Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Assuming the Chiefs really do want Foles...
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
mcnabbulous
As rumors suggest. What does it take?
I'd probably say a third and swap of 2nds.
GQSmooth
That would work, I was going to say at least a 2nd rounder. People say a 3rd but he has experience now so he is more valuable than where he was drafted.
Eyrie
It would be a decent move for the Chiefs.

It would also mean that Kelly has settled on an offense totally unsuited to Foles and is prepared to write off this season in search of a high pick for a franchise QB in 2014, because neither Vick nor Dixon is going to lead us to .500.
D Rock
I wouldn't let Foles go for less than KC's 2nd rounder.
Phits
According to an 'unknown' NFL pundit (by way of Tommy Lawlor) a 4th rounder is all we can expect for Shaggy Foles:

QUOTE
What is Foles value? This is where things get tricky. The Eagles arenít giving Foles away. At the very least, heís got value as a backup QB. We know that you need 2 QBs in the NFL. Foles may not be universally loved, but the guy showed last year that he can play. Heís got NFL ability.

I asked someone who is an NFL expert, but not an Eagles fan what he thought Foles value might be. He guessed a 4th round pick. At that point, Iíd just keep Foles. You could deal him for that pick and spend a mid-round pick on a new QB, but there is no guarantee the new guy would pan out. Foles isnít a proven quality starter, but he can be a backup.


LINK
mcnabbulous
That makes no sense, given the fact that he was a third rounder just last year, it's a weak QB crop, and he is proven to be a capable player.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 15 2013, 05:07 PM) *
That makes no sense, given the fact that he was a third rounder just last year, it's a weak QB crop, and he is proven to be a capable player.

He's proven that he can play, and he is better than mediocre. Also, with the expectations of a strong(er) QB draft next season, why would you want to give up more than a 4th? Given what I have seen Foles isn't likely to light it up in his 2nd season.
Rick
I'd really hate if they traded Foles away right now, that would mean we're stuck with Vick and would really start to scare me more about Kelly than I was when they hired him.

I still want to see what Foles can develop into. What we saw of him last season shows he has the potential to be a nice QB in the NFL. Remember, he was a rookie last season and rookies tend to make mistakes. We've gotten spoiled by a few rookie QBs but you can't expect rookies to do all that well when they are just coming into the NFL.

The question (of course) is whether he can iron out the mistakes he's made. That's something none of us know.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Feb 15 2013, 05:27 PM) *
He's proven that he can play, and he is better than mediocre. Also, with the expectations of a strong(er) QB draft next season, why would you want to give up more than a 4th? Given what I have seen Foles isn't likely to light it up in his 2nd season.

I'm not really following. What does giving up more than a 4th this year have to do with next years draft class? The fact that a team in need of a QB this year might be able to acquire a guy that has proven he is somewhat capable seems like it would be appealing. Especially because of how mediocre this QB class appears to be.
We shall see.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 15 2013, 05:53 PM) *
I'm not really following. What does giving up more than a 4th this year have to do with next years draft class? The fact that a team in need of a QB this year might be able to acquire a guy that has proven he is somewhat capable seems like it would be appealing. Especially because of how mediocre this QB class appears to be.
We shall see.

Foles is not likely to lead a team to the post season. With that said, why would you give up more than a 4th for a player that isn't likely to improve your team significantly? Especially since next year's crop of QB's is expected to be pretty good. A team in desperate need of a QB also has other holes to fill. If you were a fan and heard your team gave up a first, second or third round pick for Shaggy would you be happy?
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Feb 15 2013, 06:22 PM) *
Foles is not likely to lead a team to the post season. With that said, why would you give up more than a 4th for a player that isn't likely to improve your team significantly? Especially since next year's crop of QB's is expected to be pretty good. A team in desperate need of a QB also has other holes to fill. If you were a fan and heard your team gave up a first, second or third round pick for Shaggy would you be happy?

We spent a 3rd rounder on him last year, and I was fine with it. If I were the Chiefs fan, and Andy decided he wanted to continue working with Foles, I'd give up the compensation I mentioned earlier (3rd and flip of 2nds)

I probably wouldn't give up much more than that. Maybe a late 2, but none of those teams are in need of a QB. So from my perspective, an early 3 is reasonable for Foles. Which would mean he is slightly more valuable than when he was a mid-late round, unknown pick last year.

From the Eagles perspective, if they could have the first pick in the 2nd, and 3rd rounds, along with their original 1st and 3rd, I would be satisfied.
Zero
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 15 2013, 06:32 PM) *
We spent a 3rd rounder on him last year, and I was fine with it. If I were the Chiefs fan, and Andy decided he wanted to continue working with Foles, I'd give up the compensation I mentioned earlier (3rd and flip of 2nds)

I probably wouldn't give up much more than that. Maybe a late 2, but none of those teams are in need of a QB. So from my perspective, an early 3 is reasonable for Foles. Which would mean he is slightly more valuable than when he was a mid-late round, unknown pick last year.

From the Eagles perspective, if they could have the first pick in the 2nd, and 3rd rounds, along with their original 1st and 3rd, I would be satisfied.

I would be happy with that deal. The first pick in the second round plus the first pick in the third round sacrificing Foles and the fourth pick in the secon round. I can't see that as being over priced because: 1. Foles was drafted in the third round and has played fairly well for a rookie expected to be a third stringer, and 2. KC apparently contacted the Eagles and not the reverse. If KC wants Foles that increases his value to them in my book.
nephillymike
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 15 2013, 01:05 PM) *
As rumors suggest. What does it take?
I'd probably say a third and swap of 2nds.



Although I woul dnot trade him, I consider this to be fair value.

Trading Foles removes the security blanket of whether or not this offense can work in the NFL. Keep him, and if nothing less, you have a pocket guy if this style doesn't last thru the year.

BTW, the way to make this offense extinct?

Tackle the QB every time he does a ball fake. Every time. It is legal. It wil end the read option.
Rick
QUOTE (Phits @ Feb 15 2013, 06:22 PM) *
Foles is not likely to lead a team to the post season.

And you know this how? By his handful of NFL starts he got in his rookie year on a bad team? None of us knows what he is likely to do (or not do) in the future yet. How can anyone make assumptions yet? I seem to remember a few guys who are in the HOF who had some very bad first years (and more than their first years). Not that I'm saying Foles is HOF material, just pointing out the fact that you don't really know what he may (or may not) develop into.

I love how so many people condem him yet he just finished his rookie season. I supposed he was supposed to throw for 400 yards per game with 4 TDs and no interceptions?
Phits
QUOTE (Rick @ Feb 16 2013, 11:39 AM) *
And you know this how?

I don't 'know', it's simply my opinion. It's based on the quality of his team, and his development throughout last season. He didn't show the type of development that would lead one to believe that a 2nd year QB would be able to a team that is in desperate need of high quality QB play to the post season.


canadianeagle
I still want to see Foles play with a healthy o-line and under a coach who understands the importance of a RB. Besides, I'm not sure there are any QB's in this draft who are more ready to start than Foles. I'm not saying he will be the next Tom Brady but I do think he is more valuable to this team than a third round pick. I'd have to think long and hard for the 2nd rd pick though
canadianeagle
QUOTE (Phits @ Feb 16 2013, 03:11 PM) *
I don't 'know', it's simply my opinion. It's based on the quality of his team, and his development throughout last season. He didn't show the type of development that would lead one to believe that a 2nd year QB would be able to a team that is in desperate need of high quality QB play to the post season.


I'm not sure if Foles is anything more than a back-up Qb. All I know is that as a rookie, he was inserted into a very inconsistent offense that could not protect the QB. He replaced a former pro-bowl QB (albeit and overrated one) and made this offense run better. He did this despite horrible play calling.

IMO he has earned a shot as the starting QB.

Phits
QUOTE (canadianeagle @ Feb 16 2013, 05:46 PM) *
I'm not sure if Foles is anything more than a back-up Qb. All I know is that as a rookie, he was inserted into a very inconsistent offense that could not protect the QB. He replaced a former pro-bowl QB (albeit and overrated one) and made this offense run better. He did this despite horrible play calling.

IMO he has earned a shot as the starting QB.

IMO he didn't make the O run better. He was inserted and essentially played like the QB he replaced, without the legs or the arm. Statistically they provided the same kind of output...almost identical to be exact. The difference is that one is a 10 year veteran, who had to be taught the position in his 7th season (after a 3 year lay-off) vs. a rookie.
D Rock
QUOTE (Phits @ Feb 17 2013, 12:15 AM) *
IMO he didn't make the O run better. He was inserted and essentially played like the QB he replaced, without the legs or the arm. Statistically they provided the same kind of output...almost identical to be exact. The difference is that one is a 10 year veteran, who had to be taught the position in his 7th season (after a 3 year lay-off) vs. a rookie.

IMO he was leaps and bounds better than Vick. Turn overs alone tell that story.
Phits
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 16 2013, 06:16 PM) *
IMO he was leaps and bounds better than Vick. Turn overs alone tell that story.

I'm not sure this is the same story you thought it would be.:
VICK had 10 INT and 11 (8 lost) Fumbles in 10 starts
FOLES had 5 INT and 8 (6 lost) Fumbles in 6 starts

Eyrie
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 16 2013, 11:16 PM) *
IMO he was leaps and bounds better than Vick. Turn overs alone tell that story.

And Foles is a second year QB who will only get better, although he probably won't become elite. Vick on the other hand is definitely on the downslope of his career. Even as a short term fix, Foles is therefore the better option as we use 2013 as a development year prior to targeting the playoffs in 2014.
JaxEagle
I don't know how anyone can attempt to make a judgement on Foles given the sample we had in his rookie year. I wouldn't trade him for a 4th that's for sure. If we are going to trade him and we are prepared to suck then let's really suck and then get Clowney. Clowney can make enough of difference that I'd do whatever it took to get him.
Rick
QUOTE (Phits @ Feb 16 2013, 03:11 PM) *
I don't 'know', it's simply my opinion. It's based on the quality of his team, and his development throughout last season. He didn't show the type of development that would lead one to believe that a 2nd year QB would be able to a team that is in desperate need of high quality QB play to the post season.

I can't disagree Foles will lead this team to the playoffs next season but I don't think Peyton Manning, Tom Brady or anyone else could. I can't say it would be Foles' fault.

I also am not sure what everyone was looking for in a rookie qb playing for a team with tons of issues and a coaching staff which had no idea what it was doing. I thought he did a damn fine job under the circumstances.
Rick
QUOTE (canadianeagle @ Feb 16 2013, 05:46 PM) *
I'm not sure if Foles is anything more than a back-up Qb. All I know is that as a rookie, he was inserted into a very inconsistent offense that could not protect the QB. He replaced a former pro-bowl QB (albeit and overrated one) and made this offense run better. He did this despite horrible play calling.

IMO he has earned a shot as the starting QB.

Well-said. I have no idea how good he will become (or not). All I know is I thought he did a nice job in the situation he was thrown into.
samaroo
Yeah, I was hoping this would be the year we get to see what he can really do. I also thought he showed some good early signs of positive leadership, especially for a rookie.

I mean, he didn't throw up in the huddle, amirite? biggrin.gif
canadianeagle
I know this is only based on 6 games but I though this was interesting...

"A few weeks ago, Reuben Frank of CSNPhilly.com crunched some numbers on Foles' rookie season. Roob found that Foles' 60.8 percent completion percentage is fifth in NFL history among rookie QBs, behind some pretty notable figures -- Ben Roethlisberger, Robert Griffin III, Russell Wilson and Matt Ryan. Foles' average of 243 yards passing a game ranks third all-time, behind Andrew Luck and Cam Newton, neither of whom completed 60 percent of their passes as a rookie. Thus, Foles is the only NFL rookie, ever, to average more than 240 yards while completing at least 60 percent of his passes. (You could argue that Marc Bulger did this with the Rams in 2002, but he was not technically a rookie, having been on the roster behind Kurt Warner for two years, not playing.)

Foles threw an interception once every 53 attempts. In NFL history, only one rookie QB has had a better ratio, RGIII last season, one every 78.6 attempts."

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/dneagle...he-Eagles-.html

Again this is based only on 6 starts but it sure gives me at the very least, cautious optimism.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.