Remind Me - Why Didn't We Make a Run at Nick Foles?

[Buffalo Barbarian]

WGR said they wouldn't trade McCoy for Foles strait up because then we wouldn't have a running game. What!? Can get a RB anywhere 

 

 

[Buffalo Bills Fan]

Just now, Buffalo Barbarian said:

WGR said they wouldn't trade McCoy for Foles strait up because then we wouldn't have a running game. What!? Can get a RB anywhere 

 

 

 

I would not trade McCoy realistically for Foles no way. Maybe example Glenn but not McCoy. 

 

On topic I would grab Foles. This game showed lots for him. Having to keep up the pace with Patriots offense. That shows lots.

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Just now, Buffalo Bills Fan said:

 

I would not trade McCoy realistically for Foles no way. Maybe example Glenn but not McCoy. 

 

On topic I would grab Foles. This game showed lots for him. Having to keep up the pace with Patriots offense. That shows lots.

 

QBs over RB all day everyday.

 

 

[rodneykm]

Absolutely would not even entertain the idea of dealing McCoy. If I'm GM, he's a Bill for the rest of his career. He means that much to the team. 

 

Now, if the Eagles want a 2nd rounder and maybe a 5th....fine, but I am not paying more than that for Foles. 

[SoCal Deek]

People crack me up! They don’t want a Super Bowl MVP QB but they do want some college kid who’s never played professional football? Really?  Go get me Nick Foles!

12 minutes ago, rodneykm said:

Absolutely would not even entertain the idea of dealing McCoy. If I'm GM, he's a Bill for the rest of his career. He means that much to the team. 

 

Now, if the Eagles want a 2nd rounder and maybe a 5th....fine, but I am not paying more than that for Foles. 

So you’d want Shaq Lawson over Nick Foles?  Honestly?

[26CornerBlitz]

2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

People crack me up! They don’t want a Super Bowl MVP QB but they do want some college kid who’s never played professional football? Really?  Go get me Nick Foles!

So you’d want Shaq Lawson over Nick Foles?  Honestly?

 

Right!  Because that's the Nick Foles who shows up each and every game he's played in the NFL.  No questions at all about his ability to sustain play at that level irrespective of what team he might play for.  Nope, none at all. 

[SoCal Deek]

2 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Right!  Because that's the Nick Foles who shows up each and every game he's played in the NFL.  No questions at all about his ability to sustain play at that level irrespective of what team he might play for.  Nope, none at all. 

With all due respect...I have no idea what your response means.

[rodneykm]

7 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

People crack me up! They don’t want a Super Bowl MVP QB but they do want some college kid who’s never played professional football? Really?  Go get me Nick Foles!

So you’d want Shaq Lawson over Nick Foles?  Honestly?

 

What does Shaq Lawson have to do with Shady? I'm trying to figure out where I said anything about Shaq Lawson. 

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, rodneykm said:

 

What does Shaq Lawson have to do with Shady? I'm trying to figure out where I said anything about Shaq Lawson. 

You mentioned that you’d only give a SECOND for Foles. My point is that I’d happily trade our last FIRST (Shaq) for Foles....in a heartbeat!

[rodneykm]

Just now, SoCal Deek said:

You mentioned that you’d only give a SECOND for Foles. My point is that I’d happily trade our last FIRST (Shaq) for Foles....in a heartbeat!

 

I'd trade Shaq for Foles, sure. I would not trade either of our 2 picks this year for him. I'd rather take my chances with Bradford or Bridgewater. I think the Eagles hold on to Foles anyway. 

[26CornerBlitz]

2 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

With all due respect...I have no idea what your response means.

 

It means for much of his career Nick Foles has not played as well as he showed in the playoffs.  It appears that he's a system specific QB who needs to be supported by very good coaching/personnel to succeed.  All food for thought when contemplating acquiring him. 

[SoCal Deek]

Just now, rodneykm said:

 

I'd trade Shaq for Foles, sure. I would not trade either of our 2 picks this year for him. I'd rather take my chances with Bradford or Bridgewater. I think the Eagles hold on to Foles anyway. 

You do realize hindsight is 20:20 right?  The chances of getting a true starter from the Draft is pretty much a crap shoot. I’ll take a semi proven relatively proven veteran every day.

Just now, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

It means for much of his career Nick Foles has not played as well as he showed in the playoffs.  It appears that he's a system specific QB who needs to be supported by very good coaching/personnel to succeed.  All food for thought when contemplating acquiring him. 

OK...that makes more sense...thanks!  But I’m  always reading on here that every successful player is ‘System specific’ both in the pros and college. I didn’t see much ‘system’ yesterday from Foles. I saw a guy reading a defense, throwing to open receivers...and dropping the deep ball into a tea cup on the sidelines and at the back of the end zone over and over again.  What did you see?

[26CornerBlitz]

9 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

You do realize hindsight is 20:20 right?  The chances of getting a true starter from the Draft is pretty much a crap shoot. I’ll take a semi proven relatively proven veteran every day.

OK...that makes more sense...thanks!  But I’m  always reading on here that every successful player is ‘System specific’ both in the pros and college. I didn’t see much ‘system’ yesterday from Foles. I saw a guy reading a defense, throwing to open receivers...and dropping the deep ball into a tea cup on the sidelines and at the back of the end zone over and over again.  What did you see?

 

He excelled in executing the Eagles offense that featured lots of RPO plays and made several outstanding throws into tight windows.  He looked great. 

[dave mcbride]

1 minute ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

He excelled in executing the Eagles offense that featured lots of RPO plays and made several outstanding throws into tight windows.  He looked great. 

He is a definitely a system qb under Pederson, but it's a viable system. 

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

He is a definitely a system qb under Pederson, but it's a viable system. 

 

It certainly is with an excellent play caller and good personnel. 

[dave mcbride]

14 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

It means for much of his career Nick Foles has not played as well as he showed in the playoffs.  It appears that he's a system specific QB who needs to be supported by very good coaching/personnel to succeed.  All food for thought when contemplating acquiring him. 

But you'd agree that in the right situation, he can excel, right? Looking back, was there a worse system for him than Jeff Fisher's Rams' offense? They ran a straight-up Air Coryell offense that year, which is about the worst system possible for a player like him. 

 

PS - in his limited time in KC in 2016, he was actually pretty good: 3 games, 410 yards, 8.5 ypa, 3 TDs, 0 INTs, and a 105.9 rating. That's an Andy Reid offense too, which again is a viable and reasonably common offense in the NFL now. The additional thing is that Belichick clearly struggles against Reid's system. 

[rodneykm]

17 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

You do realize hindsight is 20:20 right?  The chances of getting a true starter from the Draft is pretty much a crap shoot. I’ll take a semi proven relatively proven veteran every day.

OK...that makes more sense...thanks!  But I’m  always reading on here that every successful player is ‘System specific’ both in the pros and college. I didn’t see much ‘system’ yesterday from Foles. I saw a guy reading a defense, throwing to open receivers...and dropping the deep ball into a tea cup on the sidelines and at the back of the end zone over and over again.  What did you see?

 

I'm glad you'd take that approach, however, that wouldn't change mine. 

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, dave mcbride said:

But you'd agree that in the right situation, he can excel, right? Looking back, was there a worse system for him than Jeff Fisher's Rams' offense? They ran a straight-up Air Coryell offense that year, which is about the worst system possible for a player like him. 

 

2013 under Chip Kelly and the 2017 Playoffs are the situations where he's excelled.  In any other scenario, he's been unimpressive. 

[dave mcbride]

Just now, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

2013 under Chip Kelly and the 2017 Playoffs are the situations where he's excelled.  In any other scenario, he's been unimpressive. 

See my edit above about KC last year. Objectively, the numbers are really good, and it's the same system as Pederson's. So I'd say that he's only really struggled in a) a classic pro-style offense and b) cold weather games (e.g., the Dallas game this year). Not sure you watched the Rams-Philly game this year, but he was very good when he came in in relief. 

[26CornerBlitz]

3 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

See my edit above about KC last year. Objectively, the numbers are really good, and it's the same system as Pederson's. So I'd say that he's only really struggled in a) a classic pro-style offense and b) cold weather games (e.g., the Dallas game this year). Not sure you watched the Rams-Philly game this year, but he was very good when he came in in relief. 

 

I wouldn't say very good.  I thought he was adequate in that game.

Edited February 5, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz

[dave mcbride]

4 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

I wouldn't say very good.  I thought he was adequate in that game.

I thought he made two absolutely terrific throws into very tight coverage that sealed the game. Not easy throws at all even though they weren't long ones.

[grb]

On 1/21/2018 at 10:04 PM, Tcali said:

TT-- a great guy--...I am happy he is a multimillionaire.Because he got screwed over by dumb coaches in this league trying to make him into something he wasnt.

Someone could have designed a college type offense for him.Everything they tried to drum into him was unnatural to him. You cant learn how to play an entirely different game of football at 24 yrs old.-He had to think about everything.Nothing was natural.

Guy shoulda been running 10-12 times per game.-And had the defense so keyed on him that it woulda opened up lots of WRs on routes and big holes for RBs.

 

   

What a hilarious rant. Here's a reminder for the umpteenth time : Over the two years of 2015 & 2016 whenever Taylor had Watkins and Woods on the field, this happened :

 

63.6% comp,  8.25 ypa, 27 TD passes, 6 ints.

 

This was over (15) games, over (2) years, and without :

• A "college type offense"
• An "entirely different game of football"
• Any crippling burden from things "unnatural to him", whatever that drivel is supposed to mean.

All it took was a decent pair of NFL-grade receivers to throw to. When he had that, there was - surprise! - no problem with his "thinking about everything". Ya know, today I saw another discussion about Foles on another site. A guy there made the valid point Foles has had a decent career if you exclude the stint with the Rams, and (to quote) "anybody would've struggled on that garbage '15 Rams team". Well, unless the Bills are able to dramatically upgrade their receivers, o-line, and back-up rbs, then you better be prepared for Foles to struggle on the garbage '18 Bills team. After all, anybody would.......

 

 

Edited February 5, 2018 by grb

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

I thought he made two absolutely terrific throws into very tight coverage that sealed the game. Not easy throws at all even though they weren't long ones.

 

He did a nice job, but nothing like he was in the playoffs.  He lit up the Giants the next week before playing poorly against OAK and DAL to close the regular season. 

[JohnC]

9 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

It certainly is with an excellent play caller and good personnel. 

It doesn't matter how well a game is called or how good the surrounding personnel is. If the qb can't throw accurately, make reads and get the ball out quickly the offense is not going to work. Foles is far from being an elite qb. What he can do is execute a pro offense. Of course it has to be adjusted to his strengths but if a qb is an erratic passer and has other glaring deficiencies the offense is going to struggle. 

 

I'm not suggesting that is what you are saying. But what made Pederson's smart coaching and play calling work is that he had a qb that can execute his offense. This offseason, without taking the draft into consideration,  it is a priority to get a qb from the market who can sufficiently run a well rounded pro offense. Although that qb is going to be far from elite that doesn't mean that there aren't reasonable options at qb that can be a major upgrade from what we have had over the past few years. 

[Franchiseneedsme]

He's dope. Trade a 2nd for him. Spend for Landry, and a DT. Then draft LB's and O-line. That would make for a quick turnaround. We would be in great cap shape, our Dwould be not good but great. And our offence would be better. Not sure to what degree, but better.  Throw in Gronk retiring, Brady aging, and the coordinators bouncing, and we would be jave a good shot at the division.

[section122]

17 hours ago, jmc12290 said:

Yes, but some QB's look good on the big stage one year and never look good again.

 

Joe Flacco comes to mind.  Baltimore wasn't sure they would re-sign, cue magical playoff run capped with a super bowl, huge contract, Ravens haven't been good since.

 

Reason for caution with Foles.

17 hours ago, matter2003 said:

 

 

He needs to be in the right system, he isn't one of those guys you can plug and play with any system...

 

 

He and a bunch of other guys.  I think it might have been transplant that laid qbs out as great qbs, then middle of the road guys that can be great and can also make you want to rip your hair out.  Tyrod is one of about 15 of those and Foles might too after his recent run.

 

9 hours ago, Teddy KGB said:

 

Foles threw for 373 yards and 3 tds.    Give him some credit 

 

Wow he played out of his mind last night and really the entire playoffs.  Not sure if the light came on or if it was lightning in a bottle but that was incredible.  He pantsed the Patriots last night! 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

...first congratulations to this kid for his accomplishments, rising from potentially wanting to retire to this pinnacle.......his perseverance paid off.......franchise or elite?.......the two major buzz words surrounding the position that NOBODY has yet and never will offer acceptable definitions PERIOD.....so the Eagles took him in the 2012 3rd drafted by Andy......if you subscribe to adjectives, was he picked due to franchise or elite?....eventual trade to Rams and subsequently released to sign with KC in 2016..... franchise or elite labeled yet?....and now he ends up in Philly with Pederson another Andy disciple... so as SB winner and MVP, is he franchise or elite labeled yet?.....who cares.....getting hung up on labels drives me nuts but then again I'm an old school fart......point is the kid has worked at his craft being affiliated with some of the better folks in this league and has rounded into top form.....he is like a "Rich Gannon resurrection" IMO.....when Carson went down, the kid was the Eagles Frank Reich" when the bullpen phone rang and not needing any labels attached.....he is an Eagle for 2018 IMO with Carson's eventual 100% status an unknown.......depending on that, he may get a mid to late 2018 extension or is a UFA for 2019 and again with no asinine labels necessary......

[billsredneck1]

3 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

I don't think anyone is going to want Glenn. He is injured and has a huge contract. If I'm a gm of another team, I'd ask why the Bills seem to want to get rid of him. They might get a later-round pick for him, but that's the best they'll get. I wouldn't be surprised to see him cut.

peters has got to be getting up there and he's gotta be making glenn money if not more. seems like a long time ago when he was here.....wanting top dollar. they can use lane at rt.

3 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

It depends on whether the foot/ankle procedure he recently had will actually resolve his season long issue that prevented him from staying on the field.  If his health is good, he's too good of a player to outright release.

yeah i don't see cutting him.

[billsredneck1]

2 hours ago, ProcessTheTrust said:

Foles seems to be a genuinely humble guy but is he humble enough to want to go somewhere to be someone's bridge?

 

"Hey guys, I just had a historic playoff run and have a SB MVP trophy on my mantle, but sure....I'd love to be your stop-gap till this unproven rook is ready. Where do I sign?"

 

 

he's worth a 4yr. deal....at least 3....and signing him to it now makes a ton of sense money wise. does anyone think that smith or bradford would(ve) cost any less? why pay a bridge qb (especially any one with a serious injury history) big money when a possible 6 yr. starter is right in front of you?

 

and the phrase unproven rook? unless we get darnold, rosen or mayfield, we need more than a bridge. this is a move this team must make and they have what it takes to make the best deal.

[YoloinOhio]

 

[whatdrought]

Im not really on either side of this... I think stats are widely unimportant when judging overall skills. With that said, everything I saw from Foles the past three games was impressive. Movement in the pocket, beautiful throws, great decision making.

 

However, after that Cowboys game I was personally saying that the Eagles were done and had no chance (egg on my face). 

 

So my preference is to sit back and let history dictate the outcome of this debate- but i do have two questions to those who are opposed to trading for Foles (because If im honest with myself im probably more pro than I am con): 

 

1- What is it about his game (over the course of the entire year) that you dislike? As in, what have you seen that has not been good? I'm not here to argue, I genuinely am just curious to see what people see as his negatives because I do not know enough myself to fairly evaluate him. 

 

2- For those who do not want Foles, or at least who are arguing that he is not all that special which scenerio would you prefer this offseason: 

           - Trade a Second for Foles and then sit where we are in the 1st. If one of the top 4 guys drops we take them and let them sit behind Foles.) 
  or     - Do what it takes to trade up and get one of the top four (potentially giving up as much as both 1's and a 2) 

 

 

[SydneyBillsFan]

Can anyone here see a circumstance where Foles will be Wentz's back up next year?

 

And if not, WHY wouldn't he be a good fit for the Bills?

[Bing Bong]

On ‎1‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 7:16 PM, BillsEnthusiast said:

Rams gave it a shot and we saw how well that turned out. That 7 touchdown extravaganza is long gone, even with as well as he is playing today. 

Under Jeff Fisher dummy. Let's just say this guy has played phenomenal when not being coached by Fisher and Kelly.

[707BillsFan]

On 1/21/2018 at 5:22 PM, oldmanfan said:

Because he wasn't very good

 

Not sure if this is posted in any of the other 6 pages or so, but just look at what Fisher did w/ Keenum, Foles and Goff. Look at these three now, free of him and his putrid 7-9 coaching. 

https://deadspin.com/jeff-fisher-must-be-arrested-and-tried-for-his-crimes-a-1822733338

[LA Grant]

4 hours ago, grb said:

   

What a hilarious rant. Here's a reminder for the umpteenth time : Over the two years of 2015 & 2016 whenever Taylor had Watkins and Woods on the field, this happened :

 

63.6% comp,  8.25 ypa, 27 TD passes, 6 ints.

 

This was over (15) games, over (2) years, and without :

• A "college type offense"
• An "entirely different game of football"
• Any crippling burden from things "unnatural to him", whatever that drivel is supposed to mean.

All it took was a decent pair of NFL-grade receivers to throw to. When he had that, there was - surprise! - no problem with his "thinking about everything". Ya know, today I saw another discussion about Foles on another site. A guy there made the valid point Foles has had a decent career if you exclude the stint with the Rams, and (to quote) "anybody would've struggled on that garbage '15 Rams team". Well, unless the Bills are able to dramatically upgrade their receivers, o-line, and back-up rbs, then you better be prepared for Foles to struggle on the garbage '18 Bills team. After all, anybody would.......

 

Been saying this all year: I'd just like to see what Tyrod looks like with a season of consistent receivers, in a modern RPO offense, with a play caller that believes in him. I'd happily take Foles, but whoever is QB, I'd like to see the team able to provide those things. And Foles is the only QB on the market including rookies I'd want over Tyrod, but that's just me.

 

How many simple slants and quick inside/outside routes did we see in the SB versus how many did we run this year? It's the same routes constantly just in different formations. It's so simple for the QB, and with RPO, much simpler to read the defenses. Your throws are either there, or they aren't. So you either check at the line to hand-off, or you take a look then scramble. I only want Tyrod in the pocket if it's play action, otherwise, stay wide in shotgun. It seems so simple but watching the Bills you'd think it's alien. 

 

The Bills pretty much have the personnel, minus a power RB and line depth -- if Benjamin, Zay, Clay, and Thompson can stay healthy and they can get into a rhythm with a simple offense. I am vaguely optimistic Brian Daboll will turn out to be in the mold of younger, more flexible, aggressive offensive mind like Doug Pederson, Frank Reich, Sean McVay, et al. Get your QB, keep it simple, then get aggressive. Imagine QB & Shady co-calling plays in no huddle K-Gun. Simple, fast, QB friendly, plays to our strengths. 

 

[Tcali]

5 hours ago, grb said:

   

What a hilarious rant. Here's a reminder for the umpteenth time : Over the two years of 2015 & 2016 whenever Taylor had Watkins and Woods on the field, this happened :

 

63.6% comp,  8.25 ypa, 27 TD passes, 6 ints.

 

This was over (15) games, over (2) years, and without :

• A "college type offense"
• An "entirely different game of football"
• Any crippling burden from things "unnatural to him", whatever that drivel is supposed to mean.

All it took was a decent pair of NFL-grade receivers to throw to. When he had that, there was - surprise! - no problem with his "thinking about everything". Ya know, today I saw another discussion about Foles on another site. A guy there made the valid point Foles has had a decent career if you exclude the stint with the Rams, and (to quote) "anybody would've struggled on that garbage '15 Rams team". Well, unless the Bills are able to dramatically upgrade their receivers, o-line, and back-up rbs, then you better be prepared for Foles to struggle on the garbage '18 Bills team. After all, anybody would.......

 

 

Very delusional re: TT. When games were on the line TT was a no show. Of course he was better with watkins and woods.But stats--Like many have stated- can be misleading.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, SydneyBillsFan said:

Can anyone here see a circumstance where Foles will be Wentz's back up next year?

 

And if not, WHY wouldn't he be a good fit for the Bills?

 

Since he's under contract and they'll have $2.4M of dead cap to pay off whether he stays or goes (plus whatever they pay the replacement backup to whittle away at their cap savings) - I think the Eagles keep Foles at least until they are sure Wentz is 100% - probably just before training camp, possibly preseason

 

Then they hope for a contender who has a QB injury and will offer them something big

 

I could be wrong - the Eagles do have a tight cap situation and Foles 2018 $7M roster bonus and salary would help quite a ways, so they may be willing to pick up the phone and take offers.

 

As to why he wouldn't be a good fit for the Bills, a lot depends upon Daboll and the offseason.  If he doesn't have WR to throw to and an OL that gives him time, don't expect success.

Edited February 6, 2018 by Hapless Bills Fan

[whatdrought]

5 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Since he's under contract and they'll have $2.4M of dead cap to pay off whether he stays or goes (plus whatever they pay the replacement backup to whittle away at their cap savings) - I think the Eagles keep Foles at least until they are sure Wentz is 100% - probably just before training camp, possibly preseason

 

Then they hope for a contender who has a QB injury and will offer them something big

 

I could be wrong - the Eagles do have a tight cap situation and Foles 2018 $7M roster bonus and salary would help quite a ways, so they may be willing to pick up the phone and take offers.

 

The thing that is very interesting to me about all of this is that I am always hearing little "asides" about this subject that say that the Eagles are very high on Nate Sudfeld. Obviously its hard for us outsiders to see that as anything to pay attention to, but then again, we wrote off Foles to begin with. 

[The Frankish Reich]

10 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

2013 under Chip Kelly and the 2017 Playoffs are the situations where he's excelled.  In any other scenario, he's been unimpressive. 

 

[Magox]

19 hours ago, T-Bomb said:

Foles has one hit wonder written all over him.

 

To be fair, at worst it would be a 2 hit wonder.   It's hard to call a whole season as good as 2013 just a fluke and then to see him do even better in the playoffs against some good defenses again.