Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Chase Daniel
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
rumply
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000063...ore-than-backup

New Philadelphia Eagles coach Doug Pederson has consistently said Sam Bradford is a fit for his offense if the free-agent-to-be returns.

But what if the quarterback signs elsewhere?

NFL Media Insider Ian Rapoport noted on Thursday that one name to watch is Kansas City Chiefs free-agent quarterback Chase Daniel. Per RapSheet, Pederson views Daniel as more than a backup.

It's logical that Pederson would have faith in Daniel to run his offense after the duo spent the past three seasons together in K.C, where Daniel backed up Alex Smith.

Daniel's familiarity with the offense would allow the 29 year old to work as a stopgap for Philly on the road to finding a long-term solution (he'd also come much cheaper than Bradford).

However, just as there are big questions with Bradford's ability to be more than just an average, mid-level NFL quarterback, Daniel is a mostly unknown entity.

Sure, the seven-year NFL vet is a yearly preseason darling, displaying good poise and accuracy against bland defenses. However, he's started just two games in his NFL career -- both Week 17 contests versus the San Diego Chargers, in 2013 and 2014. While he's performed adequately in those starts, being a week-in-week-out quarterback for which defenses are scheming is a different proposition.

We've seen the long-time backups like Charlie Whitehurst, Matt Flynn or Kevin Kolb fall flat when given the chance to become a full-time starter.

The Eagles chasing Daniel tells you all you need to know about the dearth of quarterback talent hitting the free-agent market this offseason.

The person likely most excited about this news, outside of Daniel's family? Around The NFL boss Gregg Rosenthal, whose crystal ball might have been tuned three-years ahead.
The Franchise
Awesome, the guy who couldn't beat out Alex Smith for a job could be our future.

I really hope we're not getting Andy-Lite as our coach.
Zero
Heard Rapoport talking about this on the radio today. It sounded like he was guessing and was probably fed the line. Daniel is a placeholder or a backup.
nephillymike
If we don't sign Bradford, I think the route we have to go is Sanchez, Daniel and QB at #13. Best man plays.

Figure about $9M for combined Daniels and Sanchez. Let them battle it out.

Sanchez gone next year, Daniels stays to compete with #13.

Not sure how I feel about it, but we need two Sanchez-Daniels types to compete.

If Daniels can't compete for a starting job, then pass on him.

Neither he or Sanchez should be handed the starters job.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Feb 18 2016, 08:41 PM) *
If we don't sign Bradford, I think the route we have to go is Sanchez, Daniel and QB at #13. Best man plays.

Figure about $9M for combined Daniels and Sanchez. Let them battle it out.

Sanchez gone next year, Daniels stays to compete with #13.

Not sure how I feel about it, but we need two Sanchez-Daniels types to compete.

If Daniels can't compete for a starting job, then pass on him.

Neither he or Sanchez should be handed the starters job.


Sometimes you really make me scratch my head.....

Why do we need a competition between a Daniels or Sanchez type? At that point you have given up on any possibliity of competitive football so go with the cheaper guy or start the rookie.....you have already conceded that you will lose most games so it is foolish to spend money to foster a competition between stiffs.

Joegrane
I am leaning towards your point of view. I'd rather see Sanchez' 3 mil cap space put towards an OG or veteran WR. I'd expect those players to have a greater impact than competition with Sanchez.

Also why would Daniels leave KC just to compete for a one or two-year starting job?

If you are Pederson, do you steal your friend's QB without his okay?

QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Feb 18 2016, 11:30 PM) *
Sometimes you really make me scratch my head.....

Why do we need a competition between a Daniels or Sanchez type? At that point you have given up on any possibliity of competitive football so go with the cheaper guy or start the rookie.....you have already conceded that you will lose most games so it is foolish to spend money to foster a competition between stiffs.

Zero
QUOTE (Joegrane @ Feb 19 2016, 12:31 AM) *
If you are Pederson, do you steal your friend's QB without his okay?

Yes, yes, yes ... a million times YES! And I'm not just talking about a QB. This isn't his wife you're "stealing" it's a competitive business. If Pederson likes Daniels or Allen and believe they can improve the team and the organization agrees and has the resources, you absolutely go after him. Reid wouldn't get his panties in a bunch and if he did he's a cry baby who doesn't belong in a competitive environment.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Feb 18 2016, 11:30 PM) *
Sometimes you really make me scratch my head.....

Why do we need a competition between a Daniels or Sanchez type? At that point you have given up on any possibliity of competitive football so go with the cheaper guy or start the rookie.....you have already conceded that you will lose most games so it is foolish to spend money to foster a competition between stiffs.



I'm not conceding anything.

Give me those two and the extra 11M of cap space than if we have to franchise Bradford and I turn around and buy more talent for the '16 Eagles and that team is as good as the one with Bradford and no other talent bought with the $11M.

Even if we don't franchise him but sign him long term and we're talking just cash not cap, we still could be as good, provided we use that extra money to upgrade spots.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Joegrane @ Feb 19 2016, 12:31 AM) *
I am leaning towards your point of view. I'd rather see Sanchez' 3 mil cap space put towards an OG or veteran WR. I'd expect those players to have a greater impact than competition with Sanchez.

Also why would Daniels leave KC just to compete for a one or two-year starting job?

If you are Pederson, do you steal your friend's QB without his okay?



What are the realistic FA options for Daniel? A guy with two career starts? Is anyone gonna give him the starting job without competition?

I think his offers will be to compete for the job anywhere and if I'm him, might as well compete for it in the offense I know for a coach I trust.
Joegrane
I think we are all assuming the Eagles will use a #1 pick on a QB if Bradford is not resigned. The competition is with the rookie.

Pederson might give him the job without real competition because he knows Daniels so well. Pederson assumes that he won't be a bum and waste his opportunity to be a #1 QB.

QUOTE (nephillymike @ Feb 19 2016, 06:28 AM) *
What are the realistic FA options for Daniel? A guy with two career starts? Is anyone gonna give him the starting job without competition?

I think his offers will be to compete for the job anywhere and if I'm him, might as well compete for it in the offense I know for a coach I trust.

Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Feb 19 2016, 06:26 AM) *
I'm not conceding anything.

Give me those two and the extra 11M of cap space than if we have to franchise Bradford and I turn around and buy more talent for the '16 Eagles and that team is as good as the one with Bradford and no other talent bought with the $11M.

Even if we don't franchise him but sign him long term and we're talking just cash not cap, we still could be as good, provided we use that extra money to upgrade spots.


ummmm...riddle me this batman.....you go the route of placeholder and you admit that you are going to win very little....I get not signing Bradford and saving cap space...very fiscal of you...but then you pay Sanchez 5 million AND Daniels 3 or more million for a QB competition on an offense that is going nowhere? Why not cut Sanchez and save the 5 million you want to pointlessly spend in the name of "competition" on a team that is not going to compete?

Can't wait for this explanation
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Feb 19 2016, 10:50 AM) *
ummmm...riddle me this batman.....you go the route of placeholder and you admit that you are going to win very little....I get not signing Bradford and saving cap space...very fiscal of you...but then you pay Sanchez 5 million AND Daniels 3 or more million for a QB competition on an offense that is going nowhere? Why not cut Sanchez and save the 5 million you want to pointlessly spend in the name of "competition" on a team that is not going to compete?

Can't wait for this explanation



You assume that the team won't compete and the offense is going no where.

My spending on two of the QB's is to hedge my bets and to try my best to get average QB play for $9M instead of paying $18-$20M for average QB play and no decent backup and no realistic competition for a guy who may need competition to get the best out of him.

If we have an above average D, I think our O will be good enough to be above average and that should put us in the running. If we get lucky and get a stud QB at 13, the more the merrier.

I think the teams will be comparable in talent whichever way we chose to go.

Bradford + no Sanchez +two scrub backups = Sanchez + Daniels + #13 QB +$11M of talent elsewhere.

The assumption is that we would not draft a QB at #13 if we sign Bradford. EVen if we do, they still even out.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Feb 19 2016, 09:02 PM) *
You assume that the team won't compete and the offense is going no where.

My spending on two of the QB's is to hedge my bets and to try my best to get average QB play for $9M instead of paying $18-$20M for average QB play and no decent backup and no realistic competition for a guy who may need competition to get the best out of him.

If we have an above average D, I think our O will be good enough to be above average and that should put us in the running. If we get lucky and get a stud QB at 13, the more the merrier.

I think the teams will be comparable in talent whichever way we chose to go.

Bradford + no Sanchez +two scrub backups = Sanchez + Daniels + #13 QB +$11M of talent elsewhere.

The assumption is that we would not draft a QB at #13 if we sign Bradford. EVen if we do, they still even out.


So a guy who routinely turns the ball over and a guy who has thrown 77 passes in 6 years = Bradford? And you think those 2 are capable of "above average" QB play?


I think Sanchez has shown what he can do....and I liked when they signed him but he seemed to go backwards this year....I just want this to be over whichever way they go
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Feb 20 2016, 12:14 AM) *
So a guy who routinely turns the ball over and a guy who has thrown 77 passes in 6 years = Bradford? And you think those 2 are capable of "above average" QB play?


I think Sanchez has shown what he can do....and I liked when they signed him but he seemed to go backwards this year....I just want this to be over whichever way they go



Not saying Sanchez is all of that, cause he isn't, but the two games he started were tough spots.

Put Bradford in those two games, without Ertz and without Peters for stretches and with a D giving up 40+ points a game to take away any mystery of plays called, and he'd struggle too in an 80 ish passer rating and an 0-2 record.

Now I did like sanchez more in Chip's offense than Sanchez in other offenses, but Pedey didn't throw the ball down field in KC so Sanchez could function in this offense.

I think you can have average QB play with either set up, but you have the funds with option B to make the other players on O above average than you do with Option A.
Eyrie
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Feb 20 2016, 02:02 AM) *
You assume that the team won't compete and the offense is going no where.

My spending on two of the QB's is to hedge my bets and to try my best to get average QB play for $9M instead of paying $18-$20M for average QB play and no decent backup and no realistic competition for a guy who may need competition to get the best out of him.

If we have an above average D, I think our O will be good enough to be above average and that should put us in the running. If we get lucky and get a stud QB at 13, the more the merrier.

I think the teams will be comparable in talent whichever way we chose to go.

Bradford + no Sanchez +two scrub backups = Sanchez + Daniels + #13 QB +$11M of talent elsewhere.

The assumption is that we would not draft a QB at #13 if we sign Bradford. EVen if we do, they still even out.

I'd prefer a third option of Daniels + #13 QB + other + even more $ of talent because we've cut Sanchez. Or keep Sanchez rather than signing Daniels so we can use that money elsewhere.

If we are targeting a QB at #13 then the rookie has to be the back up and not buried on the depth chart. The starter is a one or at most two year fill in, which could mean Bradford on a one year deal.

Alternatively, if we sign Bradford or Daniels to a four year deal, then I'd want to trade down from #13 and add a second. Then I'd look to the 2017 draft for a QB, although that is dependent on the likely prospects next season. If the pickings are slim, we have to bite the bullet at #13 on a QB.
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.