Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Maybe it isn't easy being a "franchise" QB
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
nephillymike
Passer ratings from today:

Brees 86.3 (his longest play was a duck that two DB's ran into each other to INT, only to pop it up to Meachem for 50)
Brady 78.4
Wilson 67.6 (against the same D we faced)
Luck 53.0

These guys are lucky they don't play here. Philly was super critical of Foles for his paltry 105 rating. Can you imagine if he had the incompetence to put up numbers like those above?

I saw each QB leave a bunch of plays "on the field".

BTW, I know this is heresy in some circles, but me, I wouldn't do Luck for Foles straight up. His good throws look prettier, he is more athletic, but he is careless with the ball, and his bad throws are horrendous.

A career passer rating of 80, is just bottom tier these days. He is flat out careless with the football.

Dreagon
Well, by the time you get into the playoffs it's reasonable to assume you're going to be facing teams with at least a decent defense. I know that's not always the case, but it's not surprising to see QB ratings go down in the playoffs.
Zero
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Jan 11 2014, 11:52 PM) *
Passer ratings from today:

Brees 86.3 (his longest play was a duck that two DB's ran into each other to INT, only to pop it up to Meachem for 50)
Brady 78.4
Wilson 67.6 (against the same D we faced)
Luck 53.0

These guys are lucky they don't play here. Philly was super critical of Foles for his paltry 105 rating. Can you imagine if he had the incompetence to put up numbers like those above?

I saw each QB leave a bunch of plays "on the field".

BTW, I know this is heresy in some circles, but me, I wouldn't do Luck for Foles straight up. His good throws look prettier, he is more athletic, but he is careless with the ball, and his bad throws are horrendous.

A career passer rating of 80, is just bottom tier these days. He is flat out careless with the football.
Foles' 105 against N.O. wasn't the issue, neither was leaving plays on the field. The issue was his hesitancy, and "issue" may be the wrong word. Maybe "frustration" would be better. We keep reading how Kelly wants his QBs to make quick decisions and get the ball out fast. Foles has been very good at that this year, much improved over Vick who occasionally held the ball interminably. Nick has been very good at what many refer to as "throwing the receiver open" and trusting in his receivers to make the play. Then again he's had those plays when he seems to be mimicking Vick by holding the ball, holding the ball, holding the ball. I'm yelling "throw the damn ball!"

I appreciate and I'm excited that he's young and will get better. Among the things I really like about him are his attitude, his humility and his work ethic. He's smart and he's dedicated. It's production that counts and from the first game he started in Tampa he's shown he can produce. I really believe he's got a good future as our starting QB!

The fact that Foles had a very good year, statistically, W-L, etc. doesn't mean that we can't be frustrated by his growing pains. It doesn't mean we need to wave a flag showing our support of the third rounder and it doesn't mean we need to fall in line and refrain from thinking or saying anything critical of his play. You mentioned "lost opportunity" in another post and Nick had his hand in that as much as others did.

Because he has his jersey and his shoes in the HOF doesn't make him a HOF player. I'm going to enjoy watching him work his way in that direction though, and I'm also going to bitch and whine when he's not better than perfect. It's my right, it's my obligation as a fan but I'll also destroy any non-Eagle fan who dares to wrinkle an eyebrow against the guy, and I'll use the same info you did in your post.

PS ... I also get frustrated when I listen to the talking heads croon over other QBs for their play this year and not even burp an afterthought of Foles. Even if they think he's a flash-in-the-pan, his 2013 performance deserves mention when talking about QB play this year. He doesn't seem the type to need motivation from that, but I'll love it when he's the first name mentioned in those conversations.
mcnabbulous
Good post, Z.

One other thing I would add is that QBs need to play to the situation. Having a game managing 95QBR with few mistakes may look good on paper, but doesn't add great value if the opposing team is scoring at will.

Conversely, Wilson was able to play conservatively because his defense is so good and Brees struggled so much yesterday. Our team doesn't have that luxury because our defense was so vulnerable.

As for Brady, his team put up 40+ so it's near impossible to criticize his performance, regardless of numbers.

As for Foles, he was good last week, but we just needed a bit more from him. Or if Cooper had caught that pass, maybe his performance would have been enough. It's not worth worrying about because the moment didn't overwhelm him. He's young and will get better.
nephillymike
Update on sports radio show banter:

The latest is that they are discussuing something from Grantland website theorized:

Foles to Cincy
Dalton and picks to Oakland
#5 to us which we use to draft manziel.

You'll be happy to know, that only about 60% of those opining would do it.

Maybe we're warming up to Foles sad.gif
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Jan 12 2014, 12:55 PM) *
Update on sports radio show banter:

The latest is that they are discussuing something from Grantland website theorized:

Foles to Cincy
Dalton and picks to Oakland
#5 to us which we use to draft manziel.

You'll be happy to know, that only about 60% of those opining would do it.

Maybe we're warming up to Foles sad.gif


We really deserve the reputation we get sometimes.

Phits
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Jan 11 2014, 11:52 PM) *
BTW, I know this is heresy in some circles, but me, I wouldn't do Luck for Foles straight up. His good throws look prettier, he is more athletic, but he is careless with the ball, and his bad throws are horrendous.

A career passer rating of 80, is just bottom tier these days. He is flat out careless with the football.

I agree, about Luck. I feel he is overrated. He is not a bad QB, by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't buy into the notion that he is the "next coming".
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Zero @ Jan 12 2014, 07:56 AM) *
Foles' 105 against N.O. wasn't the issue, neither was leaving plays on the field. The issue was his hesitancy, and "issue" may be the wrong word. Maybe "frustration" would be better. We keep reading how Kelly wants his QBs to make quick decisions and get the ball out fast. Foles has been very good at that this year, much improved over Vick who occasionally held the ball interminably. Nick has been very good at what many refer to as "throwing the receiver open" and trusting in his receivers to make the play. Then again he's had those plays when he seems to be mimicking Vick by holding the ball, holding the ball, holding the ball. I'm yelling "throw the damn ball!"

I would have quoted the whole thing but it is kind of long.....perhaps I am just that out of touch with the game but reading your post made it sound like Foles had a bad game. He was playing a team with one of the top 5 defenses in the game. He put a 24 spot on them including taking the lead in the 4th quarter. There is a perception that jackson was perpetually open which was partially due to the same clip being shown over and over....the issue is progressions....if jackson is the first option and he is covered then you move on and with the pressure Foles faced going back to another option was not in the cars. It just seems like a lot of people think it is Madden.......Foles took a really bad sack......beyond that he played a pretty good game. You are right, he is young and he will learn. The funny thing is I was outspoken in my criticism of Foles but he proved me very wrong. He is smart, not afraid to take risks and has a good enough arm. It may just be this system but imagine if they can get him a big WR with speed?...wow....and next year Avant will be replaced with a slot guy that can run.(hopefully)

It seems to have become reflex to some here that if the QB does not throw the ball in 2 seconds he has held it too long. Coverage often dictates holding the ball and deep routes take time to develop.

I am hoping when I say this but I think he is going to be very good.

and i think Luck is horribly overrated.....he has a great arm but 7 int's in 2 games?
JeeQ
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Jan 12 2014, 09:55 AM) *
Update on sports radio show banter:

The latest is that they are discussuing something from Grantland website theorized:

Foles to Cincy
Dalton and picks to Oakland
#5 to us which we use to draft manziel.

You'll be happy to know, that only about 60% of those opining would do it.

Maybe we're warming up to Foles sad.gif


As the driver of the Johnny Football bandwagon, I approve of this message
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE
The funny thing is I was outspoken in my criticism of Foles but he proved me very wrong


Now THERE'S an accomplishment. laugh.gif

QUOTE
and i think Luck is horribly overrated


rolleyes.gif

I rest my case.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Jan 12 2014, 02:08 PM) *
I agree, about Luck. I feel he is overrated. He is not a bad QB, by any stretch of the imagination, but I don't buy into the notion that he is the "next coming".


His team is really mediocre. Once he gets appropriate talent around him and doesn't try to play superman, he will be great. Their defense gave up back to back 40 spots in the playoffs, he lost his best receiver, his running backs are mediocre. And he has still gone to the playoffs in his first two years.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Jan 12 2014, 02:41 PM) *
Their defense gave up back to back 40 spots in the playoffs

It doesn't help when your QB throws 7 picks.
Zero
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Jan 12 2014, 01:45 PM) *
... reading your post made it sound like Foles had a bad game.

Not my point. I would have liked to see HIM take the team to a win. I don't criticize him for NOT doing that because of his age and relative inexperience. But I want him to get to that point and I think he'll HAVE to get there for the team to win that last game. The great thing about the kid is that he's only in his second year and he's doing what he's doing. With coaching and experience plus filling the defense out and adding a relevant piece (your big, fast WR?) or two on offense it sure looks promising.
nephillymike
QUOTE (JeeQ @ Jan 12 2014, 01:50 PM) *
As the driver of the Johnny Football bandwagon, I approve of this message

Watch out. That ditch is nasty!
Phits
QUOTE (Zero @ Jan 12 2014, 03:11 PM) *
Not my point. I would have liked to see HIM take the team to a win. I don't criticize him for NOT doing that because of his age and relative inexperience. But I want him to get to that point and I think he'll HAVE to get there for the team to win that last game. The great thing about the kid is that he's only in his second year and he's doing what he's doing. With coaching and experience plus filling the defense out and adding a relevant piece (your big, fast WR?) or two on offense it sure looks promising.

cheers.gif
nephillymike
Cam the sham takes a bad sack and gets rescued by the skirt rule and then throws a pick.

We woulda, coulda, shoulda, beat the Panthers.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Jan 12 2014, 04:51 PM) *
Cam the sham takes a bad sack and gets rescued by the skirt rule and then throws a pick.

We woulda, coulda, shoulda, beat the Panthers.


I definitely think we could have played with them, which is so frustrating. We were 1-2 plays away from having that chance. We will get back there.
D Rock
It's curious to me how some folks want to blame Foles despite the fact that he left the field for the last time with us in the lead. I get the line of thinking, but the curious aspect of it is this. As I see it, those same folks willing to lay blame on Foles are the same folk who gave Supa5 a pass and blamed our defense when the exact same scenario played out in the conf championship game against AZ back in '09.

Honestly, both sides (defense's fault vs. QB's fault) have merit and can make an effective argument. But the lack of consistency from we armchair analysts is what I'm finding curious.

Before you go getting your panties in a wad, I'm as guilty as anyone on this score as I blame the defense for last week and Supa5 in '09. Don didn't have a 105 QB rating and was absolutely putrid for 2.5 quarters of that game.
nephillymike
QUOTE (D Rock @ Jan 12 2014, 05:03 PM) *
It's curious to me how some folks want to blame Foles despite the fact that he left the field for the last time with us in the lead. I get the line of thinking, but the curious aspect of it is this. As I see it, those same folks willing to lay blame on Foles are the same folk who gave Supa5 a pass and blamed our defense when the exact same scenario played out in the conf championship game against AZ back in '09.

Honestly, both sides (defense's fault vs. QB's fault) have merit and can make an effective argument. But the lack of consistency from we armchair analysts is what I'm finding curious.

Before you go getting your panties in a wad, I'm as guilty as anyone on this score as I blame the defense for last week and Supa5 in '09. Don didn't have a 105 QB rating and was absolutely putrid for 2.5 quarters of that game.

The difference between this and 5 vs. Arizona was that after our defense gave up the lead, 5 got the chance to go back out there and win the game and didn't look good on that drive. Also at that point, 5 was a seasoned veteran with four nfccg games his belt. He was given more leeway in his first playoff poor performance against nyg in 2000. Foles didn't get the chance to go back out there,
mcnabbulous
Who is flip flopping?
I primarily blame Donovan vs. Arizona because he was so bad in the first half vs. Arizona.
Foles wasn't as bad, just a tad too conservative.
In both cases, we needed our offense to step up because they were our better unit, facing a team who was also better on the offensive side of the ball.
If anything, I would say I blame our special teams a bit more than our offense, but think Foles was less similar to what we expected than our defense. They gave me about what I expected.
Phits
I don't think anybody was solely "blaming" Foles for the loss. It was a collective effort. What happens on message boards is that there is no gray area. Either the QB was great or he sucked. More importantly if the QB doesn't win, he gets blamed and we all know that fault doesn't rest on any one player or coach.

In our playoff loss, this year, I would have liked to see Foles be a little more aggressive. I feel strongly that this kind of aggression will evolve. Our QB made significant strides this season and I expect him to continue to grow.

QUOTE (D Rock @ Jan 12 2014, 05:03 PM) *
It's curious to me how some folks want to blame Foles despite the fact that he left the field for the last time with us in the lead. I get the line of thinking, but the curious aspect of it is this. As I see it, those same folks willing to lay blame on Foles are the same folk who gave Supa5 a pass and blamed our defense when the exact same scenario played out in the conf championship game against AZ back in '09.

Honestly, both sides (defense's fault vs. QB's fault) have merit and can make an effective argument. But the lack of consistency from we armchair analysts is what I'm finding curious.

Before you go getting your panties in a wad, I'm as guilty as anyone on this score as I blame the defense for last week and Supa5 in '09. Don didn't have a 105 QB rating and was absolutely putrid for 2.5 quarters of that game.

nephillymike
FWIW,

The passer ratings from today:
Rivers 115.8
Manning 93.5
Kapernick 87.8
Newton 79.9

Good to see that Foles more than held his own (2nd) in a group that has three HOF's and a top tier veteran, and four other younger QB's thought by almost everyone as being more desirable.

It definitely does get tougher in the playoffs.

My son mentioned something. He said he didn't think there was any other tandem of QB-RB among the final 8 that were better than Foles_McCoy. I think McCoy just might put that tandem as #1 in that group of nine.

Than I said, there was no other Defense in the final eight that I wouldn't take over ours. Yep.

Next week's conference championships should be good ones.

Then a week off to get work done so that the next Sunday is free for the Bowl!!
Wheeljack
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Jan 11 2014, 11:52 PM) *
Passer ratings from today:

Brees 86.3 (his longest play was a duck that two DB's ran into each other to INT, only to pop it up to Meachem for 50)
Brady 78.4
Wilson 67.6 (against the same D we faced)
Luck 53.0

These guys are lucky they don't play here. Philly was super critical of Foles for his paltry 105 rating. Can you imagine if he had the incompetence to put up numbers like those above?

I saw each QB leave a bunch of plays "on the field".

BTW, I know this is heresy in some circles, but me, I wouldn't do Luck for Foles straight up. His good throws look prettier, he is more athletic, but he is careless with the ball, and his bad throws are horrendous.

A career passer rating of 80, is just bottom tier these days. He is flat out careless with the football.


I would go for Luck over Foles without hesitation. He isn't a "fake elite" like Eli; he's more like Favre, actually. And I'm not the biggest Favre fan (particularly for the tail end of his career) but I recognize that ceiling is pretty high when he's good. I'm not sold on Foles forever. And that is more heretic than anything you typed above... LOL, at least in these circles. I'd also take Cam over Foles, particularly with Chip Kelly as coach. Foles is a "default" QB for me until further notice.

I don't think the Eagles (this season) beat SF, CAR, or SEA... they came close to beating the Aints, which is about right for a 1st year playoff team. All those teams have high or elite defenses. This incarnation of the Eagles struggles against those type of teams (look at how the Aints managed to neutralize the Eagles for a half of football).

D Rock
QUOTE (Wheeljack @ Jan 13 2014, 02:50 PM) *
I don't think the Eagles (this season) beat SF, CAR, or SEA... they came close to beating the Aints, which is about right for a 1st year playoff team. All those teams have high or elite defenses. This incarnation of the Eagles struggles against those type of teams (look at how the Aints managed to neutralize the Eagles for a half of football).

We had the offense to beat any of those teams. Once we fix the defense, we can play with any team in the league assuming (as I am) that Foles is NOT a mirage.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Jan 13 2014, 11:19 AM) *
We had the offense to beat any of those teams. Once we fix the defense, we can play with any team in the league assuming (as I am) that Foles is NOT a mirage.

Yep - I would say we're about 3-4 players away on defense from being really solid.

I think we're going to be a very strong contender next year.
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.