McCoy for Foles.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

19 hours ago, Tipster19 said:

While I learned to love Shady it stands to reason that he is our biggest bargaining chip. Before everybody starts puking our responses just stop and think, the guy is 30 year’s old and he’s not going to single handedly bring us to the Super Bowl. Successful franchises move on and retain value for their aging gridiron stars (New England, Philadelphia under Andy Reid regime, etc etc). 

 

Under this his philosophy and speaking of Philadelphia, I believe they are our best outlet to for a starting QB. This would not only allow us to solidify the QB position but also let us retain our best resources (early draft picks) to strengthen the rest of our roster. What I would like to see is for the Bills to trade McCoy and our 2019 6th rd draft pick for Foles, RB Corey Clement and their 2019 4th rd pick. This would enable the Bills to use their 2018 top draft picks on defense, possible C if still needed and I would also like to see them draft UGA RB Sony Michel with their 2nd rd pick. In FA I’d also like for the Bills acquire soon to be released RB DeMarco Murray to a team friendly contract. 

 

I would be fine with the Bills making a move to acquire Foles.  But please folks - in constructing your scenarios for player moves, consider a dose of reality:

Given a reasonable probability that Wentz may not be back for the start of the season, what is (part) of Philly's motivation to move their SB winning QB?

    a) they are over the cap by 9M - trading Foles before his roster bonus would allow them to recoup $5M

    b) they could get something they sorely lack if they trade him now

 

b) The Eagles were #3 in the NFL for rushing yards last year, #6 for attempts (that means their rush game was efficient).  Blount is a free agent, but Ajayi and Clement are both under contract, and players on SB champion teams may be more prone to re-up at team-friendly terms to "stay with a winner".  "Great RB" is not something the Eagles sorely lack, either from the production standpoint (fine as it is) or from the standpoint of how their offense is designed (pass to run, not run to pass)

 

a) If they trade for McCoy, they take on his $6.3M salary, which is more than they save by trading Foles

 

a) + b) = not gonna happen

 

The Eagles sorely lack draft picks.  If they move Foles, they move him for a pick.

 

 

 

16 minutes ago, JohnC said:

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?

 

I thought "silence" was interpreted as "consent"?  The Bills have Tyrod under contract.  They do not need to communicate with him unless there is some change to communicate.

Edited February 15, 2018 by Hapless Bills Fan

[Wsam4031]

28 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

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?

trent dilfer won a super bowl too Rex Grossman won a NFCC game doesn't mean you build a team around them.   We cant identify one its a lot of luck and hopefully good scouting.There is just a better chance of us drafting one then if we sign one of those guys. Id rather gamble on a rookie drafted high then settle for  any of them guys. All of those free agents and Foles we know aren't going to be that guy, as we have seen from their years of past play. If we trade for Foles we will have to sign him to a long term deal based on a few good games and im not ready to advocate for that.  Yeah they may be serviceable and win you some games possibly get you to the playoffs, im not disputing that. I want superbowls. I want a dominant team. Im sick of middle of the road. Im not willing to give up assets for someone who got lucky a few good games with a great team around him. Id rather take those assets, trade up and draft a guy that hasn't shown what he is yet and possibly be great.

[JohnC]

12 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I would be fine with the Bills making a move to acquire Foles.  But please folks - in constructing your scenarios for player moves, consider a dose of reality:

Given a reasonable probability that Wentz may not be back for the start of the season, what is (part) of Philly's motivation to move their SB winning QB?

    a) they are over the cap by 9M - trading Foles before his roster bonus would allow them to recoup $5M

    b) they could get something they sorely lack if they trade him now

 

b) The Eagles were #3 in the NFL for rushing yards last year, #6 for attempts (that means their rush game was efficient).  Blount is a free agent, but Ajayi and Clement are both under contract, and players on SB champion teams may be more prone to re-up at team-friendly terms to "stay with a winner".  "Great RB" is not something the Eagles sorely lack, either from the production standpoint (fine as it is) or from the standpoint of how their offense is designed (pass to run, not run to pass)

 

a) If they trade for McCoy, they take on his $6.3M salary, which is more than they save by trading Foles

 

a) + b) = not gonna happen

 

The Eagles sorely lack draft picks.  If they move Foles, they move him for a pick.

 

 

 

 

I thought "silence" was interpreted as "consent"?  The Bills have Tyrod under contract.  They do not need to communicate with him unless there is some change to communicate.

The silence surrounding Taylor from the organization is qualitatively different from the norm. Taylor's status is undeniably in question with the organization. And it is very public. It became glaringly obvious in the San Diego game when a rookie started in his place. That certainly wasn't a ringing endorsement of him not only as a starter but more importantly with the team.

 

Having a contract doesn't indicate an organization's attachment to the player. In this case far from it. If a team was committed to a player in the midst of loud voices arguing otherwise it would undoubtedly communicate its level of commitment to the player. Taylor is playing the lead position on a team. He should be the face and leader of a team. And how does the organization respond? With silence. That is telling, maybe not for you but for me it is. 

 

Everyone knows what my position is with respect to Taylor. It means little. However, what is apparent to me is that this regime is going out of its way not to have an association with him. As I see it odds are overwhelming that he will not be on our roster next season. Sometimes more can be learned from what is not said than from what is said. That's what I see here. 

[KGun12TD]

So, you want to trade away our entire offense? No thanks!

[GunnerBill]

14 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Under no circumstances should we give up any asset for a seat warmer to our rookie. 

 

I 100% agree with this and that is my whole point.  

 

• I want to give up resources to get the best rookie available and get up in the draft.
• I want to move on from Tyrod (I probably differ from Alpha there I am guessing he would happily keep him as his bridge).
• I do not want to give up resources for a placeholder.  Not when there are always adequate placeholders available for free. 

 

Last year for free you could have had Case Keenum or Nick Foles.  I advocated both at different times last offseason - Keenum was actually my top choice.  I am not trying to say "look how smart I am" because I advocated Brian Hoyer as an option too and Josh McCown was also free. None of whom I want as my long term QB.... though maybe Keenum has finally broken through and will be a long term starter somewhere - I've liked him since he came out. 

 

This year McCown is again an option, Fitzpatrick is an option, Bradford is an option.... they all come for free and if you give up resources to get up for your 1st choice in the draft you don't really need a vet who is going to start for a whole season. You just need a guy who if required could go 2-2 through the first month.  

 

Give up resources to get your answer.  Do not give up resources to get a bridge.

Edited February 15, 2018 by GunnerBill

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Wsam4031 said:

trent dilfer won a super bowl too Rex Grossman won a NFCC game doesn't mean you build a team around them.   We cant identify one its a lot of luck and hopefully good scouting.There is just a better chance of us drafting one then if we sign one of those guys. Id rather gamble on a rookie drafted high then settle for  any of them guys. All of those free agents and Foles we know aren't going to be that guy, as we have seen from their years of past play. If we trade for Foles we will have to sign him to a long term deal based on a few good games and im not ready to advocate for that.  Yeah they may be serviceable and win you some games possibly get you to the playoffs, im not disputing that. I want superbowls. I want a dominant team. Im sick of middle of the road. Im not willing to give up assets for someone who got lucky a few good games with a great team around him. Id rather take those assets, trade up and draft a guy that hasn't shown what he is yet and possibly be great.

 

 

But you are willing to give up major assets to gamble on a high drafted  rookie QB?  A rookie QB who will not "have a great team around him" is going to get you Super Bowls?

 

 

[Wsam4031]

Just now, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

But you are willing to give up major assets to gamble on a high drafted  rookie QB?  A rookie QB who will not "have a great team around him" is going to get you Super Bowls?

 

 

Yes I am. Id much rather gamble then settle for one and a 9-7 record every year

Let me follow that up by saying if the bills have identified a guy they feel that way about. then yes id give up every pick in this years draft to get that guy

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, Wsam4031 said:

Yes I am. Id much rather gamble then settle for one and a 9-7 record every year

 

You are assuming that a rookie will be better and that a guy like Keenum, with regular starts, will get worse.

 

Essentially, for Foles and Keenum, you are ignoring how they play now and looking instead how they played in the past in order to come to your conclusion that any of these rookie QBs would be a better choice.

[Wsam4031]

4 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

You are assuming that a rookie will be better and that a guy like Keenum, with regular starts, will get worse.

 

Essentially, for Foles and Keenum, you are ignoring how they play now and looking instead how they played in the past in order to come to your conclusion that any of these rookie QBs would be a better choice.

Im not assuming im hoping. Drafting a qb in the first round, or any round, this day in ager is a complete crapshoot. He could turn out to be Jamarcus Russell or Leaf. But could be Elway or Montana. I just want them to take a shot at greatness and not settle for getting by. Ive just had too many years of that. If we fail and go 3-13 so be it then we try again but draft at the top of the draft. If we get foles and go 9-7 and miss the playoffs or go out in the first round then its the same old form the bills that we are used to

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, Wsam4031 said:

Im not assuming im hoping. Drafting a qb in the first round, or any round, this day in ager is a complete crapshoot. He could turn out to be Jamarcus Russell or Leaf. But could be Elway or Montana. I just want them to take a shot at greatness and not settle for getting by. Ive just had too many years of that. If we fail and go 3-13 so be it then we try again but draft at the top of the draft. If we get foles and go 9-7 and miss the playoffs or go out in the first round then its the same old form the bills that we are used to

 

 yeah, you must have missed the JPL and EJ Manuel years.

 

I'm not against drafting a QB in the first (with rookie contracts as they are now, it's almost a throwaway pick).  But for a team that has played in one playoff game in 17 years, it's hard to say "who wants to go out in the first round?" (Like P manning, you mean?), and "I'd rather go 3-13" looking for the right rookie QB.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

4 hours ago, JohnC said:

The silence surrounding Taylor from the organization is qualitatively different from the norm. Taylor's status is undeniably in question with the organization. And it is very public. It became glaringly obvious in the San Diego game when a rookie started in his place. That certainly wasn't a ringing endorsement of him not only as a starter but more importantly with the team.

 

With the team - you mean like the OC who reportedly pushed to start Peterman is 'with the team'?  Oh, wait - he isn't.   Firing Dennison certainly isn't an endorsement of Taylor.  But I don't "get" why people conclude that the benching means Bills have obviously 100% moved on from Taylor, but the fact that the Bills 100% definitively moved on from the OC involved in benching him doesn't impact that narrative.  One would think it does.

If by "norm" you mean what had become the Bills SOP for years past, yes I agree the silence is "qualitatively different", but it's different across the board - not just with regard to Taylor.  We don't hear that the WR coach has been released from his contract to pursue "other opportunities" until he shows up on a team across the country etcetera etcetera.  Surely it hasn't escaped your notice that the new Bills FO and coaches seem competent at playing things much closer to the vest with less of the damaging "leaks". 

 

4 hours ago, JohnC said:

Having a contract doesn't indicate an organization's attachment to the player. In this case far from it. If a team was committed to a player in the midst of loud voices arguing otherwise it would undoubtedly communicate its level of commitment to the player. Taylor is playing the lead position on a team. He should be the face and leader of a team. And how does the organization respond? With silence. That is telling, maybe not for you but for me it is. 

 

If a team was committed to a player, sure, they might say so.   (Although saying so doesn't mean too much, either.  For example, Zach Mettenberger was told how the Titans really liked and believed in him - right up to the point where they selected Mariota with the #2 pick of the draft).

 

Outside of a firm commitment, I think you're attaching way too much weight to a lack of commentary.  The Bills have a lot of possible options at QB.  Some involve Taylor, some don't.  Until they actually have a deal for a new QB or draft one, the Bills have nothing to gain and potentially things to lose by tipping their hand in public.

 

I think the logical conclusion is that the Bills would like to upgrade at QB, but recognize that their preferred choice(s) at QB may not be available to them due to factors they may influence, but don't control.   Keeping Taylor is one option that might make sense to them under certain scenarios, so it's still on the table and they'll keep it there until they have someone they believe to be better in hand.

 

If you want to make "silence" into some great "telling" factor, though, as you wish....

[Wsam4031]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 yeah, you must have missed the JPL and EJ Manuel years.

 

I'm not against drafting a QB in the first (with rookie contracts as they are now, it's almost a throwaway pick).  But for a team that has played in one playoff game in 17 years, it's hard to say "who wants to go out in the first round?" (Like P manning, you mean?), and "I'd rather go 3-13" looking for the right rookie QB.

Unfortunately I remember those years far too well.  I also remember the Jim Kelly years. Unfortunately for us those are the only 1st rd QBs weve selected since 1983. Im just hoping if they do trade up and draft a qb that hes more Jimbo than EJ

we just have 2 different view on how to get to the same spot. For both our sakes I hope 1 of us is right.

[JohnC]

9 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

With the team - you mean like the OC who reportedly pushed to start Peterman is 'with the team'?  Oh, wait - he isn't.   Firing Dennison certainly isn't an endorsement of Taylor.  But I don't "get" why people conclude that the benching means Bills have obviously 100% moved on from Taylor, but the fact that the Bills 100% definitively moved on from the OC involved in benching him doesn't impact that narrative.  One would think it does.

If by "norm" you mean what had become the Bills SOP for years past, yes I agree the silence is "qualitatively different", but it's different across the board - not just with regard to Taylor.  We don't hear that the WR coach has been released from his contract to pursue "other opportunities" until he shows up on a team across the country etcetera etcetera.  Surely it hasn't escaped your notice that the new Bills FO and coaches seem competent at playing things much closer to the vest with less of the damaging "leaks". 

 

 

If a team was committed to a player, sure, they might say so.   (Although saying so doesn't mean too much, either.  For example, Zach Mettenberger was told how the Titans really liked and believed in him - right up to the point where they selected Mariota with the #2 pick of the draft).

 

Outside of a firm commitment, I think you're attaching way too much weight to a lack of commentary.  The Bills have a lot of possible options at QB.  Some involve Taylor, some don't.  Until they actually have a deal for a new QB or draft one, the Bills have nothing to gain and potentially things to lose by tipping their hand in public.

 

I think the logical conclusion is that the Bills would like to upgrade at QB, but recognize that their preferred choice(s) at QB may not be available to them due to factors they may influence, but don't control.   Keeping Taylor is one option that might make sense to them under certain scenarios, so it's still on the table and they'll keep it there until they have someone they believe to be better in hand.

 

If you want to make "silence" into some great "telling" factor, though, as you wish....

When McDermott, the HC, went along with the recommendation by the OC to start the rookie in the Charger game it certainly was an indication of how the veteran qb was perceived by the organization. Let's remember that Taylor was not going to be kept by the new regime if he didn't take a pay cut. That certainly isn't a sign of confidence or being in the plans. 

 

We can go back and forth on this issue. There comes a point where there is nothing else to add to the discussion. We'll just have to wait and see how this plays out. My position is firm and unshakable on this issue. I can't give you all the details how this will play out but I do have a sense on the contours how this plays out. My sense is that Taylor will not be on the Bills roster next season. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 hours ago, Wsam4031 said:

trent dilfer won a super bowl too Rex Grossman won a NFCC game

 

Do you seriously mean to compare Dilfer or Grossman to Foles performance in the playoffs/SB this year?

[Wsam4031]

12 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Do you seriously mean to compare Dilfer or Grossman to Foles performance in the playoffs/SB this year?

I was simply pointing out one year wonder type qbs. Foles got hot and looked great for the playoffs and superbowl but I dont think hes a franchise qb

[Hapless Bills Fan]

17 minutes ago, JohnC said:

We can go back and forth on this issue. There comes a point where there is nothing else to add to the discussion. We'll just have to wait and see how this plays out. My position is firm and unshakable on this issue. I can't give you all the details how this will play out but I do have a sense on the contours how this plays out. My sense is that Taylor will not be on the Bills roster next season. 

 

You're a funny guy, JohnC.  "My position is firm and unshakeable" - about something over which you have absolutely no control whatsover.

 

Your sense that Taylor will not be on the Bills roster next season may be right.  Or it may be wrong.  But I think the smart money betting is whether he is, or whether he isn't, depends on what QB alternatives the Bills can put in place, not on "tea leaves" about team silence or an acknowledged "mistake" starting Peterman (which likely contributed to the OC's firing).

 

Or perhaps I'm just overly hopeful that for a change we have a cadre of experienced football professionals in place who make decisions based upon logic and 'cold hard football facts".  We can do better than Taylor.  We can also do worse.

6 hours ago, JohnC said:

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.

 

I like Foles.  I'd like to have Foles here as our QB.  I consider Foles under-rated and a clear upgrade to Taylor.

 

That said, what has to be considered is what would Philly get by trading Foles for McCoy?  It's not going to happen because it's not in their interest.  What need of theirs does it fill?

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

You're a funny guy, JohnC.  "My position is firm and unshakeable" - about something over which you have absolutely no control whatsover.

 

Your sense that Taylor will not be on the Bills roster next season may be right.  Or it may be wrong.  But I think the smart money betting is whether he is, or whether he isn't, depends on what QB alternatives the Bills can put in place, not on "tea leaves" about team silence or an acknowledged "mistake" starting Peterman (which likely contributed to the OC's firing).

 

Or perhaps I'm just overly hopeful that for a change we have a cadre of experienced football professionals in place who make decisions based upon logic and 'cold hard football facts". We can do better than Taylor.  We can also do worse.

I have a fundamental disagreement with you and others. My belief is that this organization already has made a decision to move on from him. The issue then is what can they get for him? I don't think very much but they have time to scan the market and seek whatever scraps they can get. 

 

I'm very high on this new staff. They are very systematic and thorough. (As you noted.)They certainly haven't been afraid to make some tough decisions.  Because they are so detailed and analytical there is only one decision (my opinion) that they can come to that makes sense regarding the Taylor situation. What is obvious to me may not be obvious to you. What is obvious to you may not be obvious to me. Let's see how this plays out. I'm not only very confident in my stance but I'm confident that it will play out as I expect it to. Some may consider that exhibition of confidence to be an exhibition of arrogance. I find it to be an exhibition of common sense. 

[H2o]

Uhhhhhh, no. McCoy is the heart and soul of along with being undoubtedly the best player on this team. I hope he retires as a member of the Bills. 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[1billsfan]

4 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

 

I just don't trust any information these insiders are getting this time of year. Why would any team decision-makers interested in Foles, or a specific QB in the 2018 draft, or Cousins, or Keenam, etc... tell an "insider" that they don't have much interest in a specific player he's asking about? That doesn't make any sense at all. If you were a team decision-maker would you let them know you were very much interested in trading for Foles right now? Of course the answer is no. Why drive up the price, especially when there are so many options available which now suddenly includes McCarron. I'm convinced that Foles is on the radar as a serious option for the Bills (if they believe he's very driven to prove he's an NFL franchise QB) and they're hoping the price becomes a second round pick. 

 

With the Bills picking 21 and 22 (all the top QB prospects gone), and seeing what Foles did to the NFC playoff teams and the Patriots, it's easy to see that this team could quickly view this option as a viable way to become a serious contender in a very bad AFC conference with him. Foles has serious NFL cred now, and I think Bills players would believe in him and look at him very differently than they would a couple of months ago. The Bills can still draft a developmental QB in the 3rd or 4th round. Maybe even using the other 2nd round pick depending on who's there.

 

 

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, 1billsfan said:

 

I just don't trust any information these insiders are getting this time of year. Why would any team decision-makers interested in Foles, or a specific QB in the 2018 draft, or Cousins, or Keenam, etc... tell an "insider" that they don't have much interest in a specific player he's asking about? That doesn't make any sense at all. If you were a team decision-maker would you let them know you were very much interested in trading for Foles right now? Of course the answer is no. Why drive up the price, especially when there are so many options available which now suddenly includes McCarron. I'm convinced that Foles is on the radar as a serious option for the Bills (if they believe he's very driven to prove he's an NFL franchise QB) and they're hoping the price becomes a second round pick. 

 

With the Bills picking 21 and 22 (all the top QB prospects gone), and seeing what Foles did to the NFC playoff teams and the Patriots, it's easy to see that this team could quickly view this option as a viable way to become a serious contender in a very bad AFC conference with him. Foles has serious NFL cred now, and I think Bills players would believe in him and look at him very differently than they would a couple of months ago. The Bills can still draft a developmental QB in the 3rd or 4th round. Maybe even using the other 2nd round pick depending on who's there.

 

Like Allbright said....fans.  There's an entire body of work that some people refuse to consider. 

[OldTimer1960]

I would not give up much, maybe no more than a 4th for Foles.  He excelled for a short time with a good offensive cast and a very good defense.  He had some DUD games that the Eagles’ D bailed him out of late in the year.

[1billsfan]

14 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Like Allbright said....fans.  There's an entire body of work that some people refuse to consider. 

 

NFL front offices will not say anything that even hints at the truth this time of year. So if they're the ones saying there isn't much interest, there probably is serious interest and buying into Foles going on, especially with teams like the Cardinals and Bills who right now are on the outside looking in with regards to the 2018 QB draft derby.

 

 

[Mr. WEO]

4 hours ago, Wsam4031 said:

I was simply pointing out one year wonder type qbs. Foles got hot and looked great for the playoffs and superbowl but I dont think hes a franchise qb

 

 

Foles is a one year wonder?  What do you think of his 2013 season?

Edited February 16, 2018 by Mr. WEO

[IDBillzFan]

I hate you, offseason. I hate you to pieces.

[Freddie's Dead]

Trade our best player by far?  No.

[Wsam4031]

12 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Foles is a one year wonder?  What do you think of his 2013 season?

ok so 1 year and 5 games wonder. Hes been bad thru out majority of his career. So do you think we can win the super bowl with him next year? do you think we can win a super bowl with him the next few years? 

[GunnerBill]

12 hours ago, 1billsfan said:

 

NFL front offices will not say anything that even hints at the truth this time of year. So if they're the ones saying there isn't much interest, there probably is serious interest and buying into Foles going on, especially with teams like the Cardinals and Bills who right now are on the outside looking in with regards to the 2018 QB draft derby.

 

I can see Arizona.  There is some commonality between the Andy Reid version of the West Coast offense and Mike McCoy's scheme..... 

 

I don't think the Bills are going to go in the Foles direction, I really don't.  If they liked him that much there was the chance to get him last offseason and at the time they looked across the NFL and decided retaining Taylor was their best bet.  If you think McDermott and Beane are the types of guy who are going to say "he he had 2 and a half great games in the playoffs, he's our guy" I think you totally misunderstand how thorough these guys are.  

[Chuck Wagon]

12 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Foles is a one year wonder?  What do you think of his 2013 season?

 

 

I think it was 5 years ago.

 

We have nowhere near the skill position talent of the Eagles and likely nowhere near the offensive coaching either.  Foles looked terrible against Oakland and Dallas trying to run the Eagles full playbook, once the playoffs hit they trimmed to the bare minimum.  I think he can succeed obviously, I'm just not sure we are set up to make it happen here.

[Dave in Avon Lake now]

Not sure if this was posted already but I heard this morning Eagles want 2 first rounders for Foles.  It won't happen, but the trade scenarios proposed here won't happen either.

[MrEpsYtown]

13 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

 

I think there has to be some truth to this. I think Foles trade destinations will be limited. He doesn't seem like a guy who would want to go Cleveland or like the NY Jets. It would have to be a great fit. Obviously, he can't control where he goes, but he could just retire if he doesn't like the fit. I think Arizona, Buffalo, Minnesota probably make sense. I'm not sure Denver is a great fit with Elway breathing down his neck. I think we make sense with the Andy Reid connection with David Culley on staff as well.  

 

 

 

[JohnC]

17 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

You're a funny guy, JohnC.  "My position is firm and unshakeable" - about something over which you have absolutely no control whatsover.

 

Your sense that Taylor will not be on the Bills roster next season may be right.  Or it may be wrong.  But I think the smart money betting is whether he is, or whether he isn't, depends on what QB alternatives the Bills can put in place, not on "tea leaves" about team silence or an acknowledged "mistake" starting Peterman (which likely contributed to the OC's firing).

 

Or perhaps I'm just overly hopeful that for a change we have a cadre of experienced football professionals in place who make decisions based upon logic and 'cold hard football facts".  We can do better than Taylor.  We can also do worse.

 

I like Foles.  I'd like to have Foles here as our QB.  I consider Foles under-rated and a clear upgrade to Taylor.

 

That said, what has to be considered is what would Philly get by trading Foles for McCoy?  It's not going to happen because it's not in their interest.  What need of theirs does it fill?

I certainly agree that it would be a disadvantage for the Eagles to deal Foles for McCoy. That is one of the primary basis for my position of making that deal. Getting a starting qb, even as a bridge player, for a back whose role would decline. On balance this deal would unquestionably benefit us more than the Eagles. Think about it. Most people are critical of the proposed deal in which we would benefit more? I'm considered an outlier while so many continue to argue for the status quo. It's odd and perplexing. 

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

I certainly agree that it would be a disadvantage for the Eagles to deal Foles for McCoy. That is one of the primary basis for my position of making that deal. Getting a starting qb, even as a bridge player, for a back whose role would decline. On balance this deal would unquestionably benefit us more than the Eagles. Think about it. Most people are critical of the proposed deal in which we would benefit more? I'm considered an outlier while so many continue to argue for the status quo. It's odd and perplexing. 

 

Literally no one at TSW is arguing for the status quo.  You're getting push back from some people with your ABT mantra that includes advocating for worse options like Mike Glennon who in no way represents an upgrade from the status quo. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

41 minutes ago, Dave in Bluffton said:

Not sure if this was posted already but I heard this morning Eagles want 2 first rounders for Foles.  It won't happen, but the trade scenarios proposed here won't happen either.

 

Can you share your source?

 

It wouldn't startle me that the Eagles would ask for that, but it would startle me if they got it.  After all, one of the attractions of drafting a rookie, even a rookie you trade up for, is that you can sign him relatively cheaply for 5 years and build around him.  Foles is going to want to be paid, and paid well.

 

It might make sense for a team to sell out their draft to trade up for a rookie, leaving them cap space to build the team with FA.  It might make sense for a team to sell out their cap to sign a FA, leaving their draft to build the team with rookies.

 

It does not make sense for a team to do both.

 

14 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I certainly agree that it would be a disadvantage for the Eagles to deal Foles for McCoy. That is one of the primary basis for my position of making that deal. Getting a starting qb, even as a bridge player, for a back whose role would decline. On balance this deal would unquestionably benefit us more than the Eagles. Think about it. Most people are critical of the proposed deal in which we would benefit more? I'm considered an outlier while so many continue to argue for the status quo. It's odd and perplexing. 

 

Just to be clear: I'm not critical of the proposed deal in which we would benefit more, I'm saying it would never happen because we don't just benefit more, we get something we need while the Eagles get nothing they need.  They had the #3 run game in the league last year in a pass-to-run offense.  They have no draft picks and they need them.  They are over the cap and need cap relief.

 

They are not trading Foles for an expensive player whose contract they must assume.

 

I don't see anyone arguing for the "status quo"; the point is to improve.

 

 

Edited February 16, 2018 by Hapless Bills Fan

[The Jokeman]

On 2/14/2018 at 1:42 PM, Tipster19 said:

While I learned to love Shady it stands to reason that he is our biggest bargaining chip. Before everybody starts puking our responses just stop and think, the guy is 30 year’s old and he’s not going to single handedly bring us to the Super Bowl. Successful franchises move on and retain value for their aging gridiron stars (New England, Philadelphia under Andy Reid regime, etc etc). 

 

Under this his philosophy and speaking of Philadelphia, I believe they are our best outlet to for a starting QB. This would not only allow us to solidify the QB position but also let us retain our best resources (early draft picks) to strengthen the rest of our roster. What I would like to see is for the Bills to trade McCoy and our 2019 6th rd draft pick for Foles, RB Corey Clement and their 2019 4th rd pick. This would enable the Bills to use their 2018 top draft picks on defense, possible C if still needed and I would also like to see them draft UGA RB Sony Michel with their 2nd rd pick. In FA I’d also like for the Bills acquire soon to be released RB DeMarco Murray to a team friendly contract. 

Murray has seen his best days, while I like Foles at QB I hate the thought of this trade and sign scenario. 

[JohnC]

14 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

 

 

 

Just to be clear: I'm not critical of the proposed deal in which we would benefit more, I'm saying it would never happen because we don't just benefit more, we get something we need while the Eagles get nothing they need.  They had the #3 run game in the league last year in a pass-to-run offense.  They have no draft picks and they need them.  They are over the cap and need cap relief.

 

They are not trading Foles for an expensive player whose contract they must assume.

 

I don't see anyone arguing for the "status quo"; the point is to improve.

 

 

You are missing my point. The majority of responses to this mirage deal have strenuously argued that it would be a losing proposition for us if we made this fantasy deal. I say otherwise and apparently so do you. I agree with you that the Eagles would have no incentive to make such a deal because it would be a  bad deal for them. Or another way of saying it it would be a good deal for us.  The consensus view is the opposite. There is a belief that giving up McCoy for Foles in a straight up deal would be a bad deal for us. I disagree with the consensus. That's simply what I am saying here.  

36 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Literally no one at TSW is arguing for the status quo.  You're getting push back from some people with your ABT mantra that includes advocating for worse options like Mike Glennon who in no way represents an upgrade from the status quo. 

I'm not advocating for Glennon. However, I'm open to considering all options. 

[26CornerBlitz]

On 2/14/2018 at 6:24 PM, JohnC said:

If he can run a pro offense and throw the ball down the field I would have no problem with him as a bridge qb. He would be a dramatic upgrade from what we currently have. Let me remind you that the Bills scored three points in its playoff loss in which the qb play was dreadful. 

 

6 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You are missing my point. The majority of responses to this mirage deal have strenuously argued that it would be a losing proposition for us if we made this fantasy deal. I say otherwise and apparently so do you. I agree with you that the Eagles would have no incentive to make such a deal because it would be a  bad deal for them. Or another way of saying it it would be a good deal for us.  The consensus view is the opposite. There is a belief that giving up McCoy for Foles in a straight up deal would be a bad deal for us. I disagree with the consensus. That's simply what I am saying here.  

I'm not advocating for Glennon. However, I'm open to considering all options. 

 

You did and you were 100% wrong in your assessment. 

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Wsam4031 said:

ok so 1 year and 5 games wonder. Hes been bad thru out majority of his career. So do you think we can win the super bowl with him next year? do you think we can win a super bowl with him the next few years? 

 

You easily miss the point.  We would be getting Foles as he is right now, which is pretty good.  He's learned over the years, obviously, much more about his position.

 

This team, as it is, doesn't have the talent on the roster to make it to the SB in the next few years no matter who is QB.  Which of these "franchise QBs" available anywhere I'm the 1st round is more likely than Foles to get the Bills to the SB in the next few years?  Name him.

1 hour ago, Chuck Wagon said:

 

 

I think it was 5 years ago.

 

We have nowhere near the skill position talent of the Eagles and likely nowhere near the offensive coaching either.  Foles looked terrible against Oakland and Dallas trying to run the Eagles full playbook, once the playoffs hit they trimmed to the bare minimum.  I think he can succeed obviously, I'm just not sure we are set up to make it happen here.

 

I agree. see above.

[JohnC]

14 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

 

You did and you were 100% wrong in your assessment. 

I went back and clarified what I originated stated. I subsequently stated I would consider any option. If a player couldn't play I would go to the next option. If you want to play the gotcha game then play it. My point is that I would consider all options except one.  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 2/14/2018 at 5:36 PM, JohnC said:

You don't have an understanding of what I have been posting. Please stop with the ludicrous claim that you will have to pay him in the range of $100 M. I realize that for lent you gave up some things but I didn't know it was going to be your common sense. In my mind he would be a bridge qb for a year or so. If he walks after two year or even one year then so be it. At least you got some utility out of him. He would simply be a short-term bridge qb who is capable of running a pro offense and passing at a respectable level. That in itself would be a dramatic upgrade of what we have now at qb.

 

I just have one question:  if, when the dust settles, Foles winds up with a contract worth $100M, will you return for your helping of crow?

 

I mean, thinking he won't is one thing, but telling someone they lack common sense for believing it might in today's QB market seems a bit over the top.