Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Foles for the 10th pick. Would You?
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Pages: 1, 2
nephillymike
The latest rumor has STL interested in giving us the 10th pick for Nick Foles.

Would you?

My first reaction is surprise that Foles has that much value. I would think his value is a 2nd round pick with a 3rd round kicker if he plays well enough. But the 10th pick in the draft? Seems like a lot.

But as you know, I'm not a huge fan of the draft. Such a crapshoot.

Here's a list of past # 10's. Foles is worth most of these picks:

http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/pick/10

The logistics of pulling off such a trade is difficult, only from the standpoint of needing to be sure we are able to get Mariotta to make that deal.

It would likely need to work like this;

Target a team in the top five who doesn't want Mariota. Tell them we'll give them the #10 and #20 for their pick. If Mariota is there at that team's pick, trade Foles to STL for the #10 and then trade the 10 and 20 to the team for the right to Mariota.

Easy right?



Zero
If Fisher thinks Foles is worth the 10th overall I get worried. It's not that Fisher is a genius personnel guy but it's the combination of how he feels about Foles and how he must feel about Mariota. Maybe he thinks Mariota won't be there at 10 or that there's no chance of getting him, period. And, as you say, the draft has no guarantees.

All that said, if the Eagles can pull that off, have 10 and 20 and get their guy at 10 I'll be impressed. Then Chip needs to get a reliable vet for a backup. I'm not convinced that Mariota will be in the NFL what he was in college but at least that deal won't mortgage the team's future.
BirdsWinBaby
1) kelly has made it clear he is interested in getting up for MM...

2)every team between #20 and the #1 is licking their chops. those teams wont get either of the 2 QBs so if there is a crazy man who wants to do crazy things? hell why shouldnt we benefit

3) when a team says they are willing to trade for Foles....be sure as hell that they dont mean straight up for their pick. (unless its #18 or so) they are interested in trading for Foles ANNND whatever else the crazy man is willing to give up in his quest to get to #1

problem is he will have to give up so much+ Foles for the first jump, that last leap from ~#10 to #1 wont have the good stuff the Bucs will accept for their pick. of course you dont do the first deal unless the second deal is agreed upon, otherwise you have no QB

lol...go get 'em Chip!
JaxEagle
This is nuts. If we trade all the way to #1 and take Mariota then that will be the biggest test of my Eagles loyalty that I've seen.
make_it_rain
I would do Foles for #10 in a second. I don't expect the Rams to feel the same way though.

I'm with you mike, I had assumed it would be similar to something like the Alex Smith trade from KC to San Fran, something like a second rounder with another conditional second to third thrown in.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Jan 27 2015, 11:13 PM) *
Would you?

My first reaction is surprise that Foles has that much value. I would think his value is a 2nd round pick with a 3rd round kicker if he plays well enough. But the 10th pick in the draft? Seems like a lot.


No.

I think it's ludicrous that his value would be considered a 2nd round pick, though I'm in the minority I guess. He's a proven NFL quarterback, and we are in agreement that picking QBs in the draft is a crap shoot. In his only full year as a starter he put together one of the best statistical seasons any QB has ever had, and followed it up with sub-par play this year, he's been injured a couple times too. If I were the Rams I'd certainly feel pretty good about a #10 for him. And no, I'm not a huge Foles fan, I just think at this point we keep him on and let him play for a contract while beefing up our defense.

And again with Mariota, people act like The Genius's Master PlanTM can only come to fruition if he gets 'his' guy from Oregon. Doesn't that speak more to the inferiority of his system than anything else?
Phits
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Jan 28 2015, 11:10 AM) *
I think it's ludicrous that his value would be considered a 2nd round pick, though I'm in the minority I guess. He's a proven NFL quarterback, and we are in agreement that picking QBs in the draft is a crap shoot. In his only full year as a starter he put together one of the best statistical seasons any QB has ever had, and followed it up with sub-par play this year, he's been injured a couple times too. If I were the Rams I'd certainly feel pretty good about a #10 for him. And no, I'm not a huge Foles fan, I just think at this point we keep him on and let him play for a contract while beefing up our defense.

He has never played a full year as a starter. When you look at his 3 years in the league 2013 appears to be the anomaly. The one constant has been his injuries. He's durability has to come into question (2012 - broken hand, 2013 - concussion, 2014 - broken collarbone).

Foles has had 1 good season, albeit a great one. The jury is still out on whether he is (that) good or whether the first year system masked his flaws.
Eyrie
Right now I'd take the #10 for Foles straight up, but that is based on my uncertainty over how good Foles can be. If his natural level is closer to 2014 than 2013, it's a no-brainer. I'm hopeful it will be closer to 2013 but I don't expect him to ever reach that level again.
D Rock
The deal being speculated about has Foles AND OUR #20 pick for St. Lou's #10.

Even the biggest Foles fan wouldn't be silly enough to suggest he's worth #10 straight-up. Even with pick #20, it's still a "curious" deal from St. Lou's point of view.
JaxEagle
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Jan 28 2015, 11:10 AM) *
people act like The Genius's Master PlanTM can only come to fruition if he gets 'his' guy from Oregon. Doesn't that speak more to the inferiority of his system than anything else?

Of course that stands to reason.



If we trade Foles then we most likely go backwards. I don't believe that Sanchez or a rookie can take us beyond 10 wins in 2015.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Phits @ Jan 28 2015, 01:57 PM) *
Foles has had 1 good season, albeit a great one. The jury is still out on whether he is (that) good or whether the first year system masked his flaws.


No doubt. And since it's ludicrous to pay what it's going to cost to get Mariota, and we have Foles for another year anyway, I think the obvious logical choice is to strengthen the team overall, especially on defense. Let Foles start next year, and see where we're at then.

BTW, not to spend all off-season trashing the FO and Chip, but could we be doing any worse of a job of not showing our hand? Would it kill Chip to just say "We love Foles, he's our guy!" and stop slobbering over Mariota? For fuck's sakes, if his plan is to get him, he could do us all a favor and publicly talk about some negatives he has, or why his style of play might not translate to success in the NFL, or that he's a cokehead or something laugh.gif - then he could just text Mariota 'lol' and watch his draft stock slide.
JaxEagle
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Jan 29 2015, 11:28 AM) *
No doubt. And since it's ludicrous to pay what it's going to cost to get Mariota, and we have Foles for another year anyway, I think the obvious logical choice is to strengthen the team overall, especially on defense. Let Foles start next year, and see where we're at then.

BTW, not to spend all off-season trashing the FO and Chip, but could we be doing any worse of a job of not showing our hand? Would it kill Chip to just say "We love Foles, he's our guy!" and stop slobbering over Mariota? For fuck's sakes, if his plan is to get him, he could do us all a favor and publicly talk about some negatives he has, or why his style of play might not translate to success in the NFL, or that he's a cokehead or something laugh.gif - then he could just text Mariota 'lol' and watch his draft stock slide.

Yeah, mariota needs to pay chip a cut because he is almost single-handedly keeping Mariota's stock high.
Dreagon
I just don't see it. Even if you managed to get that pick for Foles, you would be giving up your starting QB for a pick that still isn't high enough to get either of the two QBs projected to be a starter next year.
BirdsWinBaby
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Jan 29 2015, 11:28 AM) *
No doubt. And since it's ludicrous to pay what it's going to cost to get Mariota, and we have Foles for another year anyway, I think the obvious logical choice is to strengthen the team overall, especially on defense. Let Foles start next year, and see where we're at then.


That's easy....Foles will miss some games to injury, people will still be saying we don't know how great he can be, we may very well be coming off a playoff win with the extended playoff pool (YAY...PROGRESS!??!)and that leaves you with a choice...

Extend Foles and solidify him as the starter for Chip's last 2 years under contract. Or start over with a new QB (that isn't Mariota) for the last 2 years of Chip's contract

Either way You run the risk of Chip running away from the team after those 2 yrs are up
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE
Extend Foles and solidify him as the starter for Chip's last 2 years under contract. Or start over with a new QB (that isn't Mariota) for the last 2 years of Chip's contract


Well we already have a choice - mortgage the franchise to get Mariota, or strengthen some of our many other holes via draft and free agency, and give a proven NFL QB another year as starter in the final year of his contract. Maybe even draft a QB in the 3rd round if they like one, and see if he can work out. We're not going anywhere without significant improvements on defense anyway.

QUOTE
Either way You run the risk of Chip running away from the team after those 2 yrs are up


The honeymoon's been over for a while now - it's time to win or go home. If his system can't work without Mariota the Savior, then he's a fraud and he should go back to college. And if he does jump up and grab Mariota, we won't have to worry about him running away. He'll either be taking us to championships, or (more likely) he'll get run out of town and we'll be in last place for a few years.

nephillymike
QUOTE (D Rock @ Jan 28 2015, 03:24 PM) *
The deal being speculated about has Foles AND OUR #20 pick for St. Lou's #10.

Even the biggest Foles fan wouldn't be silly enough to suggest he's worth #10 straight-up. Even with pick #20, it's still a "curious" deal from St. Lou's point of view.



That's not how I've heard it. It's been advertised as Foles for the #10, straight up.

Where did you hear the combo of Foles +20?

nephillymike
HOP,

I think you and a few others assume we either have to beef up the D or we have to trade up to get a QB, but we can't do both.

Truth is, with our cap room, you can sure up our immediate needs in FA on defense, AND trade Foles and the 20th to move up to get Mariota (with maybe another 3rd round pick or so) and be OK.

I think one thing that is overlooked a bit is that Mariota, seen as a system QB, will be a reach for a lot of teams. Those teams don't have that kind of offense, won't have coaches who can coach that type of offense, and some of them don't even have OC's yet and will be looking to trade out. For some of the teams with QB needs ahead of us, Foles may seem like the safer pick and at $800K, he's a steal.

Now maybe you or others don't think Mariota will be a success in our offense. That is understandable. But don't assume it's an either/or. It can be BOTH.
BirdsWinBaby
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Jan 29 2015, 07:57 PM) *
HOP,

I think you and a few others assume we either have to beef up the D or we have to trade up to get a QB, but we can't do both.

Truth is, with our cap room, you can sure up our immediate needs in FA on defense, AND trade Foles and the 20th to move up to get Mariota (with maybe another 3rd round pick or so) and be OK.

I think one thing that is overlooked a bit is that Mariota, seen as a system QB, will be a reach for a lot of teams. Those teams don't have that kind of offense, won't have coaches who can coach that type of offense, and some of them don't even have OC's yet and will be looking to trade out. For some of the teams with QB needs ahead of us, Foles may seem like the safer pick and at $800K, he's a steal.

Now maybe you or others don't think Mariota will be a success in our offense. That is understandable. But don't assume it's an either/or. It can be BOTH.



Mariota is not a 5'9", quick little QB with a noodle arm. that is a 'system QB'....MM is a prototypical QB who is smart enough to learn another system and fast enough and big enough with a strong arm that will be coveted by ANY team....just because he plays in a system doesnt automatically mean he can ONLY a certain way for a certain coach

i totally agree with the idea that you can do both. people make it sound as if you trade up for the QB and you just shut down. draft over,no later rounds, no FAs, wait for OTAs. that being said...

Foles + a 3rd + your #20 aint getting you no where near the top 10...and MM isnt gonna fall far enough because scouts will believe he can help ANY team that needs a QB
Zero
I'd be surprised and impressed if they could get the #10 pick for Nick. That said, I'd also be worried about turning over the offense to a rookie. Will Chip bring in his version of Pederson to play the first half of the season while Mariota learns?

As for the "reach" theory, teams reach all the time. Why wouldn't a QB needy team in a QB starved league reach for the QB du jour? I still don't think he'll be at 10 and worry about the cost to get up high enough to get him, especially at the expense of losing the one NFL QB we seem to have on the roster. If there's a reasonable way to have Mariota and Foles compete for the job I'm all for it!
JaxEagle
QUOTE (BirdsWinBaby @ Jan 30 2015, 06:49 AM) *
Mariota is not a 5'9", quick little QB with a noodle arm. that is a 'system QB'....MM is a prototypical QB who is smart enough to learn another system and fast enough and big enough with a strong arm that will be coveted by ANY team....just because he plays in a system doesnt automatically mean he can ONLY a certain way for a certain coach

i totally agree with the idea that you can do both. people make it sound as if you trade up for the QB and you just shut down. draft over,no later rounds, no FAs, wait for OTAs. that being said...

Foles + a 3rd + your #20 aint getting you no where near the top 10...and MM isnt gonna fall far enough because scouts will believe he can help ANY team that needs a QB

I don't agree on Mariota's sheer throwing ability. Nobody has seen him throw consistently with strength and accuracy. Not to mention we haven't seen him throw to a WR that isn't open by 5 yards. The other teams will have a question mark there. We should too.
D Rock
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Jan 30 2015, 01:43 AM) *
That's not how I've heard it. It's been advertised as Foles for the #10, straight up.

Where did you hear the combo of Foles +20?

laugh.gif

In literally EVERYTHING I've read about this speculation that wasn't here.

#10 for Foles straight up? Seriously? Nobody is that stupid.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (D Rock @ Jan 30 2015, 12:19 PM) *
#10 for Foles straight up? Seriously? Nobody is that stupid.


laugh.gif

If you ever bump into Jeff Fisher while biking to Whole Foods on the weekend, I'm sure he'd love to hear about your evaluation of QB talent. Maybe telling him McNabb was never a top-30 QB would convince him, and land you a cushy job?

If AJ Feeley can get the 35th overall pick, and Kevin Kolb can get a Pro-Bowl CB and 2nd rounder, then Foles can get a #10 for a team with no QB, as opposed to drafting one in the crapshoot. It's not that hard really, especially when looking at recent QB drafts in the 1st round and how they worked out.
D Rock
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Jan 30 2015, 06:20 PM) *
laugh.gif

If you ever bump into Jeff Fisher while biking to Whole Foods on the weekend, I'm sure he'd love to hear about your evaluation of QB talent. Maybe telling him McNabb was never a top-30 QB would convince him, and land you a cushy job?

If AJ Feeley can get the 35th overall pick, and Kevin Kolb can get a Pro-Bowl CB and 2nd rounder, then Foles can get a #10 for a team with no QB, as opposed to drafting one in the crapshoot. It's not that hard really, especially when looking at recent QB drafts in the 1st round and how they worked out.

I've already got a cushy job, slappy.

And I'll give you a week's salary if you can find a single link where I said "McNabb wasn't top 30."

If you think anyone. . . ANYONE . . . is going to trade the #10 overall draft choice for Nick Phuquin Foles, you're stupider than your work here indicates (and THAT's saying something).
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (D Rock @ Jan 30 2015, 07:12 PM) *
And I'll give you a week's salary if you can find a single link where I said "McNabb wasn't top 30."


laugh.gif

Awesome! I can get a #5 at In N' Out, and still have some left over to see Game of Thrones on IMAX!!!!!

KAL said as much several times, part of his schtick no doubt.....but you agreed with it.
nephillymike
QUOTE (D Rock @ Jan 28 2015, 03:24 PM) *
The deal being speculated about has Foles AND OUR #20 pick for St. Lou's #10.

Even the biggest Foles fan wouldn't be silly enough to suggest he's worth #10 straight-up. Even with pick #20, it's still a "curious" deal from St. Lou's point of view.



http://www.csnphilly.com/blog/700-level/wh...%99-trade-value

Per this guy, the value to get from 20 to 10 is 450 points, which is essentially the 45th pick of the draft. If Foles is as valuable as the 13th pick of the 2nd round, then it would be fair value. Obviously teams could want more and it's going to be a bigger jump from there to get to #2.

Zero
I don't remember seeing this posted, but it's a good breakdown of Foles vs Sanchez. Follow the link for the complete analysis.
QUOTE
Ė Mark Sanchez was worse than he seemed this year. He should not be anything more than a backup QB, and asking him to start more than 1-2 games is too much if you actually want to win. He faced an easy schedule with a healthy supporting cast, and put up pedestrian numbers despite those advantages. Not only that, but his failure to lead TD drives last night, in a must-win game against a terrible defense, was inexcusable. There were open WRs all game, he had time to throw, and he still couldnít get it done. Just remember that Sanchez was, in fact, the backup QB, and that itís VERY hard to win consistently if you have to play the backup for a long period of time.

Ė Foles was not as bad this year as he seemed. He played a very hard schedule, his stats were significantly hurt by one very bad game, and he was dealing with a decimated OL and a nonexistent running game for much of his playing time. Adjusting for strength of schedule, Foles was firmly in the middle of the pack. Thatís not good enough, but itís also not bad enough to warrant throwing him away, especially after last season.

Ė I still donít know what to do with QBR, but Folesí is 62.21. Thatís the 12th best in the league, and puts him one spot above Russell Wilson and one spot behind Andrew Luck. Note that QBR does not adjust for strength of schedule, which would likely give Foles a boost. Iím definitely NOT saying Foles is better than Wilson or as good as Luck, thatís ridiculous. However, itís important context that should remind everyone that Foles wasnít anywhere close to BAD this year.

Ė Foles started 8 games this season. The Eagles were 6-2 over that span. Those losses were both on the road, in close games, to good teams (and very good defenses). Over the past two season, Foles is 14-4 as a starter. Are you really in a rush to move past someone with that record? Remember that heís also been throwing the ball downfield more than any other QB in the league over that time period (so heís not just been going along for the ride).

Ė The Eagles offense will get better. Matthews, Ertz, and Huff all have very high upside, and play positions that take several years to develop. Matthews and Ertz, specifically, look very good if you compare their statistics to other young players at those positions. Huff clearly has high-impact potential, but again, he plays a position that typically requires 3-4 years of development before really seeing peak ability. If the Eagles can find some way to maintain a decent offensive line, thereís a lot of upside to this group of players (hopefully Cooper just quietly fades away). Maclin is a big question, because of the contract heíll require, but I donít see how the Eagles could let him go. Losing DeSean and Maclin in consecutive years would be too much to overcome IMO. It would set the rebuilding plan back at least another year, which seems unlikely given the men in charge (I donít get the sense that Chip or Lurie are THAT patient).

Ė Finally, there are a lot of other aspects to the QB position that warrant a deep-dive, but I like to keep these posts somewhat contained. The overall message for now is: It is far too early to give up on Foles.

Here ...
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Zero @ Feb 1 2015, 07:50 AM) *
I don't remember seeing this posted, but it's a good breakdown of Foles vs Sanchez. Follow the link for the complete analysis.


Totally agreed. Sanchez didn't play better than Foles at all.
nephillymike
It's a shame the guy who wrote that article didn't do his job and look into the DEFENSES they each played against like I did before I posted my reply above.

The defenses that Foles started against averaged allowing 354 yds per game.
The ones that Sanchez started against averaged allowing 346 yds per game.

Not a huge difference, but one that debunks the guy's theory.

Foles and Sanchez both played against WAS and NYG

Here's where the defenses ranked:

Team................Foles......Sanchez
SEA...................---............1
SF......................5.............--
CAR....................--............10
IND....................11...........--
GB......................--............15
STL....................17............--
DAL....................--.............19
DAL...................--..............19
ARI....................24............--
JAX....................26............--
TEN...................--..............27
They both played against WAS(20th), NYG (29th) and Hou (16th)

And then there's that little thing about the records of the teams they played against. They both played against HOU so if you remove them from both sample they are Foles opponents = 49-63, Sanchez opponents = 67-60-1. If you prefer to add HOU to both, add 9-7 to both. The better the team, the more pressure on the QB to keep us in the game.

And I assume this idiot got paid to write this article? Geez.

And then you have Sanchez who got rid of the ball almost 1/2 second faster than Foles but yet he was sacked at a much higher rate. Was that because the OL was pass blocking better? Don't think so. The run blocking was better, but a lot of that ws imrpovement in Shady. Sprles didn't have a problem getting large chunks of yards per carry.

Like I said numerous times before, I'm OK if we decide to go with Foles for another year. If we don't get Mariota, I would probably do the same. I would highly prefer he not be annointed the starter though, but whatever. However, you can't look at Foles' perfomance last year and say he out played Sanchez. Sanchez was the better QB in TC, preseason and the regular season. Not by alot. But he was. And that's excluding the eye test of Foles backpedalling and throwing off his back foot with his front foot out at 45 degrees time and time again.
Phits
Also, Foles drop off in terms of quality play from 2013-2014 is very disturbing. Sanchez was marginally better than Foles, at least his play was akin to his career. Foles has been a roller coaster. The one clear advantage that Foles has demonstrated is his ability to lead from behind. If I was forced to I would give him the nod based on that as a tie breaker. However, I am not adverse to forcing him into earning the starters role.

QUOTE (nephillymike @ Feb 1 2015, 12:51 PM) *
It's a shame the guy who wrote that article didn't do his job and look into the DEFENSES they each played against like I did before I posted my reply above.

The defenses that Foles started against averaged allowing 354 yds per game.
The ones that Sanchez started against averaged allowing 346 yds per game.

Not a huge difference, but one that debunks the guy's theory.

Foles and Sanchez both played against WAS and NYG

Here's where the defenses ranked:

Team................Foles......Sanchez
SEA...................---............1
SF......................5.............--
CAR....................--............10
IND....................11...........--
GB......................--............15
STL....................17............--
DAL....................--.............19
DAL...................--..............19
ARI....................24............--
JAX....................26............--
TEN...................--..............27
They both played against WAS(20th), NYG (29th) and Hou (16th)

And then there's that little thing about the records of the teams they played against. They both played against HOU so if you remove them from both sample they are Foles opponents = 49-63, Sanchez opponents = 67-60-1. If you prefer to add HOU to both, add 9-7 to both. The better the team, the more pressure on the QB to keep us in the game.

And I assume this idiot got paid to write this article? Geez.

And then you have Sanchez who got rid of the ball almost 1/2 second faster than Foles but yet he was sacked at a much higher rate. Was that because the OL was pass blocking better? Don't think so. The run blocking was better, but a lot of that ws imrpovement in Shady. Sprles didn't have a problem getting large chunks of yards per carry.

Like I said numerous times before, I'm OK if we decide to go with Foles for another year. If we don't get Mariota, I would probably do the same. I would highly prefer he not be annointed the starter though, but whatever. However, you can't look at Foles' perfomance last year and say he out played Sanchez. Sanchez was the better QB in TC, preseason and the regular season. Not by alot. But he was. And that's excluding the eye test of Foles backpedalling and throwing off his back foot with his front foot out at 45 degrees time and time again.

HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Feb 1 2015, 12:51 PM) *
The defenses that Foles started against averaged allowing 354 yds per game.
The ones that Sanchez started against averaged allowing 346 yds per game.

Not a huge difference, but one that debunks the guy's theory.

Foles and Sanchez both played against WAS and NYG

Here's where the defenses ranked:

Team................Foles......Sanchez
SEA...................---............1
SF......................5.............--
CAR....................--............10
IND....................11...........--
GB......................--............15
STL....................17............--
DAL....................--.............19
DAL...................--..............19
ARI....................24............--
JAX....................26............--
TEN...................--..............27


I don't care to spend too more time debating Sanchez vs. Foles, but I will say yards are a complete bullshit way of ranking a defense. This isn't fantasy football. Sure, it's an important stat, but they don't necessarily correlate to how good a defense is, especially since they don't factor in penalties. A couple of our better Jim Johnson defenses were ranked pretty low compared to where we all knew they were - POINTS matter. And Arizona gave up the 5th fewest points in the league - no sane person could suggest there were only 8 NFL defenses worse than them. But the guy's main points were about the o-line being healthy during Sanchez's time, which is correct, and likely was a huge factor to Foles being uncomfortable in the pocket.
Wheeljack
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Jan 27 2015, 11:13 PM) *
The latest rumor has STL interested in giving us the 10th pick for Nick Foles.

Would you?

My first reaction is surprise that Foles has that much value. I would think his value is a 2nd round pick with a 3rd round kicker if he plays well enough. But the 10th pick in the draft? Seems like a lot.

But as you know, I'm not a huge fan of the draft. Such a crapshoot.

Here's a list of past # 10's. Foles is worth most of these picks:

http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/pick/10

The logistics of pulling off such a trade is difficult, only from the standpoint of needing to be sure we are able to get Mariotta to make that deal.

It would likely need to work like this;

Target a team in the top five who doesn't want Mariota. Tell them we'll give them the #10 and #20 for their pick. If Mariota is there at that team's pick, trade Foles to STL for the #10 and then trade the 10 and 20 to the team for the right to Mariota.

Easy right?


Pick #10 has to ENSURE an upgrade (or who Chip really wants... i.e. Mariota).

Otherwise, no.


HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (D Rock @ Jan 30 2015, 08:12 PM) *
If you think anyone. . . ANYONE . . . is going to trade the #10 overall draft choice for Nick Phuquin Foles, you're stupider than your work here indicates (and THAT's saying something).


laugh.gif jumpclap.gif laugh.gif blah.gif jumpclap.gif

Bumping this so you can apologize to me for not recognizing my HOF-level talent evaluation. Anytime sweetheart..... wub.gif
JeeQ
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Mar 10 2015, 01:35 PM) *
laugh.gif jumpclap.gif laugh.gif blah.gif jumpclap.gif

Bumping this so you can apologize to me for not recognizing my HOF-level talent evaluation. Anytime sweetheart..... wub.gif


JeeQ
One more bump just because I'm curious to see if D Rock is man enough to admit he was wrong
D Rock
How was I wrong?

There is no "Foles for #10 straight up" deal happening. Not then. Not now. Not ever.

I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong. Just find the example and I'll own it.

(hint) this isn't it.

Foles + #20 for Bradford + #10 is NOT Foles for #10 straight up. Unless of course you're fucking stupid, which is clearly a distinct possibility.
Pbfan
What about saftey!? What the fuck are we doing there? Or our other CB? Why are we concentrating on a not great rookie QB?
D Rock
QUOTE (Pbfan @ Mar 10 2015, 10:07 PM) *
What about saftey!? What the fuck are we doing there? Or our other CB? Why are we concentrating on a not great rookie QB?

Agreed. The only thing that makes ANY sense is that this is all part of some master scheme to get Marriota. It's easier done from #10 in the draft although there seems to be conflicting reports floating around about that even being in the deal.
D Rock
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Mar 10 2015, 08:35 PM) *
laugh.gif jumpclap.gif laugh.gif blah.gif jumpclap.gif

Bumping this so you can apologize to me for not recognizing my HOF-level talent evaluation. Anytime sweetheart..... wub.gif


laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Dumb asses will be dumb asses I suppose.

Nick Foles for #10 straight up aint happening, genius. HOF'er in your own mind. The rest of the world sees you for the know-nothing ass-hat you are.

Enjoy!!!
D Rock
Bowen reporting it's Foles for Bradford and swapping SECOND rounders.

So much for the soothsayer's predicting Foles for #10 straight up.

IDIOTS!

I mean REALLY!!! How fucking stupid can one House of Lame and his lil butt buddy GQ be?

Hey GQ, you were so besides yourself thinking I wouldn't be "man enough to admit I was wrong." Let's see if you're man enough to admit how right I was.

Me thinks you'll come up short. (That's what she said)
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (D Rock @ Mar 10 2015, 06:13 PM) *
Dumb asses will be dumb asses I suppose.


laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

We've sure seen that from you enough - McNabb was never a top-30 QB right? The whole planet seemed to believe we were getting the swap up to #10. It turns out we got fleeced. Only a complete douchebag asshole would cheer that while pretending to be an Eagles fan.....*sigh*
D Rock
I'm not cheering a thing beyond watching you pull your fool ass foot from your fool ass mouth.

Idiot!

You were dumb then.

You're dumb now.

You'll be dumb tomorrow.

ENJOY!!!!

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (D Rock @ Mar 10 2015, 06:25 PM) *
I'm not cheering a thing beyond watching you pull your fool ass foot from your fool ass mouth.


laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Nobody here stopped and said 'Wait a sec, this deal would never happen!' Certainly not you. You're cheering us getting fleeced on a deal, which makes you a dipshit.
D Rock
Hey STUPID!!!

I've not offered a single opinion on this "deal."

I'm simply responding to two idiot trolls who were so happy to gloat at thinking they were right.

Guess what? One of us WAS right.

(hint)

It aint you. sTuPiD!!!

You can't beat the master, junior. I own your sorry ass.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (D Rock @ Mar 10 2015, 06:30 PM) *
Hey STUPID!!!

I've not offered a single opinion on this "deal."

I'm simply responding to two idiot trolls who were so happy to gloat at thinking they were right.

Guess what? One of us WAS right.

(hint)

It aint you. sTuPiD!!!


laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Eagles fans were celebrating a deal that involved us taking a huge step towards making the leap up in the draft, and we were trying to have some fun in the process. Nobody batted an eye about the deal, or said it isn't possibly happening. You're celebrating us getting a poor deal, and you weren't even right, it just turns out we were wrong in gloating. Again, that makes you a dipshit. Go lie down.
D Rock
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Mar 10 2015, 10:32 PM) *
laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

Eagles fans were celebrating a deal that involved us taking a huge step towards making the leap up in the draft, and we were trying to have some fun in the process. Nobody batted an eye about the deal, or said it isn't possibly happening. You're celebrating us getting a poor deal, and you weren't even right, it just turns out we were wrong in gloating. Again, that makes you a dipshit. Go lie down.

Hey Moron.

Show me where I've "celebrated" anything about this deal. All I've done is shine a light on your enormous wrongness.

It's just so easy...



HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (D Rock @ Mar 10 2015, 06:35 PM) *
Show me where I've "celebrated" anything about this deal.


Pretty much half this thread? Duh? laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif
D Rock
Not even YOU are that stupid, stupid.

Nice try though.

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (D Rock @ Mar 10 2015, 06:37 PM) *
Not even YOU are that stupid, stupid.

Nice try though.

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif


No I get it, you're so desperate to be 'right' about something that you'll celebrate us getting a raw deal. You're probably frothing at the mouth right now. Go lie down junior.
D Rock
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Mar 10 2015, 10:40 PM) *
No I get it, you're so desperate to be 'right' about something that you'll celebrate us getting a raw deal. You're probably frothing at the mouth right now. Go lie down junior.

Learn to read, jackass.

I've not celebrated anything other than you showing your fool ass to the crowd. I hate this trade. But that's besides the point. You've proven (AGAIN) that you're a fucking MORON. Now? You've proved that simple 3rd grade reading comprehension is beyond you as well.

ENJOY THAT!

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

I own you, slappy. I used to wish you'd leave because you're clearly such a dick. But I'm just having too much fun toying with your over-matched sorry ass.

cool.gif
D Rock
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Mar 10 2015, 08:35 PM) *
laugh.gif jumpclap.gif laugh.gif blah.gif jumpclap.gif

Bumping this so you can apologize to me for not recognizing my HOF-level talent evaluation. Anytime sweetheart..... wub.gif


QUOTE (JeeQ @ Mar 10 2015, 08:56 PM) *
One more bump just because I'm curious to see if D Rock is man enough to admit he was wrong

Foles for #10 straight up?

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif

HOF-level troll perhaps.

IDIOT
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.