Top 5 Pick, Here We Come

Posted: December 23rd, 2012 | Author: | Filed under: Philadelphia Eagles | 72 Comments »

The Eagles lost 27-20 in very Eagle fashion, having driven to the 5-yard line, only to see the drive stall and the game end on an offensive penalty.  That’s not as sexy as the Jets losing on MNF on a bad shotgun snap that was kicked to the defense, but it is a solid effort to keep the fans highly entertained and frustrated all at once.

I come away from this game with mixed feelings.  Nick Foles was solid, but still made enough bad plays that I can’t be completely comfortable.  He was 32-48-345 with a TD, INT, and fumble.  He did have to deal with regular pressure and that was a factor.  He struggled on 3rd downs and in the Red Zone.  All of that said, if Evan Moore just catches the ball on 1st/GL…the game is tied at 27.

Nick is tough, both mentally and physically.  He is resilient.  That’s not enough at QB, but it is worth a lot.  Blaine Gabbert is an athletic QB with terrific physical skills, but he is the opposite of Nick with the intangibles.  All the ability in the world does you no good if you can’t sit in the pocket, take a beating, and then get right back into the same spot on the next play without it overwhelming you.

After the game Nick wasn’t offering up excuses and shouldered the blame for the mistakes he made.  Love to hear that.  He understands what playing QB means and isn’t afraid to put the target on himself.  I don’t know if Nick will pan out, but he does and says a lot of the right things.  If he can just improve on the field, we might have something.

Shady McCoy returned to action and was good.  His rushing numbers weren’t great, but he was excellent as a receiver and also got 1st downs at some key moments.  Before the game I wrote that I hoped the coaches would split the load between both backs.  My goal was 10 carries for Shady and Bryce Brown.  Oops.

Just as Lucy does to Charlie Brown, Marty fooled me with his talk during the week and moved the football at the last minute, which sent me flying into the air like a jackass.  All 3 RBs only totaled 18 carries and it was 13-4-1 (Shady-Brice-Dion).

Well Marty, you’ve only got one more game to fool me and then you’re headed out of town.  You might win the battle, but I’ll win the war.

The defense played a mixed game.  At times, they looked terrific.  Other times they were very accommodating to Skins runners and receivers, allowing plenty of room to the visiting players.

There is nothing compelling to say about the D or any one player.  Here’s the best I can do:

* Brandon Boykin was credited with a sack on a bizarre play that really featured a backward pass.  Cost the Skins 17 yards.

* Colt Anderson stopped the INT-less streak (since DET in Week 6) when he picked off a deflected pass.  Colt had some good moments in the game, but also missed a couple of tackles and showed his limitations as a starter.  He truly is meant for STs and being a backup.

* Fletcher Cox suffered a concussion and had to leave the game.

* Brandon Graham led the team with 6 solo tackles, but his highlight moment was knocking down a shovel pass.  I was hoping for a sack, big hit, or FF.

The key to the game was turnovers.  The Skins scored 10 points on takeaways (both led to short fields).  The Skins only had one scoring drive all day that was longer than 50 yards.  They were efficient on offense, but it helped that they had such good field position.  4 drives started at their own 40 or better.  The Eagles had just one such start.

Maybe this was another good outcome in the long run.  The Eagles played well enough to be in the game to the end, but lost and remained in the hunt for a Top 5 pick.  I think right now they stay at #4.

I do believe the Eagles have improved since the first Skins meeting (Foles first NFL start).  The team scored 20 or more points for the 4th time in 5 games.  Prior to this stretch, the team had scored 20 or more just 3 times all year.  The defense is making fewer errors.  There were some guys open today, but the Eagles looked to be playing lots of zone (to keep RG3 from getting loose as a runner).  The Eagles have 3 takeaways in the last 2 games.  In the previous 8 games, the defense also had 3 takeaways.

I don’t leave this game happy by any stretch, but there were some positive signs and I’m not overly angry.  It was disappointing to see the mistakes and crappy finish.  I hated the Skins running the ball so well in the 2nd half.  I do wonder what would have happened if Moore caught the slant.  Does Andy go for 2?  If so, does that work/fail?  Does the game go to OT? A win would have been bittersweet so like I said earlier, maybe this was the best outcome for the long term.

15 down, 1 to go.  2013 can’t get here fast enough.


72 Comments on “Top 5 Pick, Here We Come”

  1. 1 T_S_O_P said at 6:24 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    If only Marty could fool opposing D-coordinators so easy with his midweek double speak. Preparing for and then getting one guy must be so much easier to do. It isn’t just at RB either.

    And Merry Crimble to you to.

  2. 2 goeagles55 said at 6:24 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    …looks like the Eagles will have the opportunity to eliminate the Giants. It’s not the Super Bowl expectations we had in August, but it’s close….right?

  3. 3 bdbd20 said at 7:11 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    Speaking of the golden boys, 67-7 their last two games. I’m sure the media will still their jocks.

  4. 4 Colin said at 6:25 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    I know it’s a meaningless hypothetical at this point, but I’m curious as to what everyone thinks about going for two at the end of the game there- my brother and I were arguing about it during the last drive.

    I understand the “we have nothing to lose” mentality and liked Andy going for it on 4th down when he did, but to me gong for a two point conversion there wouldn’t have been the right call. Seems like you have a better chance of winning by just kicking the XP and going into OT than trying to convert a 2 pt. conversion (especially with our red zone offense). Agree? Disagree?

  5. 5 Baloophi said at 7:09 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    Did you guys discuss the decision to go for it on 4th down in the 3rd quarter? That seemed like a bad call at the time (and certainly now). I think Andy would’ve gone for it, though the right call would be to kick.

  6. 6 TommyLawlor said at 12:38 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    I won’t lie. I got caught up in the moment and wanted him to go for it.

  7. 7 Iskar36 said at 12:21 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    For the sake of full disclosure, let me start by saying I did not want the Eagles to win today, but I wanted them to play well. With that being said, I was definitely hoping for AR to go for it if they scored because if they lost, the players did enough for the comeback, but a fluke/weird play is what would have lost the game. Of course there was a chance they score as well, but to me, if I am actually hoping for the win, I think the right call is to kick the fg and then try to win it in overtime.

  8. 8 Mitchell said at 6:32 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    It seems as though Foles has leveled out in regards to playing level the past couple games. That being said does Foles still project to be a starting quarterback with another full off season and all the starters back? Not to mention a better offensive line.

  9. 9 Iskar36 said at 12:26 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    For me, I think Foles has played well enough that you do not reach for a qb in the draft or FA. That being said, I think if there is a guy worth taking, you don’t hesitate in taking him. Furthermore, if you don’t take someone, you need a legitimate veteran to be brought in to compete with Foles, even if you think Foles should start over the veteran. The competition will be important for Foles development in my opinion.

  10. 10 D-von said at 6:34 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    Why is everyone so hard on Foles. He’s done more with a banged up and pathetic o-line than Vick (or Kolb for that matter) has done with a healthy one. He’s progressed every game. He’s good decisions with what he has been given. The fumble was bad but the pick was off a tipped ball. One more can one ask for from a rookie? Could Luck, RG3 or Wilson operate with this mess of a line?

  11. 11 TommyLawlor said at 6:38 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    I like Nick, but we’ve got to be careful in judging him. Don’t want to give him too much credit or too much blame. Very tricky situation to decide just how good he is.

  12. 12 D-von said at 6:48 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    Not angry with you but with bloggers on other sites that say Foles has regressed or leveled-off. He has to make improvements on his mechanics, but I honestly some Eagles’ fans look at Luck, Griffin and Wilson and compare them to Foles and not take into account that their respective teams are better overall than the Eagles.

  13. 13 aub32 said at 7:23 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    I have to disagree. All three of these teams were worse than the Eagles last year. The Colts were the worst team in the NFL. Skins were the 6th worse. So to say these teams are so much better outside of their QB is a big stretch in my opinion.

  14. 14 D-von said at 7:53 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    Last year is last year. In 2010 the 49ers were pretty bad. Last year they were the second best team in the league. Additionally, You can’t tell me that the Eagles O-line, defense, and Special Teams is better than those three teams

  15. 15 aub32 said at 10:17 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    The skins D is worse than ours. I would take our skill players, collectively, over any of the three teams mentioned. Also, I am not judging Foles based on defensive production or STs, as he does not play there. However, all three of those offenses are performing at a much higher level despite having similar talent at the skill positions, collectively. Also, before going O-line, O-line, O-line, both the Skins and Colts have had major losses upfront.

  16. 16 D-von said at 2:25 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    First skins defense has played better than the eagles. Second, you say each of those three teams have major loses at the o-line but was it as bad as the Eagles losing Peters, Kelce, Herremans and Danny Watkins being a complete bust. Winston Justice has played lights out for the colts and they got him for nothing. Eagles have talent but you can’t sit there and tell me those are worse than the Eagles.Even before Foles took over, the Eagles were in a 4 game losing streak. Clearly your just a Vick fan, which is fine but don’t confuse that with being an Eagle fan

  17. 17 aub32 said at 5:56 PM on December 24th, 2012:

    The skins passing D was and I believe still is worse than the Eagles based on the numbers. Second the skins were projected to have a terrible O line (worst in the division before the season started). I also do not ignore we were losing prior to Foles. I was comparing this team, minus the QB to the others. This team has more talent collectively. I never even brought Vick into this argument. I do think he is better than Foles, right now. However, I would prefer Luck, Wilson, or RGIII over Vick or Foles, and believe they would do better on this Eagles team than either Vick or Foles has done.

  18. 18 RIP Worms said at 9:20 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    What major loss did the Redskins have on their O-line? In yesterday’s broadcast they mentioned the Skins were missing one starter on the line and it was the first game all year that they did not have the same five guys starting.

  19. 19 austinfan said at 6:27 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    Not sure it’s about the talent being better, Foles may have the worst OL but even with DeSesan out and Celek and McCoy dinged, the best skill players.

    However, Foles didn’t get a lot of time with the #1s in preseason, even with Vick out, he played mostly with #2s in exhibition games, then was running the practice squad for two months. So those other QBs had more time to prepare before they became starters, and they initially struggled:

    first 6 games:

    Luck: 134 250 1674 53.2% 6.70 7-7

    Wilson 95 152 1108 62.5% 7.29 8-6
    (note, his 7th game was his worst of the season)

    RGIII: 113 161 1343 70.2% 8.34 5-2

    While Wilson and RGIII have had good starts, they’re also in systems where they are protected, a lot of play action passes and not a lot of games where they had to sit in the pocket and face a big pass rush.

  20. 20 Matthew Verhoog said at 6:39 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    What more could we ask? Not much, just a perfect passer rating, winning every game, playing defense, giving our kickoff’s a boast, curing cancer, making the world a more beautiful place, middle east peace, bringing the Mayans back from the dead so we can ask them what the heck is wrong with there calendar.

  21. 21 jshort said at 7:16 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    Like to see what Foles could do behind a good OL. At least out luck is starting to change, the turnovers weren’t being returned for TD’s. Watching the Giants game makes me think Eli’s regressed, there whole team for that matter.

  22. 22 aub32 said at 7:28 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    I get annoyed when people say he’s doing better than Vick. Vick had a completely different game plan which Marty himself acknowledged. He had more mistakes than just the fumble, and this is another week where he underthrew a wide open receiver that was barely beyond 15 yds if that. He has not progressed with each game, and I believe if you were to ignore his preseason performance and only focus on his regular season play, he will not appear in near as good a light.

  23. 23 D-von said at 7:56 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    Vick hasn’t played well since 2010. Of course it wasn’t all his fault that the eagles sucked this year. But you are kidding yourself if you think Vick has played better than Foles this year. Vick had no pocket awareness and would throw to WRs late.

  24. 24 aub32 said at 10:12 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    If we are saying Foles played well enough to win this game, then Vick played well enough to win plenty of games last season before the D blew the leads he built. Also, this year he put the team in position to win against both the Lions and Steelers. Foles is throwing to WRs late as well, and he is operating in a much easier offense. It’s very difficult in my opinion to not include that fact. However, if you want to compare, then Vick put the team “in position” to win 5 games and won 3. Foles has put the team “in position” to win 1 and tie another. Vick is definitely a better QB than Foles is right now.

  25. 25 Ty-Philly said at 8:36 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    You are aware in all but one of his starts Foles has thrown 33 or more times. Over 40, 3 times, and over 50 once. And that’s not including the game where he threw 32 times in < 3 quarters.

    Take today for example. 48 passes 22 rushes. That is textbook Andy and Marty.

  26. 26 austinfan said at 6:16 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    Foles is a work in progress, people have ridiculous expectations of young QBs, the fact that he’s improved is the most important thing to note, yes, he needs a lot of work on mechanics, and he’s learning about the speed of the game (the fumble was a typical rookie mistake, few college players are that fast in pursuit, but in the NFL, a slow QB has to have a clock that says “throw it away” in that situation). However, he’s cool in the pocket, he feels pressure and knows how to slide away from it while keeping his eyes down field. His upside will probably depend on whether he can speed up his release and improve his long ball, but the TD to Maclin was a nice throw, and you really don’t have to throw it much deeper than that to be effective.

    last 4 starts:

    102 156 1157 65.3% 7.4 5-2 ~88 QBR

    He’s showing improvement, play like that for a full season and people would be calling him a franchise QB.

  27. 27 Baloophi said at 7:11 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    So we have the 4th pick as of now. Hard to believe there are 3 teams that are worse than us.

  28. 28 Colin Emo said at 7:12 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    I think we also have to take into consideration that a new Coach and OC will be coming into the picture. I think you can see a much better Nick Foles moving forward with a coaching staff that actually runs a balanced system and not ask Nick Foles to drop back 50 times a game.

  29. 29 TommyLawlor said at 12:30 AM on December 24th, 2012:


  30. 30 Brian Bona said at 1:08 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    Its a two way street though. No QB has ever left Andy’s control and done anything other than get worse.

  31. 31 aub32 said at 4:51 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    I don’t care if he only drops back 20. If he doesn’t fix his passing beyond 15 yards, he shouldn’t be the starter going forward.

  32. 32 Mitchell said at 7:20 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    I like Foles as well. I think he has done great given the circumstances. Like I said would love to see with full off season of mechanics and first team reps

  33. 33 SteveH said at 7:34 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    I like where Nick is at. He’s only on his what, 5th or 6th start now? And he’s improving week to week, which is nice. He definitely has intangibles, has a good feel for situations and the game. I think there is a good base to work with, which is really all you can hope for heading into 2013.

  34. 34 aub32 said at 7:39 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    I will admit I honestly wanted to lose this game. Not for draft position, but I really want the giants at home on the couch after all the eli/elite stuff. However, given the circumstances I wanted to see Foles pull this one out. These are the moments that define QBs and Foles not being able to pull this one out does mean something in my opinion. Tommy you pointed out how Moore dropped that pass but neglected to mention how Foles missed a wide open Maclin on a relatively easy throw. Foles has yet to show that he is the best option going forward, and this game is support of this. I hope this offseason the Eagles provide a legit QB option to challenge Foles and possibly take the position if he out performs Foles. Foles is not Manning or someone who was seen with tremendous upside. He was a 3rd round pick and does not deserve to be the unquestioned starter in 2013 based on the investment put into him, his play on the field, and his initial projected ceiling.

  35. 35 jshort said at 7:58 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    Moore should have caught the ball TD!!, missed opportunities come back to bite, and we’ve had our share. Then Henry misses PAT. Perfect, we’re all happy.

  36. 36 aub32 said at 10:04 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Fole miss the pass prior to Moore dropping the pass. So if Foles completes the pass, then Moore never drops the pass. Not to mention the degree of difficulty on the catch was much higher than the throw to Maclin. He has prove nothing but he should be able to compete for the postion, but in no way has he earned the position for next year.

  37. 37 phillychuck said at 8:34 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    Not happy if you bet against the Eagles in your scenario…

  38. 38 sew737 said at 9:32 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    projections…Tom Brady was a 6th round pick what was his projected ceiling?

  39. 39 aub32 said at 10:00 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    So every late round pick is Tom Brady? O then we are definitely set for the next decade.Stop it.

  40. 40 A_T_G said at 12:38 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    Your right. We should bring in JaMarcus Russell and Ryan Leaf to compete with him next spring, players with draft day bling.

  41. 41 aub32 said at 4:49 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    Why must everyone go to such extreme to protect Foles. If anyone criticizes him fans bring up Peyton, McNabb, Aikman, and the list goes on and on. If you suggest drafting competition for him, now the only this available is Jamarcus Russell and Time Couch. Why is it so difficult to say he hasn’t done enough. He has not been “great for a rookie”. Cam, Dalton, Rothlesburger, RGIII, Luck, Ryan, and Wilson these guys were great as rookie and showed enough that they need not be questioned going forward. Foles has not shown that. Aikman after being drafted in the 1st round had to compete against a supplemental draft pick who was also chosen with a 1st round pick. What has Foles done to show he deserves any different?

  42. 42 Daz said at 8:17 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    Aub32 – not trying to goad you here, but you do seem to be hating on Foles pretty consistently. I’m in Aus and have seen 2 eagles games this year (sucks to be an nfl fan here!) so I can’t comment except for reading what you all think here in the eagles blogosphere. And the general consensus is hands down that Foles has shown enough to earn the gig next year.

    It seems to me that we’re weighing up: A) the risk of rolling with Foles as the starter next year – who has shown a pretty grounded personality and what most are calling success behind our patch-work O-line… with his acknowledged shoddy footwork and relative lack of anything resembling accuracy on the deep ball vs B) the risk of going after smith or barkly in a widely acknowledged weaker draft class – and at the expense of using that mighty high draft pick elsewhere…

    My question to you, Aub32, is: if you don’t want Foles as the starter (and you’ve thrown up your reasons why – no need to repost them)… What’s the right move to make at QB for next season and beyond? From my distant vantage point, it seems that Foles + a high draft pick spent on the O-line or secondary far outweighs the risk of barkly/smith + no high draft pick on the line?

    PS – it’s Christmas here already, so Merry Christmas to you all! Be safe and have fun 🙂

  43. 43 aub32 said at 5:46 PM on December 24th, 2012:

    Sorry to hear you can’t get the games. Have you tried Also, I don’t know how much it is but I know makes the games available live. My buddy in the UK is one of the biggest Eagles fan I know, we watch them together via skype and he uses

    In regards to your question on Foles, I really don’t know what he has shown to prove he has earned the job. He has earned a chance, but that’s about it. I would much rather see us keep Vick or bring in another FA or take the risk on Smith/Barkley. Seattle brought in the best looking FA option on the market (excluding Peyton) and had Wilson compete with him. Wilson won the job. Shanny was not completely sold on RGIII (per NFL sources) and picked up Cousins. Had RGIII stunk it up early I do believe Shanny would’ve went with Cousins. I don’t see how Foles has earned more than either Flynn or RGIII, and why he shouldn’t have to compete for the job.

    I don’t hate Foles. I just can’t stand fans saying he’s played great for a rookie and will undoubtedly get better. If Foles is great, what in the world do you use to classify RGIII, Luck, and Wilson. Also, he may progress but how much. Is it really that wrong to want to bring in someone else who may be better right now while Foles develops? I am not saying that if he doesn’t start next year (due to losing out against someone) that he is destined to live out his days in football mediocrity.

  44. 44 A_T_G said at 8:34 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    My comment was in response to 3rd round pick, the investment that represents, and his initial ceiling projections being a large part of your rationale. It just doesn’t matter any more what pick was used. Boykin isn’t good for a forth rounder, he is good. Likewise, I get the impression that if Foles was our first round pick you would be more willing to allow him time to develop.

    By the way, wasn’t the Time Couch in one of those teenage stoner movies? “Dude, I just flopped onto the couch and suddenly I was, like, back in Miss Mostlytits class, and Principal Comboverson was feeling her up. Yuck. Dude, it is like a magic time couch.”

  45. 45 aub32 said at 5:29 PM on December 24th, 2012:

    You are right. I would. Foles being such a low invetment means that there is more to invest on competition. (See the seattle situation) If Foles was brought in as the 1st round pick then I would know that the coaching staff, who undoubtedly knows more than I do, saw something that projected him as a franchise/ starter in this league. However, right now how do I know he is not an overachieving mediocre QB who performed well against some really bad competition (preseason and the bucs) He has not shown enough to be the unquestioned starter and there is so little invested that there’s much more to be spent bringing in another viable option to compete against him.

  46. 46 quest4fire said at 7:56 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    Foles reminds me alot like Joe Flacco. Same skill set. We can use Foles like the Ravens use Flacco. We have the RBs and will have healthy OL. All we are missing is good defense, our secondary needs a complete overhaul.

  47. 47 bill said at 8:07 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    Hmmm – would like to see someone do the hard work (’cause I’m lazy) and get the numbers on how many times in the history of the league a rookie qb has had the number of attempts that Nick has had in his first few starts. I’m guessing Nick is #1 by a long shot. Most OCs are smart enough to realize that you maximize mistakes by making a rookie heave it up like that, and you don’t want to kill their confidence. Especially behind Div 1AA backup line. That has to figure into the Foles evaluation at some point – he’s succeeding DESPITE his coaching. He still has some very big flaws that he must correct if he is to be more than a backup in this league, but they are correctable. Given the lack of quality in this year’s QB class, I’m comfortable with rolling the dice on Nick next year; of course, that’s totally dependent on what the new head coach wants his offense to look like.

  48. 48 goeagles55 said at 12:04 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    According to pro-football-reference (and as long as I didn’t mess up the multiple searches), these are the top 3 QBs by Pass Attempts in their first 6 starts:

    1. Andrew Luck 2012 – 250
    2. Sam Bradford 2010 – 234
    3. Nick Foles 2012 – 233

  49. 49 deg0ey said at 6:05 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    That’s quite interesting when you consider that the first two guys were #1 picks and had a full offseason as the starter. Hopefully we get a more balanced offense under the new guy so that Nick doesn’t have to throw 40 passes a game.

  50. 50 TommyLawlor said at 12:30 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    We’ll look at Foles from every angle when the season is over. Goal is to get the most accurate answer. There will be no agenda to help/hurt him.

  51. 51 CalSFro said at 8:21 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    I know people are upset at the loss. And I know everyone needs to speak with a certain amount of caution and no one wants to overstate the positives at this point because it’s certainly possible that he’ll fall flat on his face eventually…but , in my opinion, Foles looked better than solid. He looked good. He looked really good.

    Granted, he had an INT on a ball that was deflected at the line of scrimmage and went directly to London Fletcher. Other than that he was battling and making tough throws, ending up with almost 350 yards passing. The fumble was a bad point, but he’s a young guy trying to make a play…if he threw an INT with all kinds of time that’d be a problem. Or if he fumbled without moving up and out of the pocket, that would also be a problem. But on that one I think you just have to give Ryan Kerrigan credit.

    Otherwise, Foles gave the Eagles every chance to win that game. He was sloppy at times, and he made mistakes. He’s a rookie. That’s to be expected. But even with that caveat he overcame bad blocking, a mediocre run game and lots of pressure to put up legit numbers and still have the team in it at the end.

    I’m not saying he should be the unquestioned number one going into next year. But looking past the anger of this loss…he looked damn good. And I think the All-22 will reflect that.

  52. 52 A_T_G said at 9:19 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    To build on that, is there anyone who thinks Foles won’t take full advantage of the off season to improve? I am excited about his potential as well.

  53. 53 TommyLawlor said at 12:37 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    We’ll go over the game and discuss the good and the bad.

  54. 54 mlopy said at 9:14 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    Any interest in Kirk Ferentz as HC after Andy?

    Ferentz might be the right guy to help solidify our o-line, and now
    that his son has graduated the NFL is more of a possibility.

  55. 55 D-von said at 9:16 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    Jason La Canfora is reporting will be the one of the first teams to interview Chip Kelly. So if he’s correct the eagles are highly interested in Chip

  56. 56 TommyLawlor said at 12:34 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    This is interesting. I’m sure they’re curious about Kelly at the very least.

  57. 57 TommyLawlor said at 12:34 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    Kirk is barely hanging onto his job at Iowa. No chance at NFL job as HC.

  58. 58 Thomas said at 10:59 PM on December 23rd, 2012:

    What’s your opinion of Seattle’s DB coach, Kris Richard?

  59. 59 TommyLawlor said at 12:33 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    Don’t have a strong opinion. He’s done a good job at a casual glance.

  60. 60 Anders said at 7:01 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    If we do get a defensive minded HC, I wouldnt mind him as my DC, but because he hasnt really coached for that long (3 years only), I wouldnt want him as a DC under an offensive minded HC.

  61. 61 phillychuck said at 12:06 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    I find it difficult to read some of the comments here–why would anyone be SURE Foles is NOT the answer at this point? Just plain cussedness? He’s played exceptionally well for a rookie behind a really bad offensive line, and he played the whole second half this week with a bad hand/wrist on his throwing arm. Yet I read people saying he’s shown himself to be nothing more than a career back-up. I don’t think he deserves to be handed the job, and if Chip Kelly is brought in you won’t have to worry since he’ll need a QB that can run a few times a game, but Foles is better than the starting QBs on quite a few teams already. I’m optimistic about him.

    He has two specific flaws right now–footwork and throwing the deep ball. Both can be improved.

    And i wonder what he’d be like if we had a few o-linemen to protect him and set up a running game?

  62. 62 dawkinsfan said at 12:10 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    AGREED. Like that we posted at the same time. I think the O-line and secondary are the most important positions to upgrade or replenish this offseason. Every other spot has shown potential and talent this year.

  63. 63 TommyLawlor said at 12:32 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    I think some people are nervous after seeing Bobby Hoying, AJ Feeley, and Kevin Kolb not pan out as expected. That has amped up the skepticism.

  64. 64 deg0ey said at 6:38 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    With a relatively weak QB class this season, if you’re in desperate need of a QB and drafting outside the top-10 *cough*Jets*cough* what would you give up for Foles based on what he’s shown so far?

    Trading Andy’s QBs has worked out pretty well for us in the past. In a scenario where the Raiders beat the Chargers next week and we end up with the #3 pick, would it be worth grabbing the Jets #11 for Foles and then drafting whichever of Smith or Barkley the Chiefs leave for us?

  65. 65 phillychuck said at 8:30 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    If Chip Kelly is coming to town, do you want the #11 and Tebow? 🙂

    I’d rather keep Foles myself. I think either rookie is going to take at least 2 years to develop in the NFL, and you actually set yourself back if you trade Foles right now.

  66. 66 Tom McAllister said at 8:50 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    It’s not even just those guys that fuel the skepticism, but the dozens of other young QBs around the league who have made some good plays but ultimately been failures as starters. It’s much more likely that a QB like Foles turns out to be a failure than it is that he turns out to be the answer.

    That doesn’t mean he WILL fail, but I think it’s reasonable to be skeptical.

  67. 67 dawkinsfan said at 12:09 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    I feel comfortable letting Foles go into next year with a legitimate backup or added draft pick as a fallback plan. This guy is a rookie with more stones than a good amount of the players in the NFL. He also has some of the raw physical talent that can be ironed out to fit the NFL better with more time. I say we focus on the run game and let Foles play next year, until he proves incompetent.

    Wrote an article breaking down Foles and his deep ball ability.

  68. 68 Eagles_Fan_in_San_Fran said at 1:19 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    So much negativity on Foles…did he switch his number to 5 or what?

  69. 69 A_T_G said at 8:12 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    No, he just moved from Philly’s darling to Philly’s bane on the depth chart, QB2 to QB1.

  70. 70 RIP Worms said at 9:10 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    Perhaps next year’s HC should name Foles the backup QB and just find creative ways to name him the starter each week. Win-win (assuming we actually, you know, win).

  71. 71 Davesbeard said at 6:31 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    This might be too far down the post but what do you make of Maclins re-emergence under Foles?

    He’s caught 29 passes for over 300 yards and two TDs with chances for more when playing with Foles. He never seemed to be this consistently open playing for Vick and seemed to get most of his yards on crossing routes. Was Vick just missing him?

    Admittedly I think even Andy Reid would look more dangerous in the open field than Maclin but he’s playing pretty solid football.

  72. 72 mfgdog said at 9:16 AM on December 24th, 2012:

    Great stuff, Tommy. Love the podcast. I find myself insanely jealous of the Skins, since they stepped it up and snagged a star QB. He is so accurate and game-savvy. Foles is solid for a rookie, but is simply not clutch. What a difference a QB makes! Remember, the skins were set to pick #4 last year before trading up. That’s what RG III has to work with, and he’s got them in position to win the division at home next Sunday.