Mike Sielski: The Eagles are bucking some longtime beliefs about the NFL. And people don't like it.

PHILADELPHIA — Here are two moments from Sunday. Here are two moments that speak to why so many people who cover and follow the NFL are fixated on and frustrated by the Eagles these days.

Here’s the first: Late that night, the critic and media mogul Bill Simmons recorded an episode of his eponymous podcast. During his conversation with his cohost about that day’s NFL games and in particular the Eagles’ 20-17 victory over the Kansas City Chiefs, Simmons declared that he “can’t stand” watching the Eagles.

“That game was like watching paint dry,” he said. “I wanted to take it off the multiview. They threw deep to DeVonta Smith once, and it was like, ‘Oh! Something happened!’ Otherwise, it’s just these swing passes to [Saquon] Barkley, these boring runs up the middle. Every fourth-and-1, fourth-and-2, now I’m watching Australian rugby for a play. I just don’t enjoy it all. I like a lot of their players on their team. I don’t like watching them play football. These are two games in a row that are a … snoozefest. I’m on my phone the whole time.”

Here’s the second: Late in the fourth quarter, Jalen Hurts and his teammates on the Eagles offense lined up to take a knee and run out the clock. Chiefs defensive tackle Chris Jones barked at Hurts: “You didn’t even have a hundred yards.” Hurts barked back: “We won the [expletive] game. Chill out with that [expletive].”

It’s a safe bet that most Eagles fans reacted, or would react, to Simmons’ boredom and Jones’ attempted taunt in the same manner. They’d say something like, You hate us ‘cause you ain’t us or No one likes us and we don’t care, or maybe they’d say something really nasty, like, You probably put mayo on a Jersey Mike’s Italian, jerk face. They would take it personally, because Philadelphians take everything personally.

And they’d be wrong. At least in this case. This isn’t personal. It’s strictly business. And right now, the Eagles are cutting against a few powerful and long-established beliefs and trends when it comes to the NFL and society’s obsession with and consumption of it.

Trend No. 1: Passing yards and points are considered more interesting than handoffs and Tush Pushes.

We take for granted now, in our fractured media landscape, that any NFL game will attract more attention and eyeballs — and more advertisers and revenue — than anything else that’s on traditional TV or a streaming service. But it wasn’t always this way. Into the late 1970s, the league was still battling Major League Baseball for cultural supremacy. It was only after 1978 — when the NFL loosened its rules about how and when defenders could hit receivers, when the conditions changed to allow pro football to shift from the ground to the air — that the NFL began its growth into the giant it is today. Scoring jumped by more than two points per game from 1977 (34.4) to 1978 (36.6). Quarterbacks became the league’s most popular players and marketable stars. And here we are.

When Simmons lamented the Eagles’ lack of deep passes over their first two games, he was doing nothing but reflecting what most people want, and have gotten accustomed to, from an NFL game. Whether they have a casual interest or are the kind of person who breaks down the All-22 film just for kicks and giggles, fans want to see big plays and lots of points. The Eagles have presented the worst of all worlds in that regard so far, because not only has their offense been relatively stagnant, not only have they relied on the predictable but effective Tush Push, but they’ve been winning anyway. They’re unignorable, but they’re also just not that fun to watch unless you’re already rooting for them. Which leads us to …

Trend No. 2: Interest in pro sports is more individualized.

Of course Simmons found Eagles-Chiefs dull. Unless he bet on the game, he had no vested interest in it. His week wouldn’t have been ruined if Patrick Mahomes had gotten the ball back and led Kansas City on a miraculous comeback. But at a time when anyone can watch any NFL game, the Philadelphia area — with its provincial attitudes and demographics, with its unwavering attachment to the Eagles — is an exception.

The easy availability of games, highlights, and information has eliminated geographic boundaries for fandom and interest. You can fall in love with a team on the opposite coast. You can be a huge Lamar Jackson fan even though you live in Cincinnati. And you can turn off a game in which the best team’s best play gains one lousy yard. The NFL knows this. Its rights-holders know this. And they don’t like it, because of …

Trend No. 3: The prism through which many people view pro football renders the final score irrelevant.

From prop bets to fantasy leagues, millions of fans are locked in on games for reasons that have nothing to do with which team wins or loses, and players — quarterbacks especially — are often judged on aggregate statistics instead of intangible, unquantifiable traits. Now that there is widespread access to All-22 online, a cottage industry has sprouted of analysts who try to explain, from a technical standpoint, what’s really happening on the field.

Jones’ remark to Hurts cuts to the heart of that reality. Less than 100 passing yards? The implication is that Hurts should be embarrassed by such a paltry figure. (He actually threw for 101, but the point remains.) Their exchange reflects much of what the collective conversation about the NFL has become: a lot of framing around fantasy-oriented statistical comparisons and game-film breakdowns.

Then the teams play the game, and only one outcome matters.