Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: If Manziel or Bridgewater are there at #22...
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
TGryn
Both top QB prospects Johnny Manziel and Teddy Bridgewater are having rumors run around that teams aren't that impressed by them, and that they could fall dramatically in the draft (shades of Aaron Rodgers or Randy Moss). The most likely reason is that "sources" with picks later in the 1st round are trying to spread doubt around so their team could have a shot at getting one of them.

And yet...

Suppose the rumors are true, and one of them starts a free fall. Pick 19 goes by, then 20, then 21...and suddenly the Eagles are on the clock with an unexpected QB prospect still on the board, a guy you normally would have no shot at this low in the draft. QB is not a area of need after the year Foles had, yet if Manziel or Bridgewater was at the top of their board, would you be OK with them going that route?

Lets leave trades out of it for the moment. Assume that if a team was really hot to get the player, they'd either have traded for him already, or are trying to wait it out and figure they're safe with this pick since there's no way the Eagles take a QB here...right?

Some other things to consider:
- Manziel is exactly the kind of athletic QB that Foles isn't.
- Rookie contracts only go for 4 years. Are you willing to burn that 1st for a guy who probably won't play in 2014?
- QBs are in a special category. We saw in the Dallas game what happens when the QB isn't right: the whole offense falls apart.
HOUSEoPAIN
Absolutely not.

First of all, we have a pretty big need at WR now that we just handed our Pro-Bowler to a division rival. Second, our defense
still sucks. Third, Foles has earned the right to a full season without any distractions or chatter from bipolar WIP dipshits
demanding our 'pedigreed' backups be given the job after our first loss.

Last but not least, I don't want anyone on my team nicknamed 'Johnny Football.'
Zero
What HOP said.
mcnabbulous
I don't think you can ever make blanket statements when it comes to QB's. If Chip thinks either one of these guys is a better fit than Foles, I think he can and should pull the trigger.

With that said, I like Foles and think he's more than capable in our offense.

I hope we go impact defender with our first pick.

In an ideal world, those guys fall to us and we have lots of trade options to drop back and pick up some more ammo.
JaxEagle
Agree with HoP and Zero. The risk/reward isn't good enough. But you said leaving out trades. I would consider trading the pick or the player that someone else wants.
Dreagon
Already looking for a replacement for your Pro-Bowl quarterback?
Phits
Draft picks are a crap shoot, so you might as well go for the best player available.

QUOTE (TGryn @ Apr 18 2014, 04:09 PM) *
Both top QB prospects Johnny Manziel and Teddy Bridgewater are having rumors run around that teams aren't that impressed by them, and that they could fall dramatically in the draft (shades of Aaron Rodgers or Randy Moss). The most likely reason is that "sources" with picks later in the 1st round are trying to spread doubt around so their team could have a shot at getting one of them.

And yet...

Suppose the rumors are true, and one of them starts a free fall. Pick 19 goes by, then 20, then 21...and suddenly the Eagles are on the clock with an unexpected QB prospect still on the board, a guy you normally would have no shot at this low in the draft. QB is not a area of need after the year Foles had, yet if Manziel or Bridgewater was at the top of their board, would you be OK with them going that route?

Lets leave trades out of it for the moment. Assume that if a team was really hot to get the player, they'd either have traded for him already, or are trying to wait it out and figure they're safe with this pick since there's no way the Eagles take a QB here...right?

Some other things to consider:
- Manziel is exactly the kind of athletic QB that Foles isn't.
- Rookie contracts only go for 4 years. Are you willing to burn that 1st for a guy who probably won't play in 2014?
- QBs are in a special category. We saw in the Dallas game what happens when the QB isn't right: the whole offense falls apart.

nephillymike
What HOP said, seconded and thirded by Z and Jax.

NFW!

I pray for this scenario and I call in the guy from Storage Wars and his pleasant on the eyes wife to handle the bidding:

We could drop six slots and pick up a 2nd and a fifth for a qb desperate team.

In A NY minute.
JaxEagle
Maybe we can get this in exchange for our first round pick:



Pick #12 (Rd. 1)
Pick #71 (Rd. 3)
Pick #106 (Rd. 4)
Pick #144 (Rd. 5)
Pick #179 (Rd. 6)
Pick #218 (Rd. 7)

Pick #2 (Rd. 1)
Pick #64 (Rd. 3)


Can you believe the Racially Insensitives had that much ammo and still managed to be as bad as they were... how is that possible???
Eyrie
I wouldn't take either of them there as we have enough other needs that a back up QB is not needed.

As regards the trade scenario, the team at #23 can sit tight but any other team with an interest in either Manziel or Bridgewater will have to talk to us about trading up and that has to be my preferred option.
nephillymike
So I took a look at some trade possibilities and the trade chart to see what we could get.

Based upon the Draftek team needs and trade chart, there are 7 teams with urgent or semi urgent QB needs that pick after us in Rd 1 or 2:

Cle, Hou, Oak, Tb, Jax, Min, Ten

Here's what a fiar trade would be under each scenario based on the trade value chart:

Sel#.Rnd....Team........Give Up........................Get
22.......1......PHI
26.......1......CLE.........#22 (1st).....................#26 (1st), #106 (4th)
33.......2......HOU........#22 (1st), #122 (4th)....#33 (2nd), #65 (3rd)
36.......2......OAK.........#22 (1st).....................#36 (2nd), #67 (3rd)
38.......2......TB...........#22 (1st).....................#38 (2nd), #69 (3rd), #185 (6th)
39.......2......JAX..........#22 (1st).....................#39 (2nd), #70 (3rd), #144 (5th)
40.......2......MIN..........#22 (1st).....................#40 (2nd), #72 (3rd), #108 (4th)
42.......2......TEN..........#22 (1st).....................#42 (2nd) +2015 2nd round pick (not enough picks to offer this yr.)

We could also go the unconventional route of asking for a solid starter from these teams in position of need instead of the 3rd-6th round picks.

If the market is strong, we could probably get a sweetener in there in the form of an extra 5th or 6th rounder.

Personally, I like the CLE and OAK deals, would be OK with HOU if we made it a 2015 4th but wouldn't want to drop further than #36 for fear that all the first round talent would be gone by then.

From 38 down, I would be worried that a 1st round talent at a position of need doesn't make it that far and we need first round talent and have plenty of PON's.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Apr 18 2014, 06:37 PM) *
Already looking for a replacement for your Pro-Bowl quarterback?



that is the kind of silliness you sometimes find here, particularly at draft time.......what drives me nuts is that both those guys have games that are great for college....they may have a very tough time in the pros.......
Zero
Although, about drafting a QB high ... rebuilding the Cowboys, Jimmy Johnson drafted Troy Aikman in 1989 with the #1 pick in the draft. He was without question their QB of the future. A few weeks later, Johnson used a #1 pick to draft Steve Walsh in the supplemental draft and ended up trading him to the Saints.

This was an exception and not the norm but it seems to have worked for Johnson. I don't want the Eagles to do it.
TGryn
The flip side to this being regarded as the deepest draft in years is that those lower picks may have more value than usual, so trading down may not yield the same bounty you'd get in a thinner year where you'd need to strike early if you're looking to get a guy who'd be good enough to start immediately. The draft's depth this year also may temper the urgency to trade up in the first place: if you know you're likely to get about the same level of talent at 26 or 27 as you would get at 22, it makes sense to just sit pat and hoard those lower picks.
nephillymike
QUOTE (TGryn @ Apr 19 2014, 01:26 PM) *
The flip side to this being regarded as the deepest draft in years is that those lower picks may have more value than usual, so trading down may not yield the same bounty you'd get in a thinner year where you'd need to strike early if you're looking to get a guy who'd be good enough to start immediately. The draft's depth this year also may temper the urgency to trade up in the first place: if you know you're likely to get about the same level of talent at 26 or 27 as you would get at 22, it makes sense to just sit pat and hoard those lower picks.



I haven't heard that the draft is the deepest in years. I have heard that the draft is the deepest at WR and CB' in years. Have you heard that overall it's the deepest?
nephillymike
Using ESPN's ratings 2014 vs 2013, it appears last year's was deeper per them:


Pk...'14 Rating..'13 Rating
1.......98..............97
10.....93..............94
16.....91..............93
32.....88..............89
64.....77..............81
96.....69..............75
115...65..............71

#115 was the lowest I had in last year's draft stuff, but it seems like this year isn't all that per ESPN. Except for the #1 pick, all other are rated stronger last year.
mcnabbulous
I love it. Chip just cut our best WR and everyone was on board. In Chip We Trust!

But if Chip were to decide that a specific QB, the most important position in the game, gave us a better chance to win, it would be a bad move?

FWIW, I don't think we would take either guy, but QB is the one position where Chip should have absolute autonomy.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 19 2014, 05:14 PM) *
I love it. Chip just cut our best WR and everyone was on board. In Chip We Trust!

But if Chip were to decide that a specific QB, the most important position in the game, gave us a better chance to win, it would be a bad move?

FWIW, I don't think we would take either guy, but QB is the one position where Chip should have absolute autonomy.

Much like how you feel the HC should NOT have GM responsibilities or make personnel decisions....however, he should have complete autonomy over the most important position.

From my perspective, Chip and company have complete carte blanche for the next couple of seasons while building their program.
mcnabbulous
I don't follow your first paragraph.

To clarify, QB is the one main position that is directly linked to an offensive head coach. Evaluating that one position is reasonable within the confines of the job. Doing so for the entire roster is not.
Reality Fan
This is what I think of Heisman winning QBs in the NFL.....I knew it was bad but I did not know it was this bad....

"Since 1950, 26 quarterbacks were selected as the Heisman Trophy winner. Of those 26, only 20 started at quarterback in at least one NFL game. Among those 20, only four quarterbacks have a winning record in the NFL (regular season). Robert Griffin III is the only Heisman winner with a career passer rating over 90 in the NFL (92.4). Since 1950, the combined NFL winning percentage for quarterbacks who won the Heisman Trophy is under .500 (465-489-3, .487)."

Manzeil will just be another one the highly drafted Heisman disasters.....bridgewater is also a risky venture......I stay away from them like ebola...
mcnabbulous
All QB's are risky ventures. Most draft picks are risky. It's the nature of the beast.

Manziel is super talented. Whether he has the mentality to thrive in the pocket is unknown. I suspect he'll struggle there.

With that said, if Chip thinks he can thrive in his offense, I'd be on board.

Bridgewater would make no sense, because his skill set isn't different from Foles. I'd be ecstatic if I were one of the QB needy teams with an early second round pick and he fell down the board. I'd love to see him wind up with O'Brien in Houston.
TGryn
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 19 2014, 12:36 PM) *
I haven't heard that the draft is the deepest in years. I have heard that the draft is the deepest at WR and CB' in years. Have you heard that overall it's the deepest?

Repeatedly. See:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/...s-in-ten-years/
QUOTE
"From my perspective, this is the deepest and best draft class I've seen in probably ten years," Mayock said. "That's been reinforced by most of the general managers and scouts I've talked to throughout the league. I had one GM tell me the other day that having a Top-20 pick this year is very similar to having a Top-10 pick last year."

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2010352...-2014-nfl-draft

QUOTE
(scout Chris) Landry first talked about the grades he has assigned to some prospects in the first round at this point: "In terms of overall grades, you are right, I'm not completely done yet, but I can tell you that I'm on pace to have a higher number of first round grades that I've had in years. Maybe as high as 28 or 29, which is extraordinarily high." Chris then talked about the rest of the talent and depth in the rest of the draft: "It's really deep in the second and third rounds. Maybe even a little bit above that. So, there is really good value. And what that means is that when you are picking in the fifth or sixth round, you will be getting in a lot of cases third-round value players. Because how you grade a player is how you see them and how they fit in a certain category. And that grade is corresponding to a round. But if you have more than 32 players with second-round grades, which you are definitely going to have this year, just do the numbers. If you have 42, you have 10 players who going to bleed into the third round with second-round grades. If you do the numbers going forward, I think there is going to be tremendous value here (in this draft)."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/c...lowney/5928625/

QUOTE
Pittsburgh Steelers general manager Kevin Colbert calls it, "The deepest draft I've ever seen."Colbert, with more than 30 years at his craft, is credible enough. And he's not alone.

Jason Licht, the new Tampa Bay Buccaneers GM: "Best draft I've seen."

Dennis Hickey, the new Miami Dolphins GM: "This draft class…best in a while."

Meanwhile, Atlanta Falcons general manager Thomas Dimitroff surmises, "In my mind, it's a fantastic top 10 draft, and throughout the first round there are some marquee players … they are going to be the impact-type players in this league for a number of years to come."


So, the groupthink around the league seems to be that its very deep, and that will be affecting decisions when it comes to trades as they're proposed.
nephillymike
QUOTE (TGryn @ Apr 19 2014, 08:04 PM) *
Repeatedly. See:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/...s-in-ten-years/

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2010352...-2014-nfl-draft


http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/c...lowney/5928625/



So, the groupthink around the league seems to be that its very deep, and that will be affecting decisions when it comes to trades as they're proposed.


Interesting. I guess ESPN's Kiper is one of the few who doesn't see it that way.

Mayock changed the scale on the way he rates the prospects so I can't compare. (They seem to do that often). Maybe NFP has comparables. I'll try to take a look.
nephillymike
TG,
NFP also changed their grading system. It's annoying. Doing this draft analysis for years, it's amazing how often the sites change the grading system.

I'll go with your research and yes, it could have those impacts on the trade up/down situation. Maybe that low pick sweetener I mentioned is off the table.

Looking at the equal value trade down scenarios I mapped out, do you do any?

TGryn
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 20 2014, 03:15 AM) *
Looking at the equal value trade down scenarios I mapped out, do you do any?

It's difficult to game out since we're so far down in the draft. Teams drafting with the first couple of picks decide their own destiny; at #22, we're largely left with whoever falls to us dependent on what happens in the first 20 picks, and who's there is going to decide whether another team wants to trade up to our pick. We also don't have a lot of ammunition to move up this year.

There's normally a fair amount of talk around every draft about how the Jimmy Johnson draft pick value chart is outdated, but no one's been able to come up with a revision that clearly works better, so we're stuck with it. It at least has the virtue of every draftnik being aware of it, so you don't need to explain what you're talking about when you reference the "pick value chart."
nephillymike
QUOTE (TGryn @ Apr 20 2014, 08:48 AM) *
It's difficult to game out since we're so far down in the draft. Teams drafting with the first couple of picks decide their own destiny; at #22, we're largely left with whoever falls to us dependent on what happens in the first 20 picks, and who's there is going to decide whether another team wants to trade up to our pick. We also don't have a lot of ammunition to move up this year.

There's normally a fair amount of talk around every draft about how the Jimmy Johnson draft pick value chart is outdated, but no one's been able to come up with a revision that clearly works better, so we're stuck with it. It at least has the virtue of every draftnik being aware of it, so you don't need to explain what you're talking about when you reference the "pick value chart."

On one hand, I want the QB's to be there for a trade bidding war, but really that's probably not the best case.

Best case since we don't need a QB, is that five of them go early which drop five other non QB's down in the draft, increasing the likelihood that we get our man.

I mean if the five QB's go 1-21 and that leaves Gilbert, Dennard, Pryor, Barr and Shazier there for us to pick from, then that's a good thing.
Dreagon
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Apr 19 2014, 07:49 AM) *
that is the kind of silliness you sometimes find here, particularly at draft time.......what drives me nuts is that both those guys have games that are great for college....they may have a very tough time in the pros.......


I guess it goes to show the power of pedigree. There is an instinctive urge to trust that high potential pedigree, despite the year of pro-bowl performance of a different QB who exceeded expectations.
JeeQ
Bridgewater, no... But Manziel... well you already know my feelings on Manziel. While drafting him has obvious downsides, the potential upsides are interstellar. In my opinion, he's a unique talent and you have to take the chance if he's there.
Reality Fan
What is the upside to drafting a QB in the first round.....you have a young QB coming off an incredible year in his first as a starter and what message do you want to send to him? Hi Nick...you just had the best year of virtually any first year starter in history and now, going into your 3rd year, we are going to decide to waste our first pick on a gamble at QB because no matter how well you played we still think we can do better because some fans here still think they know what I want at QB better than I do......so now you know Nick, no matter how well you play always look over your shoulder....you are a re starter.....for now....

Simply ridiculous.....
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Apr 20 2014, 06:57 PM) *
What is the upside to drafting a QB in the first round.....you have a young QB coming off an incredible year in his first as a starter and what message do you want to send to him? Hi Nick...you just had the best year of virtually any first year starter in history and now, going into your 3rd year, we are going to decide to waste our first pick on a gamble at QB because no matter how well you played we still think we can do better because some fans here still think they know what I want at QB better than I do......so now you know Nick, no matter how well you play always look over your shoulder....you are a re starter.....for now....

Simply ridiculous.....

I agree.

I really like Foles , so I'm good.

But just for shits and giggles.

What if we're on the clock and we have Manziel there for the taking and rather than offer our pick for more draft picks, we offer Foles for picks for us to move down?

What's he get us? Say with Hou's #33. I say Foles get's us the 33, a future first and a third this year.

Would you? I wouldn't, but I think many would.

Draft Manziel, get #33, #55 and a future 1st for Foles.
TGryn
OK, here's the pro-draft-a-QB reasoning:

* If Foles gets hurt, its season over. We have no meaningful depth there. Much as I like Barkley, his ceiling is like a more athletic version of the Detmers: a QB who can run the offense and won't lose games for you, but isn't a guy the defense has to worry about on his own. Sanchez is a wreck at this point that hopefully you can turn into something redeemable, but right now it'd be like Mike McMahon taking over for McNabb in '05. Manziel especially would give the offense a running option that neither Foles or Barkley can even approach, and he'd be starting fresh without the wear-and-tear that Vick had the last couple of seasons.

* Furthermore, putting all our eggs in the Foles basket leaves us vulnerable to him coming back to earth in 2015, something that became much more likely with losing his #1 receiver. As mentioned, there's no Plan B at QB. Any other position that might be OK, but we've seen how much every play in Kelly's offense relies on the QB either throwing the ball, running the ball, or being a legitimate decoy option to do either. With as much running as our QB does, even with a slow guy like Foles there, having a QB situation where you have #1 and #1B is really what you'd like to have. Depth there isn't a luxury, its a necessity. Case in point: see what the Packers went through last year when Rodgers got hurt, or the Giants when Eli fell apart.

* If you have the chance to grab a guy who you think can be a starting QB for you, you do it. End of story. Look around the league at how many teams are playing guys like Carson Palmer or Matt Cassel or Christian Ponder or Chad Henne (or pretty much any Browns QB the last 10 years). QB talent isn't easy to find, so if a prospect you like falls into your lap at #22, take him and just be thankful you got lucky enough for it to happen.
nephillymike
QUOTE (TGryn @ Apr 20 2014, 08:17 PM) *
OK, here's the pro-draft-a-QB reasoning:

* If Foles gets hurt, its season over. We have no meaningful depth there. Much as I like Barkley, his ceiling is like a more athletic version of the Detmers: a QB who can run the offense and won't lose games for you, but isn't a guy the defense has to worry about on his own. Sanchez is a wreck at this point that hopefully you can turn into something redeemable, but right now it'd be like Mike McMahon taking over for McNabb in '05. Manziel especially would give the offense a running option that neither Foles or Barkley can even approach, and he'd be starting fresh without the wear-and-tear that Vick had the last couple of seasons.

* Furthermore, putting all our eggs in the Foles basket leaves us vulnerable to him coming back to earth in 2015, something that became much more likely with losing his #1 receiver. As mentioned, there's no Plan B at QB. Any other position that might be OK, but we've seen how much every play in Kelly's offense relies on the QB either throwing the ball, running the ball, or being a legitimate decoy option to do either. With as much running as our QB does, even with a slow guy like Foles there, having a QB situation where you have #1 and #1B is really what you'd like to have. Depth there isn't a luxury, its a necessity. Case in point: see what the Packers went through last year when Rodgers got hurt, or the Giants when Eli fell apart.

* If you have the chance to grab a guy who you think can be a starting QB for you, you do it. End of story. Look around the league at how many teams are playing guys like Carson Palmer or Matt Cassel or Christian Ponder or Chad Henne (or pretty much any Browns QB the last 10 years). QB talent isn't easy to find, so if a prospect you like falls into your lap at #22, take him and just be thankful you got lucky enough for it to happen.

That's "the pro draft a qb" reasoning.

Is that what you do?

If Sanchez and Barkley are as bad as you say (I agree BTW), why is that acceptable as we sit here on Easter with 20M of cap space? If it was that important, shouldn't we have invested in that position to a greater degree in FA than we did? My hope is that the light comes on for Barkley. Sanchez is a lost cause.


TGryn
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 20 2014, 07:15 PM) *
If Sanchez and Barkley are as bad as you say (I agree BTW), why is that acceptable as we sit here on Easter with 20M of cap space? If it was that important, shouldn't we have invested in that position to a greater degree in FA than we did? My hope is that the light comes on for Barkley. Sanchez is a lost cause.

JK's column here explains where most of that cap space is going to go (TL:DR: extensions for guys like Foles, Cox, Kendricks, and Maclin). None of the FA QBs was close to the same talent level as Manziel or Bridgewater, so those are different issues; only Vick would have been a legitimate "QB 1B" option, and he wanted to start somewhere. One thing that makes me think that the DJax release wasn't something they were planning for at the beginning of FA was that they didn't even bring in WRs for visits, though there wasn't much in the market that was a clear upgrade from Cooper or Maclin.
Zero
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 19 2014, 05:14 PM) *
I love it. Chip just cut our best WR and everyone was on board. In Chip We Trust!

But if Chip were to decide that a specific QB, the most important position in the game, gave us a better chance to win, it would be a bad move?

FWIW, I don't think we would take either guy, but QB is the one position where Chip should have absolute autonomy.

I would NOT be happy if he drafted a QB high after giving up a pick for Jackson (not that he cares if I'm happy). And that's the point to me. I don't like that he let Jackson go and got nothing in return. That means he wasted a draft pick to replace him. If on top of that he uses a top pick to draft a QB after having his QB set NFL records on his way to the pro bowl I'd be amazed. That's then wasting two picks in a year when they could be contending for more than the NFC East.
Zero
QUOTE (TGryn @ Apr 20 2014, 09:17 PM) *
OK, here's the pro-draft-a-QB reasoning:

* If Foles gets hurt, its season over. We have no meaningful depth there. Much as I like Barkley, his ceiling is like a more athletic version of the Detmers: a QB who can run the offense and won't lose games for you, but isn't a guy the defense has to worry about on his own. Sanchez is a wreck at this point that hopefully you can turn into something redeemable, but right now it'd be like Mike McMahon taking over for McNabb in '05. Manziel especially would give the offense a running option that neither Foles or Barkley can even approach, and he'd be starting fresh without the wear-and-tear that Vick had the last couple of seasons.

* Furthermore, putting all our eggs in the Foles basket leaves us vulnerable to him coming back to earth in 2015, something that became much more likely with losing his #1 receiver. As mentioned, there's no Plan B at QB. Any other position that might be OK, but we've seen how much every play in Kelly's offense relies on the QB either throwing the ball, running the ball, or being a legitimate decoy option to do either. With as much running as our QB does, even with a slow guy like Foles there, having a QB situation where you have #1 and #1B is really what you'd like to have. Depth there isn't a luxury, its a necessity. Case in point: see what the Packers went through last year when Rodgers got hurt, or the Giants when Eli fell apart.

* If you have the chance to grab a guy who you think can be a starting QB for you, you do it. End of story. Look around the league at how many teams are playing guys like Carson Palmer or Matt Cassel or Christian Ponder or Chad Henne (or pretty much any Browns QB the last 10 years). QB talent isn't easy to find, so if a prospect you like falls into your lap at #22, take him and just be thankful you got lucky enough for it to happen.

My problem with this is the "system QB" equation and the extent of that potential Foles injury. If one of these guys need to step in for part of a game or a game or two it may not derail a season the way you seem to think that it would.

Cassel was the next coming of Brady when he took over for him. Kelly won in Oregon with QBs that don't even remember themselves. He used a fourth rounder on Barkley a year after he was considered to be a top pick in the draft and had an injured senior year. He came into camp still recovering from that injury. It's too early to give up on him being either an adequate back up or a potential Feeley trading chip. Sanchez could be a decent back up - IMO he wasn't brought in right in NY. NY has too many distractions, he was expected to be THE MAN as rookie coming out of USC, an NFL QB failure factory and I seem to remember his OL being a disaster (not sure). Here, he knows he's the backup, has a good OL, a good running game and a system that seems to be tailored for QB success.
JeeQ
QUOTE (TGryn @ Apr 20 2014, 06:17 PM) *
OK, here's the pro-draft-a-QB reasoning:

* If Foles gets hurt, its season over. We have no meaningful depth there. Much as I like Barkley, his ceiling is like a more athletic version of the Detmers: a QB who can run the offense and won't lose games for you, but isn't a guy the defense has to worry about on his own. Sanchez is a wreck at this point that hopefully you can turn into something redeemable, but right now it'd be like Mike McMahon taking over for McNabb in '05. Manziel especially would give the offense a running option that neither Foles or Barkley can even approach, and he'd be starting fresh without the wear-and-tear that Vick had the last couple of seasons.

* Furthermore, putting all our eggs in the Foles basket leaves us vulnerable to him coming back to earth in 2015, something that became much more likely with losing his #1 receiver. As mentioned, there's no Plan B at QB. Any other position that might be OK, but we've seen how much every play in Kelly's offense relies on the QB either throwing the ball, running the ball, or being a legitimate decoy option to do either. With as much running as our QB does, even with a slow guy like Foles there, having a QB situation where you have #1 and #1B is really what you'd like to have. Depth there isn't a luxury, its a necessity. Case in point: see what the Packers went through last year when Rodgers got hurt, or the Giants when Eli fell apart.

* If you have the chance to grab a guy who you think can be a starting QB for you, you do it. End of story. Look around the league at how many teams are playing guys like Carson Palmer or Matt Cassel or Christian Ponder or Chad Henne (or pretty much any Browns QB the last 10 years). QB talent isn't easy to find, so if a prospect you like falls into your lap at #22, take him and just be thankful you got lucky enough for it to happen.


Great points and you can't ignore the fact Foles has missed games due to injury in back to back seasons now. How anxious are we about entering the Sanchize era?
JaxEagle
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 20 2014, 10:15 PM) *
My hope is that the light comes on for Barkley. Sanchez is a lost cause.

Sanchez needs the light to go on. Barkley needs to grow a few inches. I'm not betting on either of those, though if I must then I will take Sanchez.
nephillymike
QUOTE (TGryn @ Apr 21 2014, 06:03 AM) *
JK's column here explains where most of that cap space is going to go (TL:DR: extensions for guys like Foles, Cox, Kendricks, and Maclin). None of the FA QBs was close to the same talent level as Manziel or Bridgewater, so those are different issues; only Vick would have been a legitimate "QB 1B" option, and he wanted to start somewhere. One thing that makes me think that the DJax release wasn't something they were planning for at the beginning of FA was that they didn't even bring in WRs for visits, though there wasn't much in the market that was a clear upgrade from Cooper or Maclin.

I don't think I follow you.
If they made the decision that Jackson was gone, they probably also made the decision they would draft a WR also. If it was a money issue, doubtful they would cut Jackson only to spend big money on FA wr. Why would they bring them in?
TGryn
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 21 2014, 05:42 PM) *
If they made the decision that Jackson was gone, they probably also made the decision they would draft a WR also. If it was a money issue, doubtful they would cut Jackson only to spend big money on FA wr. Why would they bring them in?

I'm just surprised they didn't bring in more insurance against Maclin not being able to complete his recovery, if they had a plan going in that DJax was gone and especially after cutting Avant which happened not that long into FA. WRs like Benn are always available, at not a huge cost, yet none were even brought in for a look-see. They're pinning all their cards on a WR prospect they like being there at their picks, which is risky considering how few picks they have to work with & the needs on defense.

It wouldn't surprise me if one of the third-day picks gets traded for a journeyman WR along the line of Maehl who Kelly values higher than the team they're currently with, though I don't have any names off the top of my head who they might be...or we get surprised and he picks up De'Anthony Thomas in the 3rd or 4th as a younger interchangeable part for the same role Sproles will likely play (as a hybrid RB/WR), plus acting as a returner. It may be that we're looking at this the wrong way, and Kelly's planning to use Sproles and the TEs (Ertz especially) as part-time WRs, so that they may figure all they need at WR this year is Maclin and Cooper and some assorted role players (especially after how Cooper blossomed in this offense, something Kelly may figure could be repeatable with other less-than-A-list wideouts). That would also explain why they held on to Casey, despite his high cap hit.
sticks n skins
Definitely no Manziel. However, any QB at #22 would be a waste for the Eagles.
Wheeljack
Holy crap, how bad is the rumor mill, or rather... how the mighty have fallen. We're seriously talking about guys who would have gone in the top 10 dropping to 22?

I don't believe it. Too many teams in need of a "turnaround QB" in that lot that are going to let either of them drop.
Manziel and Bridgewater aren't making it past Jacksonville and Cleveland. And if they do, they definitely aren't making it past Minnesota. Blake Bortles and Derek Carr are the kind of QBs that West Side Browns fans and "Flyer Fan" contingent in Eagle fandom drool over. I think that someone's going to be dumb and pick them over these guys and they're going to be pretty much Matt McGloin grade in the NFL.

In any case, I would take either as Foles insurance, but this team needs defense... and now another WR (thanks Chip and Friends).
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.