Jeffrey Lurie's Eagles power structure has created a toxic environment, per report

Anger directed at Eagles general manager Howie Roseman due to the team's power struggle may be misguided. According to CSN Philly's Geoff Mosher, it's Philadelphia Chairman and CEO Jeffrey Lurie who deserves the blame. A "toxic environment" has been created due to Lurie's preferred power structure. Here's what Mosher had to say:

"According to multiple personnel men who have worked under Lurie and Roseman, the team’s unconventional front office structure has enabled management turmoil to prevail year after year despite the rash of changes around Lurie and Roseman.

The root of the problem is the flow of information from Roseman to Lurie, which is spun exactly the way Roseman wants it.

So although Lurie is known to take "voluminous notes" about the goings-on in personnel matters surrounding his franchise, he’s essentially scribbling down the lecture coming from Roseman’s podium.

"A toxic environment," as one former Eagles personnel executive deemed it.

Lurie trusts Roseman blindly and implicitly, which is the only reason to explain why he’s sat back and allowed several well-regarded football men to become fall guys when the Eagles didn’t win or made bad draft picks.

Someone always pays the price — Marc Ross, Lou Riddick, Jason Licht — and now Gamble.

Someone other than Roseman, of course."

This report from CSN falls in line with their earlier report about Lurie seeing Roseman as a "messiah" who can do no wrong.

Mosher goes on to talk about how other models in the NFL, such as the ones featured by current playoff teams (Seattle, New England, Pittsburgh, Green Bay, Baltimore) differ from Lurie's structure. Mosher suggest those models don't feature a salary cap guy, such as Roseman, having as much power as he does with the Eagles. He also notes that Roseman isn't held accountable for any faults.

Again, this report comes from the opinion of "one former Eagles personnel executive." There are always biases to keep in mind when it comes to these kind of reports. It could very well be a disgruntled ex-employee. But at face value, it's an opinion that doesn't speak very glowingly on an organization that's going through a tumultuous time right now.