NFL season. Josh Grizzard has only done it once. There is no finished product to evaluate yet, no Eagles film to diagnose, no certainty to lean on. However, we can formulate some ideas based on past evidence. There is Mannion’s background inside the Sean McVay–Matt LaFleur–Kyle Shanahan ecosystem. There is his one public play-calling sample at the Shrine Bowl, where he installed an offense under time constraints. There are also years of league-wide data on how this coaching tree builds offenses.
The goal of this short series is not to guess which plays the Eagles will call, but to understand how this staff is likely to think about offense and what we might see from the Eagles next year. With Free Agency and the Draft just around the corner, I figured it’s a good time to get into it, as there may be some key takeaways regarding the type of player the Eagles may target.
PREVIOUSLY IN THIS SERIES: Part 1, Basic Principles | Part 2, The Run Game | Part 3, Play Action
Part 4: Other Concepts
Across the first three parts of this series, I’ve focused on specific areas. A lot of what I’ve discussed is how the run and pass are tied together, which makes everything easier for the quarterback. However, even the best systems need some classic passing concepts. You need a quarterback to throw it down the field and a receiver to win a contested catch, separate at the catch point, or something to do something special. This article is a bit more random, but I’m trying to focus on some of the concepts and extras I expect.
I think Green Bay’s offense over the past year is more of a ‘greatest hits’ of concepts offense than the Rams have been under McVay, or the 49ers under Shanahan. I think LaFleur is a bit more expansive when it comes to running standalone concepts that aren’t necessarily tied to the running game. It’s why I see the Packers’ offense as a good fit for the Eagles, as it is sort of McVay/Shanahan without being all the way in. They are quite vertical, which suits this current Eagles’ roster.
I had to include these 3 plays against Washington as a great example of an expansive passing game that is really well sequenced. Individually, they are great plays. But when you realize they are called within the same game, they become even better. The use of motion to convey a particular look, and the minor differences across plays, despite them all doing essentially the same thing, is great. Just watch them one by one…
This is something we just didn’t see from the Eagles last year. On the first play, the crossing route displaces the safety, motion widens the outside defender, and the vertical release arrives through a void created by the other routes. Play 2 is nearly identical, but the offense exploits the defense’s adjustment to that very success, freeing a corner route into a ton of open space. And lastly, they run nearly the same thing as play 1 with a route in the flat to put the flat defender in a bind. It’s beautiful.
These plays are not independent calls. These vertical shots function more as connected families than as isolated designs. The purpose of sequencing is not simply to create one explosive play. It is to alter how the defense interprets every snap that follows. This is different from how the Eagles have viewed offensive football of late.
In terms of other concepts, the Packers do an excellent job targeting the intermediate area of the field, especially outside the numbers. They throw outside more than in the intermediate area of the middle of the field, which is why I’m bullish on this system working for Hurts. Here, a simple timing comeback from shotgun succeeds through rhythm and leverage alone, independent of motion or play action.
The Packers do a good job of testing a defense’s rules by their use of personnel and formation, too. Jumbo personnel to take a deep shot? Why not…
The Eagles struggled against two-high zone coverage last year. They didn’t have answers. How about isolating a linebacker in coverage through the use of your formation and route concept? What a lovely idea…
The design succeeds because it uses the defense’s own rules against it, forcing a conflict that cannot be resolved within the coverage’s structure. This is just good offensive football.
Quarterback movement introduces another answer to the same problem. Against Baltimore, a designed rollout places the primary route directly within the passer’s line of sight, reducing the complexity of the read while still attacking downfield space.
Movement in this context is not improvisation; it is structure extending beyond the pocket. This is another weapon that you can use to attack defenses with a mobile quarterback.
I’ve mentioned the Packers’ use of intermediate outside-the-number routes. Expect to see a lot of Flood and 4-strong concepts next year. They like to cut the field in half and flood one area, which is a good way of stressing modern zone coverages. This is a big part of their identity. I don’t see Jordan Love (or Malik Willis when he played) as a genius post-snap who can eliminate reads at an elite level. Similarly, I don’t want Hurts taking full field reads where he has to get to a backside dig within the timing of the play. That’s a tough way to live in the modern NFL.
Yes, Hurts will need to hit the intermediate middle-of-the-field more. He will need to get used to under-center play action. There may be a learning curve, but I am willing to give it time. The Packers’ offense does stuff like this, but they also do a lot of RPOs and concepts Hurts is used to.
Access to that area forces defenses to defend the full width of the field, preventing the kind of sideline-condensed coverage structures that have too often limited Philadelphia’s recent passing efficiency. Even if Hurts does this only a little, it will be an improvement over the past year.
Overall, I hope I’ve given you a little insight into this offense. Sequencing can create explosives. Structure can simplify reads. Motion can make things easier for a QB. But, despite everything I’ve said about the scheme, always remember that the most talented teams often win a lot of games. A lot of Mannion’s success will come down to whether the Eagles can build an offense that suits what he wants to do.
The move toward more under-center runs, outside-zone looks, and play action should create a better offensive environment, one less dependent on late-down improvisation and more capable of sustaining efficiency across drives. But the ceiling of that environment will still be defined by talent. The more I watch the Packers, the more I like the hire of Mannion, because I think the Packers’ offense is a great blend of the McVay/Shanahan tree, with a lot of concepts that Hurts is familiar with already. LaFleur does not run a straight-up Shanahan offense. He is more in tune with modern spread concepts that Hurts already enjoys.
Despite all the positivity, remember what I said at the start … I have no idea what the Eagles’ offense will look like in 2026. Sean Mannion has never called plays over a full NFL season. Josh Grizzard has only done it once. There is no finished product to evaluate yet, no Eagles film to diagnose, no certainty to lean on.
But hey, it’s February, I’m choosing to be positive for now…
Thank you for reading! I’d love to hear your thoughts, so feel free to comment below and ask any questions. If you enjoyed this piece, you can find more of my work and podcast here. If you would like to support me further, please check out my Patreon here!
See More:
