Nick Foles Could Be in Your Future

[gobills1212]

Enough of this.. man, I've never seen another teams back up qb so popluar. And it can't be him.. so it's gotta be more simply the conclusion people who are anti trade come to when considering the next best thing. Foles was in an excellent position, on an excellent team, with a stripped/dumbed down playbook. He has shown what he is capable when a team is handed to him and not in near perfect circumstances like Philly. He was fun to watch, but that bottle of lightning doesn't come with him. At least move on to AJs unknown potential and change it up. That's a tad more realistic

Edited March 18, 2018 by gobills1212

[DrDawkinstein]

Ugh, QB purgatory for another 4 years.

[BadLandsMeanie]

1 minute ago, Boatdrinks said:

He'll be moved at the deadline, when they don't really need him anymore. 

Yeah but that comes at the end of October. 

 

Say they were 6-0 with Foles. Wentz stepped in and was rusty and they lost. Do you think they would trade him then? I think it could get messy on them. They never won a super bowl. Picture if it was here and we finally won and then we are on track to contend again and they just trade away the guy who was QB when we won?

 

That would be dicey.

[NewEra]

9 hours ago, 8-8 Forever? said:

just take Jackson and be done with it for 2018

 

I’m starting to think the same.  I’d rather have Allen or Baker over him......but at what price?  I don’t think Rosen or Darnold will be in play for us.  The jets trading 3 2nd rd picks to move up 3 spots really upped the price tag of  #1 and 2.  If Baker or Allen fall out of the top 6, we may be able to trade up for one of them and give up 12 and a 2nd.  If they are gone, Jackson is fine by me.  Great arm and mobility (which will help mask our bleh OL) and is experienced playing in a similar system.  McCarron can start until they think he’s ready.  We’d have our potential franchise Qb and a boatload of picks to build the LBs’s OL, WR.  He may not be what everyone here wants.....but that doesn’t mean that he won’t be good.

 

 

i wouldn’t trade anything for Foles.  I’d rather go after him as a FA next year if AJ isn’t very good and/or the QB we draft this year doesn’t show as much promised as we had hoped.  

Edited March 18, 2018 by NewEra

[BadLandsMeanie]

2 minutes ago, gobills1212 said:

Enough of this.. man, I've never seen another teams back up qb so popluar. And it can't be him.. so it's gotta be more simply the conclusion people who are anti trade come to when considering the next best thing. Foles was in an excellent position, on an excellent team, with a stripped/dumbed down playbook. He has shown what he is capable when a team is handed to him and not in near perfect circumstances like Philly. He was fun to watch, but that bottle of lightning doesn't come with him. At least move on to AJs unknown potential and change it up. That's a tad more realistic

That is your narrative. 

 

And it isn't balanced as I see it.  I see it as Foles was clutch. See Tony Romo for a great QB who was not clutch. And Foles played very well against elite competition. 

And he won in the Super Bowl defeating the greatest dynasty we have had so far, lead by the greatest coach, and arguably the greatest QB.

 

And he did it in a shootout. Not by being a game manager.

 

And if the offense was so simplified, why couldn't Bellichick neutralize it?

 

And of he is just the product of the great team around him., how do we know Wentz is so special?

 

 

 

 

 

[Figster]

4 minutes ago, BadLandsMeanie said:

Yeah but that comes at the end of October. 

 

Say they were 6-0 with Foles. Wentz stepped in and was rusty and they lost. Do you think they would trade him then? I think it could get messy on them. They never won a super bowl. Picture if it was here and we finally won and then we are on track to contend again and they just trade away the guy who was QB when we won?

 

That would be dicey.

I would almost be tempted to start the Superbowl MVP regardless of what Wentz's status is and let it play out.

 

If Foles should somehow hold the position the Eagles have one heck of a good problem to have at the QB positiion.

[gobills1212]

10 minutes ago, BadLandsMeanie said:

That is your narrative. 

 

And it isn't balanced as I see it.  I see it as Foles was clutch. See Tony Romo for a great QB who was not clutch. And Foles played very well against elite competition. 

And he won in the Super Bowl defeating the greatest dynasty we have had so far, lead by the greatest coach, and arguably the greatest QB.

 

And he did it in a shootout. Not by being a game manager.

 

And if the offense was so simplified, why couldn't Bellichick neutralize it?

 

And of he is just the product of the great team around him., how do we know Wentz is so special?

 

 

 

 

 

I'd venture to guess it's most people's narrative or at least something similar. Then, there's a very small contingent that are STILL holding a candle for Foles. At every turn, and every opportunity, savior Foles is mentioned. If we were talking about a Brees type guy, fine. I get it. But you don't think it's a bit short sighted to put his last 3 games and 1 outlier season above the best of his career. The Bills ARE NOT the Eagles. They might not even be the Chiefs. If this dude was the cats meow, teams would be begging the Eagles to take their picks for Foles the FQB. 1st and 4th is nothing for a guy who will bring a team to greatness. Bbbuuutttt..... crickets. I promise, I don't mean this to be a jerk but you ARENT smarter than every GM in the league. There is a reason the guy has been passed around and almost retired. The Eagles had a GREAT team and he was in a GREAT situation with coaching, roster, game plan etc. He stayed within himself and didnt screw it up. He didnt make the Eagles but was a product of the Eagles.There is actual history of similar situations you can compare it to and each and every time it's  essentially fools gold. Luckily, the Bills (and every other qb needy team for that matter) realize they don't want to be said fool...

Edited March 18, 2018 by gobills1212

[Figster]

2 minutes ago, gobills1212 said:

I'd venture to guess it's most people's narrative or at least something similar. Then, there's a very small contingent that are STILL holding a candle for Foles. At every turn, and every opportunity, savior Foles is mentioned. If we were talking about a Brees type guy, fine. I get it. But you don't think it's a bit short sighted to put his last 3 games and 1 outlier season above the best of his career. The Bills ARE NOT the Eagles. They might not even be the Chiefs. If this dude was the cats meow, teams would be begging the Eagles to take their picks for Foles the FQB. 1st and 4th is nothing for a guy who will bring a team to greatness. Bbbuuutttt..... crickets. I promise, I don't mean this to be a jerk but you ARENT smarter than every GM in the league. There is a reason the guy has been passed around and almost retired. There is actual history of similar situations you can compare it to and each and every time it's  essentially fools gold. Luckily, the Bills (and every other qb needy team for that matter) realize they don't want to be said fool...

 

 

touch'e

[Alphadawg7]

15 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I think that thinking is backwards. That means you bow to the pressure and draft someone just because you need a starter.  What if, as I said, they don't like whats left after 10 picks?  What if all that's left doesn't look like a starter in year one?  

 

That ,ears they have to go with McCarron. Maybe they like him. I don't. If they don't like him, Foles is their option.

 

I mean, I don't know, but they're thinking about stuff like this at OBD. If theyre thinking about it, it could happen. 

 

But that doesn't make sense anymore after FA and trades have played out.  

 

Only Jets and Cleveland are expected to take a QB anymore.  Quite possible 3 of the top 5 still on the board after the top 10 pick. So if they aren't going to like them, then the only guys they would like are the ones expected to go in first 4 picks...so they would just trade up then.  

 

Giants not likely taking a QB and Broncos paid Keenum when they didn't have to if they were taking a QB at 5 as they already had 2 cheap bridge options at QB on the roster.  Them spending tight cap space on Keenum is not something Elway would have done if he planned to get a rookie IMO.   He did it to try and win now, and I think he's taking D, probably Fitzpatrick, at #5 to make another postseason push.  

 

So, there is no one else in the top 10 who will take a QB now for sure.  And Cardinals after signing 2 FA QB's are certainly not also going to trade up for a QB IMO.  So I just don't see how this would make sense and I definitely do not think they are looking at Foles.  They have AJ now for pennies...let him and a rookie battle, Beane isn't going to BOTH give a draft asset and more cap space to get Foles...a guy who has one good season on his resume in 6 years in the NFL, and that season was years ago.  Getting hot for 2 games doesn't erase your career performance.  

Edited March 18, 2018 by Alphadawg7

[BadLandsMeanie]

13 minutes ago, gobills1212 said:

I'd venture to guess it's most people's narrative or at least something similar. Then, there's a very small contingent that are STILL holding a candle for Foles. At every turn, and every opportunity, savior Foles is mentioned. If we were talking about a Brees type guy, fine. I get it. But you don't think it's a bit short sighted to put his last 3 games and 1 outlier season above the best of his career. The Bills ARE NOT the Eagles. They might not even be the Chiefs. If this dude was the cats meow, teams would be begging the Eagles to take their picks for Foles the FQB. 1st and 4th is nothing for a guy who will bring a team to greatness. Bbbuuutttt..... crickets. I promise, I don't mean this to be a jerk but you ARENT smarter than every GM in the league. There is a reason the guy has been passed around and almost retired. The Eagles had a GREAT team and he was in a GREAT situation with coaching, roster, game plan etc. He stayed within himself and didnt screw it up. He didnt make the Eagles but was a product of the Eagles.There is actual history of similar situations you can compare it to and each and every time it's  essentially fools gold. Luckily, the Bills (and every other qb needy team for that matter) realize they don't want to be said fool...

Your answer is vague. It doesn't address the specific points I made. And no, there really are not a lot of other similar circumstances. Highlighted by you didn't even mention a single one of the "history of similar circumstances". 

 

There are however, countless examples of a quarterback improving over time. They can become , better. That may have happened.

 

And you might want to take a moment and ask yourself, why I would have to even mention that to you as if it was a new concept.

 

Anyway you can think it is a stupid idea. I am not so sure and I think I am not so sure because I look at the evidence. It could work out to be a good idea. I don't know even if you think you do.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 18, 2018 by BadLandsMeanie

[Tuco]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

They don't have to extend his contract immediately and shouldn't.  They should let him play the year out and then decide.

I agree, but only if the price tag is low enough. If it's a matter of giving their current stated asking price of a 1st and a 4th minimum this year, then I disagree. I can't see giving up that much for a player who could either walk away or force the franchise tag after only one season.

[Adam]

12 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

But that doesn't make sense anymore after FA and trades have played out.  

 

Only Jets and Cleveland are expected to take a QB anymore.  Quite possible 3 of the top 5 still on the board after the top 10 pick. So if they aren't going to like them, then the only guys they would like are the ones expected to go in first 4 picks...so they would just trade up then.  

 

Giants not likely taking a QB and Broncos paid Keenum when they didn't have to if they were taking a QB at 5 as they already had 2 cheap bridge options at QB on the roster.  Them spending tight cap space on Keenum is not something Elway would have done if he planned to get a rookie IMO.   He did it to try and win now, and I think he's taking D, probably Fitzpatrick, at #5 to make another postseason push.  

 

So, there is no one else in the top 10 who will take a QB now for sure.  And Cardinals after signing 2 FA QB's are certainly not also going to trade up for a QB IMO.  So I just don't see how this would make sense and I definitely do not think they are looking at Foles.  They have AJ now for pennies...let him and a rookie battle, Beane isn't going to BOTH give a draft asset and more cap space to get Foles...a guy who has one good season on his resume in 6 years in the NFL, and that season was years ago.  Getting hot for 2 games doesn't erase your career performance.  

I don't see why the Jets are so penciled in at taking a QB. With the distinct possibility of Darnold and Rosen going first and the dropoff of the other QB prospects, this alone raises a flag. And Mayfield's questionable character definitely drops him quite a bit.

 

Also, they invested in a very promising young QB in Bridgewater, in addition to resigning a veteran. I could see them going Nelson or Barkley unless one of the two top QBs fall to them

[Figster]

26 minutes ago, BadLandsMeanie said:

Your answer is vague. It doesn't address the specific points I made. And no, there really are not a lot of other similar circumstances. Highlighted by you didn't even mention a single one of the "history of similar circumstances". 

 

There are however, countless examples of a quarterback improving over time. They can become , better. That may have happened.

 

And you might want to take a moment and ask yourself, why I would have to even mention that to you as if it was a new concept.

 

Anyway you can think it is a stupid idea. I am not so sure and I think I am not so sure because I look at the evidence. It could work out to be a good idea. I don't know even if you think you do.

 

 

 

 

Phil Simms to Hostetler and I know I didn't spell that name correctly, which does suggest that particular Championship was more about coaching and total team effort much like the Eagles Championship.

 

I mean Nick Foles played a great game, don't get me wrong,but we've also watched Frank Reich lead Buffalo on the biggest comeback Bills fans have ever seen.

 

Reich was no Kelly, good coaching, good supporting cast, good system...

 

Edited March 18, 2018 by Figster

[Boca BIlls]

How much would that suck... New regime same leftovers of garbage QBs

[Adam]

27 minutes ago, Tuco said:

I agree, but only if the price tag is low enough. If it's a matter of giving their current stated asking price of a 1st and a 4th minimum this year, then I disagree. I can't see giving up that much for a player who could either walk away or force the franchise tag after only one season.

If we picked him up and he forced using the franchise tag, I'd be thrilled

[Doc]

1 hour ago, BadLandsMeanie said:

That is your narrative. 

 

And it isn't balanced as I see it.  I see it as Foles was clutch. See Tony Romo for a great QB who was not clutch. And Foles played very well against elite competition. 

And he won in the Super Bowl defeating the greatest dynasty we have had so far, lead by the greatest coach, and arguably the greatest QB.

 

And he did it in a shootout. Not by being a game manager.

 

And if the offense was so simplified, why couldn't Bellichick neutralize it?

 

And of he is just the product of the great team around him., how do we know Wentz is so special?

 

Yup.  If it was the coaches and team, they might as well go with a nobody like Sudfeld and trade Foles and Wentz for picks and cap relief.  And it's amazing how that "dumbed-down" offense was able to beat the Vikings and Cheaters/Belichick, on the road and in the biggest games of Foles' life. 

[dezertbill]

I get the whole "we finally need a franchise QB" argument.  

 

I've been on that bandwagon for years and this year's draft crop has my super excited.

 

But think about it for a sec.  All the draft ammunition we have to really take this team to the next level.

 

Imagine if all we had to do is trade our number 22 for a just-turned 29 year old QB who last year in the playoffs won a Super Bowl ring while pilling up 72.6 Comp %, 971 Pass Yards (323 avg), 6 TD's / 1 INT and a rating of 115.7 vs 3 playoff teams, two arguably the best in the league (Falcons, Vikings, And Patriots).  And that's not taking into consideration what we have in AJ McCarron.

 

It's not often that we can pull the previous year's SB Winning QB (vs NE no less) to be our QB for possibly 3-5 years.   That would leave us 5 picks in the top 100 that we would be able to retool our franchise and turn the corner into being a truly competitive playoff team year in and year out.

 

I'm on board with that.

 

 

 

[Another Fan]

They should go after Foles.  I mean is McCarron really that much if any a step up over Tyrod?  I know Tyrod wasn't the long term answer but ideally you'd like to strengthen the position. 

[gobills1212]

1 hour ago, BadLandsMeanie said:

Your answer is vague. It doesn't address the specific points I made. And no, there really are not a lot of other similar circumstances. Highlighted by you didn't even mention a single one of the "history of similar circumstances". 

 

There are however, countless examples of a quarterback improving over time. They can become , better. That may have happened.

 

And you might want to take a moment and ask yourself, why I would have to even mention that to you as if it was a new concept.

 

Anyway you can think it is a stupid idea. I am not so sure and I think I am not so sure because I look at the evidence. It could work out to be a good idea. I don't know even if you think you do.

 

 

 

 

Look, I appreciate the back and forth and I honestly don't mean to come across as rude or condesending in this case. I feel it's important I make that clear. BUT, if this were such a good idea, or sure fire way to get a franchise guy -again- why aren't qb needy teams begging the Eagles to take their picks? A 1st and a 4th is a pittance for a game breaker franchise maker hall of famer. Now, you didn't say that but before you point that out.. That's what we need. It's why people want to get to 2. It's why teams aren't lining up to meet the Eagles asking price. I didn't directly answer each of your questions 1 by 1, but I still answered them and rather matter of factly so. Foles had the best roster in the NFL, 2 up and coming potential qb gurus, solid coaching, a simple plan and didn't mess it up. When most qbs have a flash in the pan season it's because the circumstances are what that person needed to be successful. Prior to that, Foles had 1 such year and then when taken away from it - he faltered. The goods ones don't. Sure they can be assisted by it, but they are good year in and year out. Oc to Oc. Staff to staff. Before the nfcc and super bowl he was simply asked to and preformed as a game manager. He played like his hair was on fire those last 2 games and again, it was fun to watch. I know I'm not smarter than all the other GMs. So, it's very telling when no one is jumping at the chance to hitch their wagon to a guy for a small price for a fqb. Maybe he could provide some stability in a tyrod sense. Not how he plays the game per se, but the roll that the qb plays in the offense.  McCarron could also provide that. We already have that. Foles isn't the answer any more than AJ is potentially. 

And are you really going to make me list 1 yr wonder flash in the pans who teams tried molding into a fqb and it fell apart? I hope not... but if u do

#1 on that list? None other than Nick Foles himself...

   

35 minutes ago, Another Fan said:

They should go after Foles.  I mean is McCarron really that much if any a step up over Tyrod?  I know Tyrod wasn't the long term answer but ideally you'd like to strengthen the position. 

Is foles?

[OldTimer1960]

Foles had several opps to prove that he can be a good starter in the NFL and he did not prove that.  Could he have figured it out and be a tru “franchise “ QB?  Yes, but odds are way against that...

[transplantbillsfan]

Doubt it.

 

most important offseason in maybe 35 years. Anything short of finding our QB for the next 10-15 years is a failure with all the jockeying in the draft Beane has done in the last year. Even Beane’s public comments were more liberal about trading up in the draft in his PC the other day.

 

Somewhere in the top 12 we’ll draft a QB. My Dad and I just bet lunch on it today. That’ll be a good meal

[Tcali]

4 hours ago, billsfan11 said:

One good year, 5 years ago?...

 

Hasn't started in 3 years

he only played four yrs. his rookie yr was fine. his 2 BAD yrs were with crap teams. I always liked the guy. He was a star in his 2nd yr in the league. And he came in and finished up last season and roared thru it both regular season and playoffs as a star. He is already ahead of what eli accomplished

2 hours ago, BadLandsMeanie said:

That is your narrative. 

 

And it isn't balanced as I see it.  I see it as Foles was clutch. See Tony Romo for a great QB who was not clutch. And Foles played very well against elite competition. 

And he won in the Super Bowl defeating the greatest dynasty we have had so far, lead by the greatest coach, and arguably the greatest QB.

 

And he did it in a shootout. Not by being a game manager.

 

And if the offense was so simplified, why couldn't Bellichick neutralize it?

 

And of he is just the product of the great team around him., how do we know Wentz is so special?

 

 

 

 

 

right on

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Maybe.

 

 

[BillsFan130]

19 minutes ago, Tcali said:

he only played four yrs. his rookie yr was fine. his 2 BAD yrs were with crap teams. I always liked the guy. He was a star in his 2nd yr in the league. And he came in and finished up last season and roared thru it both regular season and playoffs as a star. He is already ahead of what eli accomplished

Foles has been in the league for 6 years and only has 39 career starts in those 6 seasons. ( 4 or 5 of them were because the starter was hurt as well)

 

He had 1 good year which was 5 years ago, and even then he only played 13 games.

 

If you like him, that’s fair enough and that’s your opinion.

 

But he hasn’t proved that he is consistent successful starter in the NFL yet. That part is a fact.

[Doc]

4 minutes ago, billsfan11 said:

Foles has been in the league for 6 years and only has 39 career starts in those 6 seasons. ( 4 or 5 of them were because the starter was hurt as well)

 

He had 1 good year which was 5 years ago, and even then he only played 13 games.

 

If you like him, that’s fair enough and that’s your opinion.

 

But he hasn’t proved that he is consistent successful starter in the NFL yet. That part is a fact.

 

And...the rookies have?  And you'd be spending far more to get one of them.

[BillsFan130]

Just now, Doc said:

 

And...the rookies have?  And you'd be spending far more to get one of them.

Oh no I wasn’t saying that if that was your argument .

 

But in saying that, I would rather draft a rookie than have Foles.

 

1. I don’t think Foles will ever play like he did in the playoffs again.

2. The rookie will be a lot cheaper in terms of salary 

3. Rookie will be a lot younger 

4. I would prefer a rookies upside/chances to be a consistent NFL starter compared to Foles who was a backup for the past 2.5 seasons and probably will be again next year . (Assuming the rookie is drafted in the top 5)

[gobills1212]

54 minutes ago, Tcali said:

he only played four yrs. his rookie yr was fine. his 2 BAD yrs were with crap teams. I always liked the guy. He was a star in his 2nd yr in the league. And he came in and finished up last season and roared thru it both regular season and playoffs as a star. He is already ahead of what eli accomplished

right on

Bad years on bad teams... I don't think we know where the Bills will shake out next year but their roster is closer to the Chiefs than Eagles. I respect you like the guy, but hope and pray you don't expect the Bills to turn into the Eagles if he were to come here...

27 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

And...the rookies have?  And you'd be spending far more to get one of them.

No, but there in lies the disconnect. 

One more time, a blue chipper could be the next Kelly for this team. Foles ceiling has essentially been established. If the rookie turns into 'the guy' 5 Foles couldn't equal him. I'd venture to guess many Foles guys liked Taylor. You essentially have that in AJ now. Safe. Ever wonder how the list of qbs on the dummy jersey in Cleveland got so long? Among other things, giving too many Nick Foles type guys the reigns. IF this FO LOVES a guy, I feel they've earned the right to go get him should they choose. Lord knows we've tried every other way to get a guy. Mid to low 1st, mid rd, late rd, other teams back ups, other teams cast offs, free agents who haven't gotten a chance.. but never going up and getting THEIR top rated guy in a qb strong year. At least you can't really be proven wrong, bc at the end of the day it's pretty safe to say the Foles ship has sailed.

Edited March 19, 2018 by gobills1212

[Tcali]

37 minutes ago, gobills1212 said:

Bad years on bad teams... I don't think we know where the Bills will shake out next year but their roster is closer to the Chiefs than Eagles. I respect you like the guy, but hope and pray you don't expect the Bills to turn into the Eagles if he were to come here...

No, but there in lies the disconnect. 

One more time, a blue chipper could be the next Kelly for this team. Foles ceiling has essentially been established. If the rookie turns into 'the guy' 5 Foles couldn't equal him. I'd venture to guess many Foles guys liked Taylor. You essentially have that in AJ now. Safe. Ever wonder how the list of qbs on the dummy jersey in Cleveland got so long? Among other things, giving too many Nick Foles type guys the reigns. IF this FO LOVES a guy, I feel they've earned the right to go get him should they choose. Lord knows we've tried every other way to get a guy. Mid to low 1st, mid rd, late rd, other teams back ups, other teams cast offs, free agents who haven't gotten a chance.. but never going up and getting THEIR top rated guy in a qb strong year. At least you can't really be proven wrong, bc at the end of the day it's pretty safe to say the Foles ship has sailed.

the eagles were 7-9 just a yr ago. they arent the 84 niners

[gobills1212]

5 minutes ago, Tcali said:

the eagles were 7-9 just a yr ago. they arent the 84 niners

A lot changes in a year, as we know. They became an elite team last year. It's a copy cat league and it sure seems like the Bills are taking steps to follow in their footsteps. Pointing this out does little besides make an argument against the point you are trying to make. Foles wasn't the one who set em up last year. He simply knocked em down. Not nothing, but not a building block either. In fact, the Eagles have the exact same predicament we are debating. Talented young rookie, or stick w their backup. They know who buttered their bread last year...

Edited March 19, 2018 by gobills1212

[Punt75]

19 hours ago, BuffaloRush said:

 

I think they are ok with AJ as starter, as long as there’s a rookie QB waiting to take over.  That’s why there’s no way the Bills don’t draft a 1st round QB.

 

 

 

gobills1212

• Rookie
•  
• 
• Members
• 74
• 269 posts

• Report post
•  

Posted 4 minutes ago

10 minutes ago, Punt75 said:

 

Tell SHAW66 this!!!!

Haha, ive tried. Those foles guys are a persistant bunch with hearts of gold who never give up or crumble under pressure. They'd prob say the same about Foles himself

[Doc]

24 minutes ago, billsfan11 said:

Oh no I wasn’t saying that if that was your argument .

 

But in saying that, I would rather draft a rookie than have Foles.

 

1. I don’t think Foles will ever play like he did in the playoffs again.

2. The rookie will be a lot cheaper in terms of salary 

3. Rookie will be a lot younger 

4. I would prefer a rookies upside/chances to be a consistent NFL starter compared to Foles who was a backup for the past 2.5 seasons and probably will be again next year . (Assuming the rookie is drafted in the top 5)

 

14 minutes ago, gobills1212 said:

One more time, a blue chipper could be the next Kelly for this team. Foles ceiling has essentially been established. If the rookie turns into 'the guy' 5 Foles couldn't equal him. I'd venture to guess many Foles guys liked Taylor. You essentially have that in AJ now. Safe. Ever wonder how the list of qbs on the dummy jersey in Cleveland got so long? Among other things, giving too many Nick Foles type guys the reigns. IF this FO LOVES a guy, I feel they've earned the right to go get him should they choose. Lord knows we've tried every other way to get a guy. Mid to low 1st, mid rd, late rd, other teams back ups, other teams cast offs, free agents who haven't gotten a chance.. but never going up and getting THEIR top rated guy in a qb strong year. At least you can't really be proven wrong, bc at the end of the day it's pretty safe to say the Foles ship has sailed.

 

We'll agree to disagree.  I've seen too many "blue chippers" fail, and that's without their teams having to trade tons of good draft picks away to get them. 

[formerlyofCtown]

19 hours ago, BuffaloRush said:

You

 

Doug Whaley is that you?  Because the author of that response has no idea how to build a team

Whaley just couldn't get along with others.  I can't wait for the guy that is evaluating our GMs draft success to get to Whaley.  This bored is gonna self destruct.  Wether some of the posters on this bored like it or realize it.  Last year's draft was Doug Whaley's.   Not to mention the free agents he signed.  He was a  QB away from building consistent contender. However with that being said I have faith in Beane and the others to make the right decision.  We have a strong group of football minds.  A lot of future GMs.

[BillsFan130]

33 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

 

We'll agree to disagree.  I've seen too many "blue chippers" fail, and that's without their teams having to trade tons of good draft picks away to get them. 

Yes sir we’ll have to on this one. And you’re definitely right about that a lot do fail, no argument there 

[gobills1212]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

 

We'll agree to disagree.  I've seen too many "blue chippers" fail, and that's without their teams having to trade tons of good draft picks away to get them. 

And doc you aren't wrong.... I've maintained I'm for a trade up at all costs if there is a guy they love. They have shown nothing but competence. They have earned the right imo to take their shot. If they are wrong, it could be their jobs. Personally I feel better about these 2 making a decision of that magnitude than any of the other bozos that have come through.  If they don't love a guy and just feel like they have to take a guy to take a guy... well that's where problems arise. I think we don't see eye to eye that Foles is the answer. You have him on a pedestal but I haven't heard what you think in regards to him being in the right situation and why if he is the guy, hasn't any one paid a 1 and 4 for their answer? He is there for the taking for any team that wants him. I maintain that Foles and AJ might be very close. I'd then get it if you wanted them to ride him and see how he shakes out. It's the Foles over everyone else part I don't understand.

[Tuco]

5 hours ago, Adam said:

If we picked him up and he forced using the franchise tag, I'd be thrilled

So would I. But what if he doesn't? What if he leads us to a non-stellar 8-8 season and still wants to be a free agent at the end of the year? Do we use the franchise tag at $23+ million? Or do we let him walk? In which case I sure hope we didn't give the stated asking price of a 1st and 4th.

Sure we could swing and miss with a rookie too. But even if we do we have him for at least 4 years at $3-$5 million to see where it goes. My whole point is if we're going to trade for Foles and let him play the year before we decide to re-sign him, he'd better come a lot cheaper than a 1st and 4th this year.

[keepthefaith]

It's awfully expensive pick-wise to move up to #2.  If you use the draft value chart (who the heck makes up those numbers anyway?) you're talking the 2 firsts and 2 seconds. You're giving up a lot of very good potential players for the opportunity to draft a QB that might turn out great and might not.  If you're the Bills' brass you better love the guy you can get at 2 compared to those available later in the round and he better pan out.