McCoy for Foles.

[Doc]

Foles faced the #1 and #4 scoring defenses, one on the road and the other in by far the biggest game of his career, and averaged almost 40 PPG against them.  This after the Eagles went to the RPO (so it's not like there was no reason he got hot).  I'd take the chance and trade for him before I'd trade multiple first rounders for an unproven QB, especially a guy like Darnold who I think will bust and Rosen who had durability issues in college. 

 

As for the contract, at worst you make him play out the final year and then franchise him if he proves to be worth it. 

[JohnC]

5 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Once again, you prove my point.  You are incapable of any rationale because the ONLY thing that matters to you is that ANYONE other than Tyrod is the QB.  This is NOT in ANYWAY about Tyrod, but you just cant let it go.

 

We NEED to find a LONG term QB solution, not a retread one year just to appease your over exaggerated hate for Tyrod.  First of all, TT is NOT nearly as bad as you ridiculously exaggerate.  Is he the LONG term answer...nope.  Do we need to find a franchise QB...yup.  

 

But your blind ranting hate for TT is now suggesting we GIVE AWAY assets for a 1 year vet just so you can have peace of mind that the 1 year vet is not TT.  That is so beyond absurd, I cant even fathom how any fan can logically come to this conclusion.  

 

Now if you want to trade McCoy for Foles because you BELIEVE Foles is the the franchise QB Buffalo needs (which Foles is not IMO), I wouldnt have an issue with you wanting that based on that belief.  But you are literally advocating sending valuable assets, whether its McCoy or draft picks, to get a stop gap Veteran who wont be here in a year after drafting a rookie to be the future.  Thats such a waste of assets since there are already veteran QB's we can sign in FA without having to part with our best offensive weapon or draft picks we need to keep BUILDING this team.  

 

Either sign Cousins or DRAFT the a potential franchise QB.  Under NO circumstances should the Bills give a single asset for Foles UNLESS they plan on him being the Franchise guy they want to build around and not draft a QB.  Which in that case, its a huge gamble where the resume is very underwhelming.

You criticize my ability to be rational on the Taylor issue when yet it coincides with the organization's line of thinking. And let me remind you that Whaley was going to dispatch Taylor before he had a viable replacement but couldn't execute his plan because he lost his authority. And the irrationality that you claim I have on this issue is more likely to coincide with the position that this current regime has on Taylor. What are the odds that Taylor is on our roster next season? 

 

Foles is not a franchise qb or it is questionable that he is a long term starting qb. Would I give up a McCoy for him for a one or two year deal? Absolutely. I would still want the Bills to go all out to get a top shelf qb prospect in this draft but still be in a position to be competitive and allow time to prepare the prospect. McCoy is undoubtedly one of our best players on offense. However, he is 30 yrs old, and he definitely won't be a workhorse back next season. Understandably, he is a diminishing player with a high price tag for a position where there are a number of reasonable options. Would there be a loss of productivity at his position? Probably so. But on the other hand the play at the more important position would inarguably be improved, even if it is for the short term. I'll take that deal. 

 

Make no mistake what my position is. I'm still a strong advocate for the franchise to come out of this draft with a high end qb prospect. But if a qb such as Foles can be attained for the price of a back and it would allow us to be more competitive and give time to develop a qb I would take the deal with no hesitation. I said it before and I will say it again: The era of a pop warner offense has to end. If you don't know what I mean then I suggest that you watch a tape of the Jacksonville game. From a quarterback standpoint it was an embarrassment. No more!

[Alphadawg7]

3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

He’s a FA next year. Any big deal will come from a trade and a season played. That’s been the point. If he plays well (or even pretty good) he’s getting a big deal. If he sucks, you gave up a good asset for a guy that played as a bridge guy for a year. 

 

Gotcha, thought you meant someone trading for him and giving him the deal now.  

 

I dont want to give up assets for a possible bridge QB.  Keep McCoy to help balance the offense for whatever rookie we draft to be our future.  

[YoloinOhio]

[Chicken Boo]

Almost nothing in the NFL is linear.  Foles is NOT a plug and play QB.  

 

He knows Pederson and his system and has a ton of talent around him.  That's why he's having success.

[Kirby Jackson]

3 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Gotcha, thought you meant someone trading for him and giving him the deal now.  

 

I dont want to give up assets for a possible bridge QB.  Keep McCoy to help balance the offense for whatever rookie we draft to be our future.  

I’m in agreement. I want to trade up and get a guy that could be a star.

[Alphadawg7]

12 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You criticize my ability to be rational on the Taylor issue when yet it coincides with the organization's line of thinking. And let me remind you that Whaley was going to dispatch Taylor before he had a viable replacement but couldn't execute his plan because he lost his authority. And the irrationality that you claim I have on this issue is more likely to coincide with the position that this current regime has on Taylor. What are the odds that Taylor is on our roster next season? 

 

Foles is not a franchise qb or it is questionable that he is a long term starting qb. Would I give up a McCoy for him for a one or two year deal? Absolutely. I would still want the Bills to go all out to get a top shelf qb prospect in this draft but still be in a position to be competitive and allow time to prepare the prospect. McCoy is undoubtedly one of our best players on offense. However, he is 30 yrs old, and he definitely won't be a workhorse back next season. Understandably, he is a diminishing player with a high price tag for a position where there are a number of reasonable options. Would there be a loss of productivity at his position? Probably so. But on the other hand the play at the more important position would inarguably be improved, even if it is for the short term. I'll take that deal. 

 

Make no mistake what my position is. I'm still a strong advocate for the franchise to come out of this draft with a high end qb prospect. But if a qb such as Foles can be attained for the price of a back and it would allow us to be more competitive and give time to develop a qb I would take the deal with no hesitation. I said it before and I will say it again: The era of a pop warner offense has to end. If you don't know what I mean then I suggest that you watch a tape of the Jacksonville game. From a quarterback standpoint it was an embarrassment. No more!

 

My point is you dont apply any rationale other than the QB just not being Tyrod.  If you think Foles is a stop gap, then its utterly absurd to trade an asset for him when there are quality veteran QB's on the open market we dont have to give up assets to get.  Its literally that simple.  But man, all you do is talk about TT and how it cant be him and dont care if you hurt the future of the team just to make sure its not him.

 

Whether you like it or not, its far better for the FUTURE of this team to keep TT or sign a FA and draft a rookie than it is to TRADE assets for Foles for one year and still draft a rookie.  If we are drafting our future QB, next year does NOT matter, its about the future.  So who cares who the TEMPORARY QB is while we groom a rookie, its literally irrelevant other than your personal desire to not see TT again. 

 

Again, if you want Foles as a franchise guy, then you proposing getting him makes sense.  But all your comments are about how he is a 1 year rental.  Ridiculus to give away McCoy or picks for a 1 year rental.  Either sign a vet, or keep TT, then go draft a stud prospect to be the future...or bypass all this and sign Cousins.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Alphadawg7

[Chicken Boo]

6 hours ago, PIP said:

In a hot second MCcoy stinks.  No other team would pay him $8 mil like Buffalo is about to. The most New England will pay for any running back is 3 million. The position  is not that important. 

 

The position isn't important IF you have Tom Brady and run NE's system.  Other than that, name another perennial contender without a top flight RB *or running game.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Chicken Boo

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

My point is you dont apply any rationale other than the QB just not being Tyrod.  If you think Foles is a stop gap, then its utterly absurd to trade an asset for him when there are quality veteran QB's on the open market we dont have to give up assets to get.  Its literally that simple.  But man, all you do is talk about TT and how it cant be him and dont care if you hurt the future of the team just to make sure its not him.

 

Whether you like it or not, its far better for the FUTURE of this team to keep TT and draft a rookie than it is to TRADE assets for Foles for one year and still draft a rookie.  If we are drafting our future QB, next year does NOT matter, its about the future.  So who cares who the TEMPORARY QB is while we groom a rookie, its literally irrelevant other than your personal desire to not see one specific QB. 

 

Again, if you want Foles as a franchise guy, then you proposing getting him makes sense.  But all your comments are about how he is a 1 year rental.  Ridiculus to give away McCoy or picks for a 1 year rental.  Either sign a vet, or keep TT, then go draft a stud prospect to be the future...or bypass all this and sign Cousins.

As usual you are missing the point. With Foles I believe the Bills could still remain a competitive team. In addition, you would still have credible play at the qb position that would buy your young qb  time to be better prepared when the time comes to take over. It might be in his rookie year or second year. At least you remain competitive with a qb who can run a pro offense and can capably throw the ball. 

 

McCoy is a terrific player. But he is not in his prime from the standpoint of usage. His touches are going to be limited. If you lose his talent you balance it out with getting better qb play, even if it is for the short term. You want to portray my position as if I was mortgaging the future. That is utter nonsense. I wouldn't want to give up draft picks for Foles. But I would be willing to give up a high cost running back for him.  With a qb such as Foles the team can continue to be competitive.

 

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, JohnC said:

As usual you are missing the point. With Foles I believe the Bills could still remain a competitive team. In addition, you would still have credible play at the qb position that would buy your young qb  time to be better prepared when the time comes to take over. It might be in his rookie year or second year. At least you remain competitive with a qb who can run a pro offense and can capably throw the ball. 

 

McCoy is a terrific player. But he is not in his prime from the standpoint of usage. His touches are going to be limited. If you lose his talent you balance it out with getting better qb play, even if it is for the short term. You want to portray my position as if I was mortgaging the future. That is utter nonsense. I wouldn't want to give up draft picks for Foles. But I would be willing to give up a high cost running back for him.  With a qb such as Foles the team can continue to be competitive.

 

 

His entire body of work says you'd have inconsistent play at QB with plenty of highs and lows. 

[Alphadawg7]

18 minutes ago, JohnC said:

As usual you are missing the point. With Foles I believe the Bills could still remain a competitive team. In addition, you would still have credible play at the qb position that would buy your young qb  time to be better prepared when the time comes to take over. It might be in his rookie year or second year. At least you remain competitive with a qb who can run a pro offense and can capably throw the ball. 

 

McCoy is a terrific player. But he is not in his prime from the standpoint of usage. His touches are going to be limited. If you lose his talent you balance it out with getting better qb play, even if it is for the short term. You want to portray my position as if I was mortgaging the future. That is utter nonsense. I wouldn't want to give up draft picks for Foles. But I would be willing to give up a high cost running back for him.  With a qb such as Foles the team can continue to be competitive.

 

 

Foles will not stay here more than 1 year with a rookie here, so you can forget about the 2 year window.  The Bills could also sing Keenum, Teddy, Bradford, McCown, or keep TT and remain competitive.  

 

Hate TT all you want, but we won 9 games and broke the playoff drought this year with him despite an inept OC, a diminished offensive line, diminished run game, and mostly terrible WR group most the year because of injuries, trades, FA, and a rookie who couldn't catch.  We CAN be competitive with TT and NOT give up assets.  Or if they dont want TT, sign a Vet to do the same thing while the rookie grooms.  

 

Under no circumstances should we give up any asset for a seat warmer to our rookie.  Sign Cousins, or draft a rookie and let him battle TT or some other FA vet for the gig until he takes the job for good.  

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Foles will not stay here more than 1 year with a rookie here, so you can forget about the 2 year window.  The Bills could also sing Keenum, Teddy, Bradford, McCown, or keep TT and remain competitive.  

 

Hate TT all you want, but we won 9 games and broke the playoff drought this year with him despite an inept OC, a diminished offensive line, diminished run game, and mostly terrible WR group most the year because of injuries, trades, FA, and a rookie who couldn't catch.  We CAN be competitive with TT and NOT give up assets.  Or if they dont want TT, sign a Vet to do the same thing while the rookie grooms.  

 

Under no circumstances should we give up any asset for a seat warmer to our rookie.  Sign Cousins, or draft a rookie and let him battle TT or some other FA vet for the gig until he takes the job for good.  

I'm agreeable to any option that doesn't include Taylor. In the three years he has started for us he has had no progression to his game. If a qb can't run a pro offense or throw it downfield then that player should not be a starter, even if it is as a bridge qb. What have we come to when it is considered an outrageous expectation to expect your starting qb to be able to run a pro offense? It's a sad commentary when expectations have been so dumbed down. A pop warner offense may be good enough for you but it is not for me. On this issue I'm not yielding or going with the flow. 

[Alphadawg7]

41 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I'm agreeable to any option that doesn't include Taylor. In the three years he has started for us he has had no progression to his game. If a qb can't run a pro offense or throw it downfield then that player should not be a starter, even if it is as a bridge qb. What have we come to when it is considered an outrageous expectation to expect your starting qb to be able to run a pro offense? It's a sad commentary when expectations have been so dumbed down. A pop warner offense may be good enough for you but it is not for me. On this issue I'm not yielding or going with the flow. 

 

What does it matter if its TT or some other band aid if we draft a rookie?  Its not like TT would still be the future in that case, its all about the rookie moving forward.  

 

All that matters is we draft a high rookie or sign Cousins.  Everything is a waste of breath to worry about.  Doesn't matter if TT keeps the seat warm or some other vet.  The future will still be the rookie.

[B-Man]

No.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

[GunnerBill]

8 hours ago, JohnC said:

The reason why the Eagles would not trade Foles for McCoy is that it would be a losing proposition for them. Or in other words it would be more beneficial for us. I intensely disagree with you that Foles would be a lesser player than either McCown or Fitz. The mistake you and others are making is that you are assuming that he would be ensconced as our long term franchise qb. I am not suggesting that. However, in my view he would not only be an acceptable bridge qb but also a dramatic upgrade at that position until the next high end qb prospect is ready to play. 

 

I didn't say worse than McCown or Fitz. He might be slightly better than them. But they cost you nothing. Fitz plus McCoy is better than Foles and no running back. 

 

I am not thinking Foles would be "enconsed" and Foles was a name I banded about last year when I thought we should have replaced Tyrod and Foles was going to be released by KC. I think Foles is an acceptable bridge. Just not one you give up serious assets for. If Philly would take a 5th I'd do it. A 1st, 2nd or our best offensive weapon? No thanks. 

[Brianmoorman4jesus]

Imo there are only 2 players on this team that are untouchable. Shady and Tre White. Do not trade McCoy. Just don’t.

[Wsam4031]

12 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

What are you talking about?  Kelly, Elway, Montana, Brees aren't walking through OBD's door.   Where is your "legit franchise QB" right now?

Well they certainly aren't if we trade for foles, sign Bradford, keenum etc. We already know what those guys are.  Im just saying that id rather gamble on trading up and drafting a legit franchise QB, if the bills identify one of them as one, than sign a guy we know wont be

[Mr. WEO]

5 minutes ago, Wsam4031 said:

Well they certainly aren't if we trade for foles, sign Bradford, keenum etc. We already know what those guys are.  Im just saying that id rather gamble on trading up and drafting a legit franchise QB, if the bills identify one of them as one, than sign a guy we know wont be

 

We sure do...One just won the SB, another lost to the SB winner in the NFCC game.

 

how are the Bills going to identify "a legit franchise QB" in the draft?

[JohnC]

6 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I didn't say worse than McCown or Fitz. He might be slightly better than them. But they cost you nothing. Fitz plus McCoy is better than Foles and no running back. 

 

I am not thinking Foles would be "enconsed" and Foles was a name I banded about last year when I thought we should have replaced Tyrod and Foles was going to be released by KC. I think Foles is an acceptable bridge. Just not one you give up serious assets for. If Philly would take a 5th I'd do it. A 1st, 2nd or our best offensive weapon? No thanks. 

I consider McCoy a sterling player. But the reality is that he is a thirty year old speed back whose value is going to diminish. Without a doubt his workload is going to lessen, so he is not going to be as much of a focal player as he has been. You can't beat mother nature!  Brady is in a different category because of the position he plays. His position relies more on brains than athleticism. 

 

Let's look at what you would get from an acquisition of Foles in an exchange for a back. You get a qb who can run a pro offense and make pro throws. That in itself is a major upgrade from what we have been accustomed to over the past three years.  Foles is a qb who even in the short term (one to two years) will keep the Bills competitive while it continues with its reconstruction. 

 

Where I forcefully disagree with you is that a McCoy/Taylor combination does not closely match replacement backs/Foles combination. In addition, in my scenario the Bills keep their picks. And if smartly handled they can either work a deal to get their ace qb prospect or if they stay pat get an infusion of young talent added to the roster. 

 

I'm open to all qb options other than retaining Taylor. That shipped has sailed a long time ago for me. If I could get a qb such as Bradford from the market I would be ecstatic. My unyielding criteria is that the qb has to be able to run a pro offense and throw the ball down field. 

[JohnC]

9 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

What does it matter if its TT or some other band aid if we draft a rookie?  Its not like TT would still be the future in that case, its all about the rookie moving forward.  

 

All that matters is we draft a high rookie or sign Cousins.  Everything is a waste of breath to worry about.  Doesn't matter if TT keeps the seat warm or some other vet.  The future will still be the rookie.

Odds are that McBeane are going to move on from Taylor just as Whaley had moved on. I just don't see this regime keeping him for another year. Taylor was recently asked if the organization had communicated with him about his future. He succinctly said no. What does that tell you about their plans for him, even as a bridge qb? 

 

My priority is to draft a qb and have a presentable bridge qb in place until the prospect is ready to play. When I say presentable I mean a qb that is capable of running a pro offense and throw the ball down the field. If Bradford was available I would be ecstatic. 

 

If you are truly a Tyrod aficionado you would want him to be dealt so that he could have a fresh start somewhere else. This fine fellow needs a new scenery to recharge. It's evident that it is not happening in western NY.