Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: I think it's kind of interesting
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
xsv
Maybe it's just me, but this comparison doesn't really even look remotely close. As well as many of you say that Vick played in the first few games, it pales in comparison to what Foles has done.


CODE
Com  Att      Pct         Att/G      Yds        Avg   Yds/G    TD   Int  1st   1st%    Lng    20+    40+    Sck    QBR  
77     141      54.6     23.5     1,215   8.6   202.5      5     3    51   36.2     70     25     5     15     86.5
74     118      62.7     19.7     1,028   8.7   171.3     13     0    43   36.4     63T     16     7      7   127.4


Att    Yds    Avg    TD    FUM    Lost
12    42    3.5    1       0        0
34    308    9.1    2     4       2

Phits
Is this the equivalent of kicking the proverbial "dog" when he's down?
mcnabbulous
I'm not going to try to make sense of the stats, which aren't rendering correctly for me...

But I don't know that anyone was thinking that Vick played great this year. He was having a good year, as evidenced by his yards per play and the general success of the offense.

Overall, he was having a good year. Comparing him to a guy with a 127 passer rating is fruitless. Vick won the starting job in the preseason and Foles has subsequently taken it from him.
Jax
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 7 2013, 02:05 PM) *
I'm not going to try to make sense of the stats, which aren't rendering correctly for me...

But I don't know that anyone was thinking that Vick played great this year. He was having a good year, as evidenced by his yards per play and the general success of the offense.

Overall, he was having a good year. Comparing him to a guy with a 127 passer rating is fruitless. Vick won the starting job in the preseason and Foles has subsequently taken it from him.

And just for the record, I know at least one guy on this board that wanted Foles during the preseason... even after his losses last season wink.gif
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Jax @ Nov 7 2013, 03:12 PM) *
And just for the record, I know at least one guy on this board that wanted Foles during the preseason... even after his losses last season wink.gif

That's all good and fine. But Vick outplayed him during the preseason. That's generally indisputable. And Foles is outperforming him when it counts.

And I was on the record for making the move to Foles prior to the Dallas game. smile.gif
xsv
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 7 2013, 02:05 PM) *
I'm not going to try to make sense of the stats, which aren't rendering correctly for me...

But I don't know that anyone was thinking that Vick played great this year. He was having a good year, as evidenced by his yards per play and the general success of the offense.

Overall, he was having a good year. Comparing him to a guy with a 127 passer rating is fruitless. Vick won the starting job in the preseason and Foles has subsequently taken it from him.


I seem to remember quite a few people, including you and NEP saying that you can't bench Vick after one poor game when he was having such an outstanding season.

All I'm pointing out is that I thought it was interesting that Vick's 'outstanding year' isn't nearly as good as 'Fole's outstanding' year. I'm also wondering if anyone disagrees.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (xsv @ Nov 7 2013, 04:05 PM) *
I seem to remember quite a few people, including you and NEP saying that you can't bench Vick after one poor game when he was having such an outstanding season.

All I'm pointing out is that I thought it was interesting that Vick's 'outstanding year' isn't nearly as good as 'Fole's outstanding' year. I'm also wondering if anyone disagrees.

9.1 yards per play is pretty outstanding.

127 passer rating is beyond outstanding.

Like I said, making this argument after a 7 TD performance is pretty fruitless. There was a lot less of this talk after the Dallas game.
xsv
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 7 2013, 03:24 PM) *
9.1 yards per play is pretty outstanding.

127 passer rating is beyond outstanding.

Like I said, making this argument after a 7 TD performance is pretty fruitless. There was a lot less of this talk after the Dallas game.


I only brought it up now because they've played about the same amount of time this year. Roughly the same number of attempts.

For what it's worth, you can look it p and see that I said Vick should start the season. After the second game I said I didn't like how he was playing, but he should still get the start. After the 3rd game I had seen enough.

I think we've seen enough of both now that we know Foles is actually the one with the higher upside at this point. If he plays against GB like he did against Dallas, I'll be calling for his head too, though.

Jax
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 7 2013, 02:17 PM) *
That's all good and fine. But Vick outplayed him during the preseason. That's generally indisputable. And Foles is outperforming him when it counts.

And I was on the record for making the move to Foles prior to the Dallas game. smile.gif

Yes, Vick did outplay him in the preseason because he got twice as much playing time and Foles' playing time wasn't primarily with the first string. I was never convinced of the value of the preseason.

Yes, I know you gave Foles a slight lean over Barkley wink.gif
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (xsv @ Nov 7 2013, 05:05 PM) *
I only brought it up now because they've played about the same amount of time this year. Roughly the same number of attempts.

For what it's worth, you can look it p and see that I said Vick should start the season. After the second game I said I didn't like how he was playing, but he should still get the start. After the 3rd game I had seen enough.

I think we've seen enough of both now that we know Foles is actually the one with the higher upside at this point. If he plays against GB like he did against Dallas, I'll be calling for his head too, though.

After the second game of the season, when he threw for 428 yards on 64% completion and 2 TDs to 0 INTs (not to mention his 34 yards and 1 score on the ground), you "didn't like how he was playing." You've got some lofty expectations, my friend.

I'm not sure what the point of this thread is though. No one is calling for Foles to be benched. It was unreasonable for people to do so for Vick after his poor game against the Chiefs. To that point, he was playing at an extremely high level. His passer rating after the first two games was nearly 120. Not to mention what he was doing on the ground.

If you expect more out of a QB than that, you're going to have a bad time. It's also worth noting that Lesean hasn't been nearly as effective on the ground with Vick out of the game. There is value in that you're not considering. Vick was doing a more than acceptable job as our QB. If Foles can play anywhere near the level he played against Oakland and TB, there is no question that he should be the starter. Criticizing Vick's play, which was solid, isn't necessary to boost up Foles.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Jax @ Nov 7 2013, 05:19 PM) *
Yes, Vick did outplay him in the preseason because he got twice as much playing time and Foles' playing time wasn't primarily with the first string.

Is that true? I recall them both getting first team snaps. Besides, I highly doubt that Vick exclusively won the preseason competition in the games. It was likely based on practice and the games. By the end of it, the beat guys all said that Vick had pulled away during the preseason.
Jax
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 7 2013, 04:24 PM) *
Is that true? I recall them both getting first team snaps. Besides, I highly doubt that Vick exclusively won the preseason competition in the games. It was likely based on practice and the games. By the end of it, the beat guys all said that Vick had pulled away during the preseason.

Foles did have some time with the starters but much of his time wasn't. Different than Vick. Anyway, many of the beat guys have proven to know about as much as those of us on this board.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Jax @ Nov 7 2013, 04:31 PM) *
Foles did have some time with the starters but much of his time wasn't. Different than Vick. Anyway, many of the beat guys have proven to know about as much as those of us on this board.

And Chip, I suppose.
D Rock
QUOTE (xsv @ Nov 7 2013, 08:05 PM) *
I seem to remember quite a few people, including you and NEP saying that you can't bench Vick after one poor game when he was having such an outstanding season.

All I'm pointing out is that I thought it was interesting that Vick's 'outstanding year' isn't nearly as good as 'Fole's outstanding' year. I'm also wondering if anyone disagrees.

Other than the first half of the first game (foreskinz) Vick's year was ordinary at best. Typical Vick at worst. The turn overs were down, but he was dead last in redzone TD %, completed under 60% of his balls and was only effective via saving broken plays with his legs.

Like I said . . . Typical Vick.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Nov 7 2013, 05:49 PM) *
Other than the first half of the first game (foreskinz) Vick's year was ordinary at best. Typical Vick at worst. The turn overs were down, but he was dead last in redzone TD %, completed under 60% of his balls and was only effective via saving broken plays with his legs.

Like I said . . . Typical Vick.

I seriously can't believe people are disregarding the San Diego game, which may have been his second best game as an Eagle. It's not his fault our defense made Phillip Rivers look like the best QB in football.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 7 2013, 05:58 PM) *
I seriously can't believe people are disregarding the San Diego game, which may have been his second best game as an Eagle. It's not his fault our defense made Phillip Rivers look like the best QB in football.

Some people choose to disregard it because they don't like Vick.
Zero
Seriously, despite everything else: "why isn't Vick playing?" The answer to that question adds much to why Foles is a better choice right now.

Foles potentially has a future with the Eagles as a starter. Vick, not so much. Foles had a concussion and sat out a week. Vick is injured more than any other player on the team. Continuity and consistency are relevant.
xsv
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Nov 7 2013, 04:21 PM) *
I'm not sure what the point of this thread is though.


Like I said, because they've now both played roughly the same amount this year, so we can compare them a little more easily. I don't think it was really fair to either guy to compare them without them having roughly equal playing time.

I think it's pretty clear who the better QB is here. And it's clear that Foles isn't the 'more consistent game manager' type of qb some said he would be. And it's also clear that Foles can be even more 'explosive' than Vick at the position.

I think Foles has a long way to go. And I've been on the bench about him being the starter going forward. I've tried to be objective, even though my dislike for vick is clear. I waited until both QB have had roughly equal playing time before really throwing the comparison out there. And it looks to me like Foles is the better of the two at this point in their careers.

After next game, they should be almost exactly even in attempts.
Wheeljack
QUOTE (Zero @ Nov 7 2013, 07:44 PM) *
Seriously, despite everything else: "why isn't Vick playing?" The answer to that question adds much to why Foles is a better choice right now.

Foles potentially has a future with the Eagles as a starter. Vick, not so much. Foles had a concussion and sat out a week. Vick is injured more than any other player on the team. Continuity and consistency are relevant.


"Why isn't Vick playing?"

He's injured. Bottom line.

Had no business coming in against the Giants, but with a concussed (and sucky playing Foles the week prior) and Barkley not exactly playing to "professional grade", Chip's hands were tied. He should have just stuck with Barkley since he ended up playing most of that game anyway.

I know there are some licking their chops at the departure of Vick, and even more so being replaced by a (yawn) pocket passing QB, but...

I want to see more before I even say the words "potential starter" with Foles. Pessimism and remembrance of (certain) Eagle fans' embrace of the backup QBs past tells me that even saying those words are premature. As much as people want to say, "oh, that Dallas game was an outlier", it still was the worst performance at home by an Eagles QB for a very long time. And to make matters worse, it was against Dall-ass.

Eagles should still draft a QB in the first round. I hope they do.
Zero
QUOTE (Wheeljack @ Nov 8 2013, 09:09 AM) *
"Why isn't Vick playing?"

He's injured. Bottom line.

And that's the point. He's injured too often to be a reliable starter on a team with any post season aspirations.
Bocadelphia Eagles John
Foles is taller.

And reminds me of Napoleon Dynamite.

I like him. But only in a manly football guy kinda way.
nephillymike
A few things here.

#1. Vick solidly beat Foles out in the preseason. It wasn't close.

Therefore, in a fair competition, Vick won the job fair and square.

You can look it up, in my poll I posted at the end of the preseason, almost everyone said Vick should start. Most of those who didn't say Vick, were OK with fewer Wins this year to learn more about Foles if he was the future or if we needed to draft someone.

#2 Vick played really well vs. Wash and SD, poorly vs. KC, decently vs. Den and NYG, such that after those games, his passer rating was above 90 and his combined yards per attempt was first in the NFL, by a long shot. Every time you gave the ball to Vick, whether he ran with it, or threw it, he averaged over 9 yards with it. So after 4.5 games, he was pretty damn good.

#3 Now he returns too early to help the team b/c Foles was hurt and Barkley was incompetent. He was not ready, played poorly and then his rating goes way down after the poor performance.

#4 Foles plays great, pitiful and then great and now most are ecstatic, not only by Foles success, but by Vick's apparent demise. True Eagle fans and Vick bashers unite. Both have reason to rejoice.

#5 About injuries. Take the games Vick has missed because of injury since he started when Kolb went down as a percentage of the total game during that period. Now do the same thing for Foles starting when he went in for Vick last year up until this week. What you will find is that the healthier, younger, taller, more stout Foles misses a greater percentage of games than the old, aged, walking injury waiting to happen Mike Vick. Go figure. Not saying that either has a great track record, but at least state it correctly.

#6. Except for that Dallas debacle, this is the only real reservation I have about Foles. In Chip's read option offense, his skill set is not the optimum fit. Defenses have no reason to respect his running ability and in this offense, to run at optimum, defenses need to respect that. But more importantly, anyone watching the X's and O's know that this offense runs better when facing zone coverage and struggles against press coverage man over the top. Reason is, is that press coverage takes away the bubble screen. It slows down the release, and doubling Djax with the safety over the top takes him out of most games. If he is doubled, Cooper struggles vs, man press coverage. He is below average vs man no press, and very good vs zone. If defenses go to this type of coverage, we struggle. With Vick or another QB with excellent running skills, we can kill a defense by having the WR's go deep, and the Cb's whose backs are to the QB, will never know Vick is running until he's twenty yards down field and even then, our WR's are excellent blockers so they pay dearly. Vick's skill set will force teams to play the defense we're best against, zone. Foles will not. Now if you look at the tape from Oakland or Tampa, what did you see? Zone defense. Yep Zone defense. The folks on Eagles Extra and the others opining on the all-22 film said that the defensive coordinators for Oakland and Tamp should have been fired for malpractice. Foles to his credit, chewed those zones apart. But if the DC's do their job, they should NEVER play that D vs this team with Foles or Barkley at QB. To get a good evaluation of Foles, we need to see a defense play our nemesis press coverage man over and Foles needs to show he can be successful. I have to believe GB has seen the tape of Foles killing zone and that their DC has a brain to do something different. If he does, let's see how we do.

That being said, if Chip ditches the read option and goes to a more conventional offense by using a FB and another TE, Foles is my man, no questions asked. I think, in him, in that type of system, we have a top ten QB. If he insists on read option, I have to believe we have a built in skill set limitation that will not win the big games.
xsv
#1 - I don't see anyone arguing otherwise. Vick was clearly playing better in the preseason.

#2 - I disagree. I think he played really well against Wash. Decently against SD and poorly against KC, Den and the NYG. I'd love to see what that 9 yards per touch stat looks like without the first 3 quarters of the Washington game. I do know that his passer rating dropped significantly after each game.

#3 - Vick getting hurt and playing poorly due to injury is part of having Vick as a QB. If you're going to take his running into consideration of his abilities, you also have to consider his the fact that he is prone to injury every couple of games, if not every single game at this point in his career.

#4 - And Foles' cumulative totals and ratings are better than Vicks, even without Vicks poor outing against the NYG.

#5 - You can't really believe that Vick can play more than 3 games in a row anymore and not get hurt?








JeeQ
When I read through some of these posts it's like your blaming Vick for being the best QB on the team. Vick is far from perfect, but as of right now he's still the best QB on this team, and gives 100% every time he's on the field. He's not the QBOTF for this team but that's not Vick's fault; that's Howie's fault, that's Foles fault, that's Lurie's fault. When we signed Vick he was the 3rd string QB, now he's been the starter for 3 seasons.

The only thing stopping Foles from being our starter is Foles. He could have showed flashes last season when he started 6 games, he didn't. He could have showed flashes during training camp, he didn't. He could have showed flashes during preseason, he didn't. He could have taken Vick's job away outright during the Dallas game, he didn't.

Foles has looked amazing versus two of the worst teams in the NFL, so did Kevin Kolb and Matt Flynn. You say the media is against Foles because they didn't worship him for his performance. You want to know why? Because he hasn't proved a damn thing in this league. Zero wins against teams with winning records. If Foles wants to be the man, he has to come out and prove it.
xsv
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Nov 10 2013, 01:10 PM) *
...Vick is far from perfect, but as of right now he's still the best QB on this team, and gives 100% every time he's on the field. ..


That's the reason I posted these stats. I'm contending that maybe Vick is not, in fact, the best QB on this team. Especially in the redzone, I think Foles is clearly superior.
JeeQ
QUOTE (xsv @ Nov 10 2013, 10:24 AM) *
That's the reason I posted these stats. I'm contending that maybe Vick is not, in fact, the best QB on this team. Especially in the redzone, I think Foles is clearly superior.


If Foles can't take the job away from an injury-prone, fumble-machine, who's terrible in the Red Zone what does that say about Foles?

Foles has yet another golden opportunity today to show he's the man for the job. He's going against a depleted Packers team with Scott Tolzien at QB today who hasn't played a single down for the Packers. Let's see if he can make the most of it.
Phits
Jeeq...you're not helping your case. It's not reasonable to argue that Foles 'only beat 2 bad teams'. Until proven otherwise we are a 'bad' team and need to win any game we can. The difference in quality of play between the 2 is day and night. Furthermore, the gaudy stats that Foles is putting up certainly support his becoming the new starting QB for this team, until proven otherwise.

Vick is/was a unique talent that helped usher in a new era of QB play, but he still is in development and at his age that is too much to expect.


QUOTE (JeeQ @ Nov 10 2013, 01:10 PM) *
When I read through some of these posts it's like your blaming Vick for being the best QB on the team. Vick is far from perfect, but as of right now he's still the best QB on this team, and gives 100% every time he's on the field. He's not the QBOTF for this team but that's not Vick's fault; that's Howie's fault, that's Foles fault, that's Lurie's fault. When we signed Vick he was the 3rd string QB, now he's been the starter for 3 seasons.

The only thing stopping Foles from being our starter is Foles. He could have showed flashes last season when he started 6 games, he didn't. He could have showed flashes during training camp, he didn't. He could have showed flashes during preseason, he didn't. He could have taken Vick's job away outright during the Dallas game, he didn't.

Foles has looked amazing versus two of the worst teams in the NFL, so did Kevin Kolb and Matt Flynn. You say the media is against Foles because they didn't worship him for his performance. You want to know why? Because he hasn't proved a damn thing in this league. Zero wins against teams with winning records. If Foles wants to be the man, he has to come out and prove it.
Phits
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Nov 10 2013, 01:50 PM) *
If Foles can't take the job away from an injury-prone, fumble-machine, who's terrible in the Red Zone what does that say about Foles?

Foles has yet another golden opportunity today to show he's the man for the job. He's going against a depleted Packers team with Scott Tolzien at QB today who hasn't played a single down for the Packers. Let's see if he can make the most of it.

Foles doesn't play against the opposing QB, he plays against their D.
xsv
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Nov 10 2013, 01:50 PM) *
If Foles can't take the job away from an injury-prone, fumble-machine, who's terrible in the Red Zone what does that say about Foles?

Foles has yet another golden opportunity today to show he's the man for the job. He's going against a depleted Packers team with Scott Tolzien at QB today who hasn't played a single down for the Packers. Let's see if he can make the most of it.

Not sure I understand your point. Foles clearly has the superior stats so far this season in roughly equal playing time. I think the job is his to lose at this point.
nephillymike
QUOTE (xsv @ Nov 10 2013, 09:50 AM) *
#1 - I don't see anyone arguing otherwise. Vick was clearly playing better in the preseason.

#2 - I disagree. I think he played really well against Wash. Decently against SD and poorly against KC, Den and the NYG. I'd love to see what that 9 yards per touch stat looks like without the first 3 quarters of the Washington game. I do know that his passer rating dropped significantly after each game.

#3 - Vick getting hurt and playing poorly due to injury is part of having Vick as a QB. If you're going to take his running into consideration of his abilities, you also have to consider his the fact that he is prone to injury every couple of games, if not every single game at this point in his career.

#4 - And Foles' cumulative totals and ratings are better than Vicks, even without Vicks poor outing against the NYG.

#5 - You can't really believe that Vick can play more than 3 games in a row anymore and not get hurt?



And about #6?

Vick passer rating by game and combined yards per combined attempt:
Was 112.6 7.55
SD 123.4 11.26 ( a hell of a "so so" game if I do say so)
KC 49.4 8.82
DEN 83.6 8.25
NYG 69.5 8.76

You overlook that SD game as it is convenient.
Phits
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Nov 10 2013, 02:17 PM) *
And about #6?

Vick passer rating by game and combined yards per combined attempt:
Was 112.6 7.55
SD 123.4 11.26 ( a hell of a "so so" game if I do say so)
KC 49.4 8.82
DEN 83.6 8.25
NYG 69.5 8.76

You overlook that SD game as it is convenient.

The problem is that these particular stats don't show how much more efficiently the offense runs through Foles. He doesn't (appear to) have happy feet and is solid in the pocket. most importantly he finishes drives and doesn't leave points on the field.

I know it's early in his 'tenure' but he is demonstrating the traits you want to see in a starter.
JeeQ
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 10 2013, 10:58 AM) *
Foles doesn't play against the opposing QB, he plays against their D.


What I meant by this is Foles is playing against Scott Tolzien. Therefore not only is the chance of winning this game exponentially higher playing against a 3rd String QB rather than one of the best QB in the league. But it should also be incredibly easy for Foles to look like a much better QB when he only has to out duel a 3rd String QB offensively.

QUOTE (xsv @ Nov 10 2013, 10:59 AM) *
Not sure I understand your point. Foles clearly has the superior stats so far this season in roughly equal playing time. I think the job is his to lose at this point.


My point is the same one I've always been making about Foles. His stats look amazing, but he still doesn't show anything when he faces a good team. Look at this first half today. Foles has looked like "Dallas Foles" again. Why is this? There's no groin injury today. The Packers don't have a Top Ten Defense. Could it just be that Foles struggles against teams with .500 records and better? So far he hasn't beaten one; I'm hoping he can break that streak today.
Phits
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Nov 10 2013, 02:46 PM) *
There's no groin injury today. The Packers don't have a Top Ten Defense. Could it just be that Foles struggles against teams with .500 records and better? So far he hasn't beaten one; I'm hoping he can break that streak today.

The same can be said for Chip Kelly...does he get a pass?>
JeeQ
QUOTE (Phits @ Nov 10 2013, 11:51 AM) *
The same can be said for Chip Kelly...does he get a pass?>


For the longest time I thought it was the coaching, but the future Coach Of The Year Andy Reid and the 9-0 Chiefs have proven without a doubt it's the personnel. At times I see the right plays being called yet the players lack the talent and discipline to execute it; and I've seen this from the offense, defense, and special teams. Chip isn't turning the ball over. Chip isn't missing wide open WRs. Chip isn't letting them convert 3rd and 20. Chip isn't terrible in the Red Zone. Chip isn't lacking basic football fundamentals like holding onto the ball correctly and wrapping up on tackles.

It's time to trim the fat, let Chip pick the type of players he wants for his team (because it does work), and see where it goes from there.
xsv
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Nov 10 2013, 03:01 PM) *
For the longest time I thought it was the coaching, but the future Coach Of The Year Andy Reid and the 9-0 Chiefs have proven without a doubt it's the personnel. At times I see the right plays being called yet the players lack the talent and discipline to execute it; and I've seen this from the offense, defense, and special teams. Chip isn't turning the ball over. Chip isn't missing wide open WRs. Chip isn't letting them convert 3rd and 20. Chip isn't terrible in the Red Zone. Chip isn't lacking basic football fundamentals like holding onto the ball correctly and wrapping up on tackles.

It's time to trim the fat, let Chip pick the type of players he wants for his team (because it does work), and see where it goes from there.


Foles isn't playing lights out like he did last week, that's for sure. But he's *still* playing better than Vick has in any game this year, except Washington.

Even when he's not at his best, it looks like Foles is better.
JeeQ
QUOTE (xsv @ Nov 10 2013, 12:30 PM) *
Foles isn't playing lights out like he did last week, that's for sure. But he's *still* playing better than Vick has in any game this year, except Washington.

Even when he's not at his best, it looks like Foles is better.


Personally, I felt Vick's season (possibly career) ended with that reactivation of his hamstring injury. There's no place in the NFL for a QB who can't stay healthy for an entire season. He could find work as a backup, but his starting days are all but over.

I believe our future QB is in the draft; Foles will be the starter next year, with Barkley as backup while our future QB is groomed.
xsv
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Nov 10 2013, 03:37 PM) *
Personally, I felt Vick's season (possibly career) ended with that reactivation of his hamstring injury. There's no place in the NFL for a QB who can't stay healthy for an entire season.

I believe our future QB is in the draft; Foles will be the starter next year, with Barkley as backup while our future QB is groomed.


I couldn't agree more, tbh. Except I think Vick will be a very good backup for a few years. Can't think of a qb I'd rather want to come into a playoff game if my starter goes out of the game with an injury.
JeeQ
QUOTE (xsv @ Nov 10 2013, 12:40 PM) *
I couldn't agree more, tbh. Except I think Vick will be a very good backup for a few years. Can't think of a qb I'd rather want to come into a playoff game if my starter goes out of the game with an injury.


I'd be all for keeping Vick on as a backup or our team, but... I think we could get a lot more value out of re-signing him and trading him.
Wheeljack
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Nov 10 2013, 03:01 PM) *
For the longest time I thought it was the coaching, but the future Coach Of The Year Andy Reid and the 9-0 Chiefs have proven without a doubt it's the personnel. At times I see the right plays being called yet the players lack the talent and discipline to execute it; and I've seen this from the offense, defense, and special teams. Chip isn't turning the ball over. Chip isn't missing wide open WRs. Chip isn't letting them convert 3rd and 20. Chip isn't terrible in the Red Zone. Chip isn't lacking basic football fundamentals like holding onto the ball correctly and wrapping up on tackles.

It's time to trim the fat, let Chip pick the type of players he wants for his team (because it does work), and see where it goes from there.


I still think it's the coaching AND the personnel. Because Andy Reid would not have made the play of the backup LT somewhat unnoticeable. I don't even know who the heck that guy is who came in behind Jason Peters but running an offense where you weren't trying to set up long-developing plays all day probably helped him not become another Demetress Bell.

I will say that on both sides of the ball there was improvement.

I still hate Riley Cooper and judge people who are partying because the "most hated man in the NFL (even over an alleged double murderer)" is likely out of a job.

but this team is a work in progress. the Washington Football Club is not the best of NFL teams but at the same time we have sucked at home, and against NFC East teams.

I don't blame Andy for everything though. Howie has gotta take some of the blame... because we've had dismal drafts for 3 out of the last 4 years.
D Rock
QUOTE (Wheeljack @ Nov 10 2013, 11:00 PM) *
I still hate Riley Cooper and judge people who are partying because the "most hated man in the NFL (even over an alleged double murderer)" is likely out of a job.

That's funny. I judge people who hate Riley Cooper.

And at least THIS eagle fan, can't wait for the day that Mike Vick is no longer on our roster.
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.