Lane Johnson says quiet part out loud about Nick Sirianni's questionable decision-making

If you just looked at the final box score from Philadelphia's 28-23 victory over the Jacksonville Jaguars in Week 9, you'd probably assume that the Eagles coasted to victory over an inferior opponent on the way to their fourth straight victory. However, as is often the case, the final score doesn't tell the whole story of the contest.

It doesn't tell you that the Eagles were up 22-0 at one point before being outscored 23-6 the rest of the way. It doesn't tell you that the Jaguars were actually in position to win the game in the closing minutes before Trevor Lawrence threw an errant pass that was secured by Nakobe Dean to seal the victory for Philly.

And, it also doesn't tell you that a big part of the reason that the game was much closer than it needed to be was Nick Sirianni's head-scratching decision making that consistently cost the Eagles points.

Philadelphia left a total of nine (!) points on the board by opting against using All-Pro kicker Jake Elliott to extend the lead and tack on additional points. There were two easily makeable field goal opportunities that Sirianni passed up in favor of going for it on fourth down, and the Eagles failed to convert on both occasions. There were also three failed two-point conversions.

So, assuming that Elliott would have converted all of those opportunities had he been given a chance, the Eagles should have scored at least 37 points. Instead, they had to sweat it out all the way until the end because the head coach was determined to make things much more difficult than they needed to be.

There's nothing wrong with an aggressive approach. The Eagles made it all the way to the Super Bowl in 2023 with Sirianni's aggressive playcalling being a big factor. But, there's a difference between being aggressive for the sake of being aggressive compared to taking chances when they actually make sense.

For instance, when the Eagles scored a touchdown to go up 16-0 on the Jaguars, Sirianni opted to go for two, and failed. In that situation, going for two makes absolutely no football sense. 16 points is a two-possession game, while 17 points is a three-possession game. You take the points in that case. Every time. Make it a three possession game.

Lane Johnson not a fan of Sirianni's strategy of passing up points

Other decisions in that game might not have been quite so black-and-white, but in general, football is about outscoring your opponent, and continuously opting against putting points on the board isn't a sound strategy. It also is probably frustrating for the offense to drive all the way down the field consistently only to not maximize the potential points scored.

Eagles offensive tackle Lane Johnson expressed some such frustration after the win over Jacksonville.

"I felt like we left — it should have been a 40-point game," Johnson said. "And I felt like the yards we obtained should have been a reflection of that. It comes down to scoring points. It doesn't matter about yards. You don't win the game with yards. There's multiple times we could have had some points and we didn't."

It's as simple as that. There were multiple times that the Eagles passed on putting points on the board, and it almost came back to bit them. The fact that the game ended in a win doesn't justify the risky and reckless decision-making throughout.

At this point, it's tough to trust Sirianni when it comes to game management, as he simply appears to be a huge fan of self-sabotage. We just have to hope that someone can get the message through to him that it's OK, even often advisable, to settle for field goals and to kick extra points.