The Future at QB

Posted: November 26th, 2013 | Author: | Filed under: Philadelphia Eagles | 128 Comments »

Chip Kelly made it official today – Nick Foles is the starting QB for the rest of the season. We all knew it was true, but Kelly had to make it public and official. Nick earned the job so kudos to him.

I think Foles has played well enough to be the front-runner heading into 2014, but he will need to play well the final 5 weeks to truly secure the spot for the long term. The point of this is that Chip Kelly needs to find his QB. He needs a player he can build around. That isn’t a choice to be made lightly. If a coach picks the wrong guy, he’s likely to lose his job and the franchise can waste several years.

The Eagles are 6-5 right now. I’m willing to bet they will win at least one more game (hopefully several more). That means the team will likely be picking in the 11 to 16 range at the earliest (they’re 20th for now). Will there be QBs worth taking in that area? Would the team spend a 1st round pick on a QB?

There really are a lot of moving parts to this situation.

Foles controls his part of the equation. If he plays well, Kelly is going to become more sold that Nick is the guy for him and the Eagles. If he plays okay, that means that Kelly may still consider trying to upgrade if possible. If Foles has a stinker or two, Kelly may think QB is a position that needs to be addressed.

The part that no one controls is the market. Kelly can want an upgrade, but the right players have to be available. Kelly would have loved to land a stud QB last April, but that guy wasn’t in the draft so the Eagles spent their first pick on Lane Johnson. The Eagles have played their way out of the sweepstakes for guys like Teddy Bridgewater and Marcus Mariota.

There could be QBs that go in the mid-1st round. Derek Carr from Fresno State is a really intriguing player that I think would be an excellent fit for Kelly’s offense. Carr might have the best arm of any QB in the draft. He is a solid athlete and leads an up-tempo attack. He’s had such a strong Senior year that Carr might have played his way into the Top 10.

Johnny Football is a guy that is really tough to get a read on. It won’t shock me if he goes Top 10, but also won’t shock me if he slips further than some expect. He’s an erratic player and has serious maturity issues. Would Chip Kelly want him? Most people say yes, that’s the perfect guy for the system. I’m not so sure. I know Kelly recruited Manziel, but the guy is different now. Kelly wants plays to be run a certain way. Some improvisation is good, but Manziel might do too much of that. Manziel definitely throws more INTs than Kelly wants. And remember that Kelly raved about the Combine interview with Matt Barkley. I don’t know if Manziel is going to have the same affect on NFL teams when they meet him. If you haven’t read this great piece by Wright Thompson, do it now.

There could be other guys to consider in the mid-to-late 1st round. I’m not going through everyone at this point. Let’s see who declares and who finishes the season well.ย Kelly and the Eagles could spend a 2nd or 3rd round pick on a QB, but they would have to ask if that guy is genuinely better than Foles. You don’t want change for the sake of change. The Eagles would need to find someone who would be an upgrade. That gets tough outside the 1st round.

The other X-factor in all of this is Matt Barkley. He’s had a rough rookie season, but he’s also not played in ideal circumstances. Barkley saw most of his action in 2 games. He entered both with the team struggling and losing by 10 points. That put a lot of pressure on him. The coaches know what Barkley is doing every day in the classroom and on the practice field. That is more important than how he played in some tough losses.

The coaches have to ask 2 questions. First, can Barkley challenge for the starting role in 2014? Second, is he good enough to be the primary backup? Kelly always says you need at least 2 good QBs to win in the NFL. The coaches will have to be confident that Barkley could start and play well if called upon. Trying to upgrade on Barkley should be easier than Foles, but remember that the Eagles did have a 2nd round grade on Barkley. They’re not just going to grab some guy in the 3rd round. It would have to be a player the Eagles truly felt was better.

Would the Eagles want another rookie to pair with Foles and Barkley? Would they prefer a veteran to come in and help the young guys? Chip Kelly never had decisions like this at Oregon so we really don’t know what he’ll do.

With Pat Shurmur and Bill Lazor around, I’d almost like to see them go young. At that point, I’d go for an athletic QB toward the bottom of the draft. Lazor and Shurmur are veteran coaches that have worked with a lot of young QBs. They could serve the same purpose as a veteran QB. And depending on which skill players the Eagles keep around, those guys could also help with the young QBs.

More than a few fans are fascinated by Logan Thomas from Virginia Tech. I have no interest, unless the Eagles convert him to a TE or OLB. Thomas isn’t a consistently good college player. I just don’t trust guys like that to go to the NFL and suddenly learn how to play QB. ย I’d rather have someone like Jordan Lynch from Northern Illinois or Devin Gardner from Michigan. Each player has some issues, but they’ve also done some really impressive things in college. Thomas played his best as a Sophomore. Guys like that scare the heck out of me.

Should the Eagles decide to go for a veteran, I have no idea who they might target. Some have brought up the idea of Mike Vick sticking around. I think that would be a bad idea. Mike has said and done all the right things for 2 years, but he still wants to play. I think he’ll want to go somewhere that he can compete for the starting job with a feeling that he’s got a good chance to get it. I’d love to see Vick go to the Raiders. I think he’d look good in Silver and Black and would make those games fun to watch. Plus, he could help mentor Terrelle Pryor.

Hopefully Foles will finish well and the Eagles can put aside any worries about 1st round QBs. They can figure out how they want to go about finding someone else to be a backup. Figuring out the backup situation is the QB problem you want to have.

* * * * *

Since Jimmy Bama and I haven’t been able to do a show recently, I did a podcast with Chuck and Todd from Eagles Fancast. We talked about how the Eagles season has gone to this point and what is going to happen from here.

I think I raised the most relevant point. Will the Eagles sit their starters in the NFC Championship game so that the guys are well rested for the Super Bowl? That’s what I call some serious football analysis.


128 Comments on “The Future at QB”

  1. 1 mksp said at 5:21 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    2014 will pretty much come down to these next 5 games. If Foles keeps this up, I don’t know how you spend *any* resources on the QB position next year. If he flails, maybe a 1st round talent like Derek Carr makes sense.

    Sunday will be big. Its a huge game. AZ is playing well and has a big time defense. Foles was just named starter, and we’re making a push for the playoffs. Pressure’s on, how does Nick respond?

  2. 2 eagleyankfan said at 8:42 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    meh. “If Foles keeps this up”? Keeps what up? Playing amazing? Can we ask any QB to keep up the pace that Foles is on? That’s unfair to expect Foles to continue the numbers he’s putting up. Would be great if he did(and maybe he can) but man, that’s asking a lot.

  3. 3 Sean said at 5:24 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    For later guys, how about Keith Price?

  4. 4 TommyLawlor said at 5:29 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    He could definitely be of interest.

  5. 5 brza said at 7:12 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    I really like Price as a prospect too. I wonder why he is so under the radar this season. Every time I see him play he impresses me, even more than Hundley who is much more up and down to be honest.

    Price didn’t live up to expectations last season after a great sophomore year but he’s really bounced back this season and is right in line with his sophomore numbers. He’s very accurate on the short to intermediate routes, especially in getting receivers the ball in position to move upfield on screens and flares. He has good arm strength. And most importantly he plays well when pressured by the defense, he’s had a lot of experience in that department.

    I think Hundley has more upside and may be better than Price in a year or two but right now I think Price is better mainly because he’s calm under pressure where Hundley gets a bit skittish.

    I’ll be interested to see where Price is projected to go after the Senior Bowl and Combine. He is only listed at 6-1 though which could be a backbreaker for his draft stock. If he’s available in the mid-rounds I think he’d be an interesting pick.

    Hopefully, Foles continues to perform well so this all turns out to be a moot point anyway. If not we can always set our hopes on Randall Jr. in 2016.

  6. 6 Sean said at 4:55 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Price played really well against Stanford, and their defense went on to make Hundley and Mariota both look pretty bad

  7. 7 ICDogg said at 5:41 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    What do you think of Braxton Miller?

  8. 8 nickross23 said at 7:41 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    Love Braxton Miller as a late rd guy around rd 4 who you can bring along slowly. His lack of size is concerning as he has taken some big hits and missed some games over the years.

  9. 9 TommyLawlor said at 9:53 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    Very talented. As an Eagles/NFL fan, I’d love to see him stay and progress as a passer.

    As a PSU fan, I want him gone.

    I do think he’d be wise to stay in school. Lots of talent, but some issues to work on as a passer. If he comes out, could be an interesting target because of his potential.

  10. 10 Rambler said at 4:10 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    As an Ohio State alumni/fan, and Eagles fan, I have to say that I have mixed feelings on Braxton. I have watched enough of him over the past several years to be frustrated by his decision making. He definitely needs to stay his last year and work on his fundamentals, but he is really athletic and would be an interesting project, especially in this offense. I think he declares for the draft though, and will probably go near Round 3.
    Interestingly, I am actually more curious about his backup, Kenny Guiton. He has played very well in relief of Braxton, and I think he is a better decision maker and looks more fluid as a passer. But clearly he is not as dynamic/athletic. I really think he has what it takes to be a decent backup QB in the NFL, and am curious to see if a team takes a flyer on him. He could easily have been starting for the majority of college programs out there.

  11. 11 Scott said at 6:16 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    I’m probably overthinking this, but Chip’s announcement today signals a pretty big shift in thinking. Howie and Chip are now NOT gung ho on taking a QB in round 1.

    So gaming this out a little, let’s say Foles goes 8-8 (2-3) but misses playoffs. How are you telling Foles he isn’t the starter next year? He was named the starter and played overall pretty well.

    To go draft a capable rookie means were in 2013 all over again. Foles would then have to compete with a rookie for a job he was named to just 8 months before.

  12. 12 TommyLawlor said at 9:51 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    Foles doesn’t have to make the playoffs. He just needs to continue to play well.

  13. 13 SteveH said at 7:05 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    Whatever we do I really hope it isn’t Johnny Football.

  14. 14 TommyLawlor said at 9:50 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    I’m both fascinated and scared by him.

  15. 15 SteveH said at 10:39 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    My feeling has nothing to do with his on the field ability, which may or may not work out at the pro level, he just comes off as an incredible douche bag and even if he did end up being an amazing quarterback for us there would still be a part of me that would be like… fuck that guy.

  16. 16 BlindChow said at 7:50 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    The article Tommy linked to really shows how Manziel’s maturity issues go way beyond “he’s just a young guy who drank too much once” (as his supporters like to claim).

  17. 17 SteveH said at 1:28 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Yeah, he gives off that vibe. At the end of the day I’ll cheer whoever’s wearing Eagles green but man, I’d really prefer it was someone else.

  18. 18 Travis said at 1:52 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Some will think this is hyperbole (and perhaps rightfully so), but I’d rather sign Vick to a 10 year contract and make him play right-handed than see Manziel in an Eagles uniform.

  19. 19 nickross23 said at 8:03 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    before the start of the college season this year a lot of people where saying myself included how strong the QB class was going to be. I think alot of that was based on potential. There really isn’t that sure fire top flight QB that you know belongs as the top pick or that prospect that flashes throughout the year and builds remarkable momentum that he goes in rd 1 a la RG3. Teddy Bridgewater is the top guy but people question his level of competition. If he wanted to really make a statement I’d stay 4 my senior yr when L vill joins the ACC. Boyd, and Aaron Murray are too short and have weak arms. AJ McCarron is a game manager and doesn’t wow you. The list goes on and on with alot of these guys Brett Hundley, Manziel and Mariota are all red shirt sophs who could really use 1 more year. I say regardless of how Nick plays in these last 5 gms we build this defense with legit 3-4 pieces and add a healthy J Mac or another play making wr (Allen Robinson). The offense works clearly, just fix the D and we’re good.

  20. 20 TommyLawlor said at 9:49 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    Lots of logic in your comments. We just need Chip to feel that sticking with Nick is the right move. If he’s got doubts, we can’t ignore the QBs.

  21. 21 nickross23 said at 12:49 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    True, Chip has a vision for this offense and how his QB wants to play into this offense. At the end of the day Chip will determine Foles’s fate. The question or concern i have is investing a high value draft pick on a QB that may or may not be better the Nick when that pick could go to the defense or Oline WR ect. There’s so much time from now and draft time that its impossible to think of what might happen in the off season, i’m just enjoying the here and now.

  22. 22 Midnight_Greenville said at 8:26 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    Not needing to draft a QB early this year could be a great advantage for the Eagles. If 4 or 5 QB’s go in the first half of the 1st round, that’s 4 or 5 other players that may drop to us in the 2nd half of the draft (hopefully). I agree that there is no sure-fire franchise QB in the draft this year; and the potential upgrade over Foles is not as great as, say, the potential upgrade we could get with a stud pass-rushing LB or stud DB (or possibly addressing our oldest position group–OL). It also seems to me that the likelihood of finding a QB in future drafts that supposedly fits Chip’s system will not be that difficult given the increasing number of athletic QB’s in college every year.

  23. 23 BlindChow said at 10:24 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    The results from the top DB’s in the last couple years’ draft classes have me very wary about taking one early. I guess you have to get DB’s from somewhere, but if it takes 2-3 years for them to become serviceable, is it worth it?

  24. 24 Anders said at 4:03 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    but if you never pick one high, how are you going to fix it? or do you want to fix CBs in FA only?

    Also plenty of young CBs are playing well.

    Honey Badger (cant spell his real name)
    Brandon Boykin(g)
    Desmond Trufant
    Joe Haden
    Xavier Rhodes
    Patrick Peterson

    Yes some guys aint playing well, but there is also plenty pass rushers, OTs, safeties, WR etc who aint performing as a high draft pick

  25. 25 ICDogg said at 5:13 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    I don’t like to get hung up on drafting a position. At those rare top picks that you get to make, you should draft players that can help you most down the road, not restricting yourself to any particular positions. As an extreme illustration of this point, you would never want to be the guy that didn’t draft Michael Jordan because you needed a center.

    So I would not rule out drafting a CB if he had rare talent and was a good fit, since you can always find ways to take advantage of that. But I’m not sure, overall, that this defensive scheme relies so much on having top corners.

  26. 26 Anders said at 5:17 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    I think every defense starts up front. If you cant get pressure, your all pro CB aint going to help you anyway because 1 guy will eventually come open.

    You need good enough coverage so that guys aint running free all over the place and the pass rush has a chance to get home (so around 3 sec good coverage should be enough most of the time)

  27. 27 ICDogg said at 5:30 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    In a 2-gap front, the linebackers are kept more clean so they can make plays. If they make plays, the secondary is not as exposed.

    As much as we like Bennie Logan, if the Eagles think that there is a guy who can be the next Wilfork, that instantly improves the pass rush indirectly by requiring more than normal attention from opposing O-lines to keep the pocket intact.

  28. 28 Anders said at 7:36 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    I dont buy the NT thing. If its the DEs who demand the double team, it is just as good. Also one of Logan’s strengths coming out was his disruption. He was projected as a 4-3 1 tech.
    Also looking at tape, seems Davis and the DL is good at giving the OLBs 1vs1 matchups. They just aint winning enough of them.

  29. 29 Insomniac said at 9:20 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Well to begin with, we don’t have those LBs that you speak of. Even if we draft say Nix or McCullers, it’s not going to change anything if Cole and Barwin can’t get sacks. You just need a consistent NT and we might have one that is already developing. Hell, if Jay Ratliff could play NT why can’t Bennie Logan do it?

  30. 30 ICDogg said at 12:33 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    I’m not saying he can’t. And I’m not saying we don’t need an OLB. But if you have a guy who demands that much attention up front, it makes everyone else better.

  31. 31 BlindChow said at 8:50 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Yeah, like I said, you have to get CB’s from somewhere, so what do you do? It’s not like getting the top CB in free agency really worked out for us the last time we tried it…

    As to the young guys: Boykin and Badger weren’t high draft picks (though Badger fell on account of off-field stuff and not talent, so he may fit your point better than mine). Peterson was mediocre his rookie season (though at least he didn’t get benched like half the 1st round CB’s in the last two drafts).

    I’m okay with taking a DB early (assuming he’s the BPA), but they tend not to be impact players their first couple years. So you’re essentially taking a flyer on a guy who you hope can develop into an impact player a few seasons out. But isn’t that the theory behind 3rd-4th round picks? Develop them for a couple years until they become starters down the line?

    I guess I’m mostly responding to people saying we should get a CB in the 1st round as though that would immediately solve our problems. It’s just not that simple.

  32. 32 Anders said at 11:00 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Looking at some of the top CBs in the NFL. It seems all the top outside CBs needs at least 1 year to learn NFL route running (many WRs needs the same adjustment).

  33. 33 Insomniac said at 9:16 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    I rather see us try to sign Verner. If we fail to get Verner then draft a developmental CB like Gilbert, Desir, or either CBs from Florida. Personally, I don’t like Verrett or Ifo enough to neglect OLB or OL in the first round.

  34. 34 Anders said at 11:02 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Im torn on Gilbert. He is the best pure cover CB in college and seems like he might translate best to the NFL, BUT he got some Samuel to his game that disturbs me consider how much we ask our CBs to tackle.

    Maybe the coaching staff can get him to toughen up consider they have Nate Allen actually hitting guys now.

  35. 35 Mitchell said at 1:43 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    I have a huge man-crush on Gilbert. I wish he had more tape on YouTube but I can only find one game. I didn’t see awful tackling when I watched him though. I like him as both a corner and a return guy. I dnt see why the coaches can’t get him to tackle better if he is indeed bad. If he can at least get to a point where he isn’t a liability his play making will more than make up or his tackling.

  36. 36 Anders said at 1:33 AM on November 28th, 2013:

    best draft site ever

  37. 37 Mitchell said at 11:35 AM on November 28th, 2013:

    Thank you. I’m always looking for good football references

  38. 38 Mac said at 10:13 AM on November 27th, 2013:


    Brent does a nice job of breaking down the crap shoot that we call the NFL draft.

  39. 39 eagleyankfan said at 8:56 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    Great article as usual. ” but he will need to play well the final 5 weeks to truly secure the spot for the long term.” As mentioned below, I think that’s a little unfair. Foles is still young. He has yet to complete 1 full year as a starter. He will have bumps along the road (every QB does). So why does he have to play well for 5 more games? I think he’s earned enough respect to have a flop(like he did) and come back strong. (showed a lot of character). There has to be some latitude for mistakes. They are going to happen.
    Of course — all this is mute if Chip already has his plan in place(he is a smart-forward thinking man). He may already know who he wants next year(and for the future).

  40. 40 TommyLawlor said at 9:46 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    Not unfair. Didn’t say Nick had to be great. He needs to play well. He can have a bad game. Just can’t struggle over the course of several games.

    I can’t stress this enough. The goal is to win a SB. We need a QB who can get us to that level. I hope Nick is the guy, but I’m not going to lower standards so he can get a passing grade.

  41. 41 eagleyankfan said at 10:49 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    Foles can go undefeated the rest of the season or not win a game. Either way — the next 5 games won’t determine if Foles is capable of winning the SB.

  42. 42 TommyLawlor said at 12:09 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    You’re making this way too complicated. I never said anything definitive.

    Nick needs to play well enough that Kelly feels comfortable with Nick as a QB that he could build around. You’d want that to be someone who could help you win a SB.

    There is no requirement of W/L or stats. This is about Nick showing that he deserves to be the guy. Clearly we won’t know if he is “the guy” until he’s played several years.

  43. 43 P_P_K said at 9:56 AM on November 27th, 2013:


  44. 44 eagleyankfan said at 10:17 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    I make everything complicated :). I do agree with you. I just think we need stop saying he’s giving a try out period to see what he can do over a certain period. That will always apply. I think he’s earned a longer leash at this point. I’m hoping he lights up Arizona this weekend. Going to be a great match up with him vs. a solid D.

  45. 45 shah8 said at 1:47 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    It’s really not complicated. Foles need to be able to pass and gain yards/TDs as a matter of offensive discipline, and not merely as an opportunistic passer eating up horrible safety play. I didn’t see Keenum play last Sunday, but I sure did see the boxscore of a QB that couldn’t score on the freakin’ Jags. And I can guess why. Keenum is short, likes to buy time for defensive breakdowns by running around, and make a bunch of intermediate throws along with a few floating deep balls. He’s not as bad as Colt McCoy, but he wasn’t really talented enough to pass on a sound defensive effort on a consistent basis. Compare him with Russell Wilson, for example, and while you see Wilson run around alot, Wilson is genuinely excellent at throwing on the run, but more seriously than that, Wilson can run a truly standard offense when his OL gives him that chance, after the fashion of the other short and competent QB like Brees or Vick–moving around alot in the pocket, deeper dropbacks, and more attention to passing lane w/less emphasis on short-center passes.

  46. 46 fran35 said at 9:31 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    I took this to mean that in order to lock down the starter job for next year, Foles needs to continue playing well. If he flops, or plays poorly–the coaches will need closer examination in the offseason.
    Really, from what I see and even Tommy inferred, the job is Foles to lose. To really hurt himself, he would have to play multiple games at the Dallas level.

  47. 47 Bob Brewer said at 8:57 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    As a Hokie fan just say no to Logan Thomas. His only NFL QB asset is his size. No accuracy, no touch, no reads.

  48. 48 D3FB said at 11:30 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    Say no to Thomas. Say yes to Kyle Fuller.

  49. 49 LawEagle said at 9:33 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    Stop with the next draft speculation- focus on this week and the Cards- in a very few weeks we can talk about drafts and the future!!

  50. 50 TommyLawlor said at 9:44 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    I get lots of draft questions. I’ve avoided most of them since the team is winning, but felt this was worth addressing.

  51. 51 eagleyankfan said at 10:55 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    I love the draft questions/answers. I don’t follow college so I like reading about the players.

  52. 52 fran35 said at 9:27 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    As long as we are not talking about Foles vs. Vick, we can talk about damn unicorns and I would be happy.

  53. 53 Anders said at 10:54 AM on November 27th, 2013:


  54. 54 D-von said at 11:05 PM on November 26th, 2013:

    Speaking of the draft, what do some of you think about Vic Beasley as a pass rush lb?

  55. 55 nickross23 said at 1:02 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Good size and speed, dont know about the strength or pass rush moves but is clearly the best defensive player on that Clemson unit so he knows he’s gonna see alot of attention. Most of the time the opposing team is down a few TDs so he gets plenty of pass rush opportunities. Was a no show against FSU but alot of teams haven’t really been able to get pressure on Winston. As of now 2nd to 3rd pick but alot can change from now and then

  56. 56 Anders said at 3:55 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Lacks in the size department (6-2, 230). Vic Beasley is perfect AR fast ball, high motor and undersized guy ๐Ÿ˜›

    Got great speed and first step and has a good ability to dip under the tackle when turning the corner.

  57. 57 ICDogg said at 5:20 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    The odd thing is, I can’t help wondering if Vinny Curry shouldn’t have become an OLB instead of a DE. He has the right size and explosiveness, and a knack for getting to the QB.

  58. 58 Anders said at 5:23 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Curry got a great first step, but there is a huge difference between having the ability beat a guard with explosion and having the ability to dip the corner.

    Its the same reason Graham will never be a great weak side pass rusher. He does not have the ability to dip the corner, but he is very deadly with his bull rush and he is fast enough to rush the corner on lesser athletic RTs

  59. 59 ICDogg said at 5:32 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    In Graham’s case, though, I think it’s more a matter of bad knees.

  60. 60 SteveH said at 1:26 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Tragic IMO, the micro fracture surgery his rookie year. Who knows what he could have been if it weren’t for that.

  61. 61 fran35 said at 9:26 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Very accurate. Graham does not seem to have much beyond the bull rush. Couple that with his lack of top end speed and explosiveness and you have a 4-3 situational pass rusher.

  62. 62 Anders said at 10:53 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    He still make a very good LDE. Like a Juqua Parker but better.

  63. 63 Cafone said at 5:01 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    If Foles gets hurt again and Vick comes in and kicks ass, peoples’ heads are going to explode.

  64. 64 knighn said at 8:58 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    True, because some people are ridiculous. Every player in the NFL has the potential to get hurt. Would it be disappointing if Nick Foles gets hurt? Absolutely. It may also be a indication that Foles is also injury prone, which would also be very disappointing.
    It should not surprise anyone if Mike Vick comes in and plays well. He has shown that he can do this throughout his career. There are a few things that Mike, at this point in his career, cannot do:
    – Go back in time and make himself more of a student of the game from the start
    – Take away all of the hits and wear that have accumulated over his career that make him more prone to injury now
    – Make himself younger

    If you just look at his age, compared to the other QBs in the league, Vick is not that old. If you look at Vick’s apparent likelihood to miss numerous games, and then look at his age, he is simply too old to be anyone’s franchise QB.

    If people’s heads explode, they didn’t have their heads right to begin with.

  65. 65 A_T_G said at 9:21 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    I thought the same thing about the propane tank attached to my grill. Did you know flammable and inflammable actually mean the same thing?!

  66. 66 P_P_K said at 9:55 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    “Did you know flammable and inflammable actually mean the same thing?!”

    I laughed so hard I spit out my coffee! Good one.

  67. 67 fran35 said at 9:23 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Vick is the kind of QB who excels being thrust into a situation like that. His kind of QBing takes so much gameplanning for a defense, and when Vick comes in he creates so much chaos-both good and bad.
    I think if Foles gets hurt and Vick is inserted back into the lineup, we will be in the middle of ANOTHER full blown QB controversy-at least at the media level.

  68. 68 jshort said at 10:24 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    I’m hoping no one picks Vick up and comes back to #2. Think he’s a class act, and would like to see him make some bucks b-4 he finishes his career.

  69. 69 knighn said at 10:58 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    You’re hoping Vick comes back as the backup QB? I wouldn’t mind that. Vick might not want that, though. He’ll probably try to see if he can compete for the starting job somewhere.

  70. 70 knighn said at 10:54 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Of course. It’s all about ratings. Stir up some controversy and your show will get more viewers, and your web site will generate more hits. Either way: it’s a great way to gain more advertising revenue.

    Outside of the media: there are still some who would rather see Vick because they still believe that Vick gives the Eagles the best chance to win.

  71. 71 eagleyankfan said at 10:07 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    yeah right. Vick would come in and do what he always does – which is struggle. People have to stop hoping that Vick will hit the fountain of youth. Two years in a row Vick lost his starting job to Foles. Odds of Vick coming in and kick ass…zero.

  72. 72 austinfan said at 6:35 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    I’m not worried about Foles at this point, the way he bounced back after the Dallas fiasco tells me he has the mental toughness to start in the NFL (less pressure than Westlake HS, just ask Drew).

    He’s gonna have his ups and downs, his mechanics will take another year or two to perfect, one thing to do it in practice, another thing for it to become second nature, but Lazor seems like a first rate QB coach.

    It was obvious to me when Chip kept Foles and drafted Barkley that “repeatable accuracy” and football IQ are the most important qualities for a Chip QB. And Foles has steadily improved in that regard this season.

    The problem with drafting QBs for Chip is that these qualities are hard to ascertain for most college QBs due to spread systems that provide one read/easy throws (because few college defenses have two decent DBs much less four or five) – just look at RGIII’s struggles to learn to play NFL QB. So if you have two guys who you are confident have those qualities, you’re not going to use a high pick on a question mark, no matter how fast the question mark runs or if he can throw it 60 yards from his knees. Of all the physically talented QBs drafted the last three years, who would you take over St Nick?

    Conversely, good scouting can find QBs with those qualities in the middle rounds, because they require more homework than just determining if the guy is 6’3, can run a 4.4 and has a 90 MPH fastball. And the shift to the passing game by high schools and colleges will increase the supply of these second tier QBs who don’t jump off the college film. So I expect the Eagles to continue the “GB” tradition of drafting and developing middle round QBs.

  73. 73 jshort said at 10:15 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    I’d be very happy if he could go 4-1 in the next 5. and win 4 more in a row.

  74. 74 eagleyankfan said at 10:22 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    I’m with you, I’m not worried about Foles. Teams will adjust to Foles. Eagles will make adjustments to those changes. it’s a vicious cycle :).

  75. 75 BlindChow said at 9:08 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Former Eagle Greg Salas (#17) makes a contribution to the Jets’ season:

  76. 76 SteveH said at 1:25 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    I’m confused about what was supposed to happen on that play… was he supposed to keep going past and they just snapped too soon? Or was he motioning back out the way he came and they just snapped too soon? Or did Salas motion further down the line than he was supposed to? I just don’t know.

  77. 77 eagleyankfan said at 10:20 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    What expectations – if any – is there coming out of the by week? Will Chip throw out there some new formations/plays for the offense? Or has the Eagles kept practicing what they already know and try to perfect it? Either way, can’t wait for Eagles football.

  78. 78 Anders said at 10:52 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Kelly will have a new wrinkled. It will be based on something we do a lot, so maybe a fake bubble screen, but instead of blocking the WR simply runs past the CB for a huge gain?

    Maybe its a fake out of the double screen we have had great success with (the one Celek took for a huge gain last game).

  79. 79 RobNE said at 12:55 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    My expectations are sky high. Realistic or not.

  80. 80 jshort said at 11:18 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    This might have been discussed, but was away for a few days. While watching other teams play over the weekend, they just seemed slow. Kind of boring compared to Eagles games

  81. 81 mtn_green said at 12:37 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    So true. There is a great quote from chip Kelly’s presser:
    “Do you think it helps the other 10 guys in the huddle knowing who their quarterback is going to be going forward?”

    COACH KELLY: We don’t huddle.

  82. 82 ACViking said at 11:32 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Re: How Important is the QB?

    Kelly’s brought a very productive ground attack to the Eagles — though less so measured by the numbers, I think, since Foles replaced Vick. Early in the season McCoy was on target for an historical performance.

    Does that matter as far as winning a SB?

    Does having a RB rack up historical rushing yards matter?

    Or is having a very good QB more important?

    Among the Top 50 single seasons rushing performances, only 6 were by RBs in the SB: 5 on the winner, 1 on the loser.

    The winners: Emmitt Smith (’92, ’95), Terrell Davis (’97, ’98), Corey Dillon (’04).

    The Loser: Shaun Alexander (’05).

    The QBs on those 5 winning teams: HOFers Elway, Aikman, and Brady.
    And it’s fair to surmise that the RBs’ performances were partly the product of threats presented by their QBs . . . and vice-a-versa.

    The losing QB in ’05 was Matt Hasselbeck. Not a HOFer. Alexander carried the Seahawks in ’05.


    So maybe the moral of the story is it’s great to have a dominant running game that posts historical numbers.

    But you whether that happens or not, it seems you need a very good QB to win a Super Bowl.

  83. 83 Andy124 said at 12:57 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Great stuff as always.

  84. 84 Mac said at 12:58 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    And, if you ask some Seahawk fans a little help from the Zebra’s goes a long way toward victory.

  85. 85 RobNE said at 1:03 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Perhaps by having such a good running game Kelly needs a slightly less elite QB to win a SB. The run game has been producing a better passing game (as D’s stuff the box), and in turn should produce a better running game. This may be outside the norm for SB winners but I don’t think that makes it wrong or impossible. I think Chip is taking advantage of inefficiencies in the other team’s D.

    Also, given that elite QB’s don’t grow on trees, it isn’t like we can just wait around for one. So this is another path to SB. I am sure if we end up with an elite QB our running stats will go down.

  86. 86 ACViking said at 11:41 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    ATTENTION: Tommy Lawlor . . .

    AFC defensive POM was Pats’ 2nd-year DE Chandler Jones — a guy you liked a lot coming out of Syracuse in 2012.

    The Eagles drafted DE Fletcher Cox at No. 12. Jones went to NE at 21.

    1 season later, what do you think? Toss up performance-wise? Is Jones slightly ahead? Is Cox?

    And do you still see Cox as possessing the greater upside.

    I ask only because both play DE in principally 3-4 defenses — and you liked both very much coming out of college.

  87. 87 Anders said at 11:47 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    Jones is playing DE/OLB

  88. 88 ACViking said at 11:51 AM on November 27th, 2013:

    A —

    So what do you think — factoring in that Jones is, apparently, versatile enough to work as a very good DE/OLB?

    I’ve argued Cox could be as impactful as Richard Seymour was for the great Pats teams of the ’00s — a guy with his hand down on every play and who can play across from any lineman, from OT, to G, to C.

    Is that type of player better to have, mucking it up at the LOS? Or is a Jones-type, firing off the edge?

  89. 89 Anders said at 12:01 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Well Chandler Jones would be the perfect OLB for us as he can both play 3-4 OLB and 4-3 DE.

    I think it is hard to quantify what is better, but an all pro (Seymour’s level and Cox’s ceiling) DT/DE is a QBs worst nightmare. Guys like Brady, Manning, Bress etc have a harder time handling inside than outside pressure.

  90. 90 ACViking said at 1:34 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Nice, quick breakdown. Well done.

  91. 91 shah8 said at 1:32 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    I don’t watch the Raiders. I’d rather have Vick make Eagles games fun to watch.

    My first presumption is that Foles doesn’t have a future, unless the coaching have been slow-walking him, going with the simplest offensive plans, and saving higher play for later.

    1) Derek Carr is not athletic enough to survive in the NFL. More like a more talented Mike Glennon. And don’t give me the whole, Glennon hasn’t looked too bad–usually, if you give competent but undertalented people enough starts, they usually have at least one or two decent games. Even whackos like Ryan Leaf has had a good game. In any event, Derek Carr is still going to be pretty dependent on a good line for him to look good.

    2) Manziel flat out doesn’t have the arm. Also, watching that LSU game, he doesn’t play all that well against fast defensive linemen. I suspect he does better against Alabama because they rely more on linebackers to clean up.

    3) I think you’re underselling the degree to which Mariota will probably drop if he comes out. And the Eagles may well pass on him as well.

    4) Not sure how Devin Gardner will shake out. A lot of bad games as well as good games, looking at the box scores, and I’ve never seen him play.

    5) Blake Bortles and Braxton Miller are your probable second rounders/better.

    Barkley looks like a bust to me, so far, primarily for maturity reasons. He obviously thought he could play at a higher level than he actually can, and he comes off to me in interviews as someone with a rather brittle ego.

  92. 92 RobNE said at 1:51 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    So you would cut Foles and Barkley and start Vick next year? Trade a lot of picks to move up and take a QB? Or something else?

  93. 93 shah8 said at 2:07 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Eeeeh, I don’t know. Given health, I will always prefer Vick, because he’s a competent QB, and they don’t grow on trees.

    Would I cut a productive at-least-backup QB? Why?

    Until I see Foles run a real passing offense, I’m always going to be expecting a Dallas game. I’ve been watching football for a long time. People that have played the way Foles has, has usually not succeeded over the long term. You saw Pryor and Keenum fall to earth this year after doing better than expected in the beginning. Same with the likes of Colt McCoy, or Patrick Fitzgerald. And on and on back into the misty dawn of football. Pretending that Joe Montana had a noodle arm doesn’t help the case (noodle in terms of today? Yes, but not when he was playing before the salary cap, and his arm was the primary reason Steve Young took his job). You do really have to have that arm, because several meat and potatoes throws depend on it, when you’re playing a good defense. Like Sheil’s talk with the deadskin’s DB (I forget the name) indicated, teams would prefer to play Foles, because Vick is far more dynamic, and while it was caged in the terms of his ability to run, it is also about the sort of passes that can happen. As such, I really don’t think Foles is in Kelly’s view as a long term starter–there’s no way he can win more than one playoff game with Foles, and that one will probably be because of a no-business-being-there team, or one with a high scoring offense and weak defense.

  94. 94 shah8 said at 2:13 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    I would draft a better QB than Barkley and make Barkley’s stay contingent on him getting better at making the right reads and better throws to go with them. Barkley does not have the ceiling to where he could just mess around. Nobody has, or should have the patience for that.

  95. 95 RobNE said at 2:17 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    how many capable NFL QB’s do you think there are, as you judge them? 10 maybe? I mean right now, not who could become one. Given the limited number (I assume your list can’t be even 32 QB’s long) isn’t it possible that the Eagles don’t have one and can’t just decide to get one, thus trying to continue to develop Foles makes sense?

    Pryor and Keenum – sorry, they have not done what Foles has done. Not even close. I’m not saying Foles is Brady, just that your example is not a good one.

  96. 96 shah8 said at 2:30 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Quarterbacks that you can at least have the hope of getting hot and unstoppable in the playoffs:
    Newton? Needs a touch more consistent accuracy, but probably better than Flacco right now as a passer.
    Eli Manning

    I don’t have Peyton Manning, because, well, you can see what happened against the Patriots. Cold. Wind. Patriots determined to prevent Manning from getting lots of easy throws. Manning sucking wind on harder and deep throws. It’s hard to do it, given how wily Manning is, but Peyton definitely can be controlled in a way that’s not really true of Vick, for example. Really, this is also true of Brady, but what kills Brady is just one thing, interior pass rush, and that kills most QBs. Brady is just more sensitive and less able to cope.

    I also don’t have RGIII, because he’s completely out of sorts now, and isn’t really either a competent QB or one that can get by purely on his natural physical talents right now. I have Kaepernick because Kaepernick is more competent than people give him credit for. He’s not very competent, but for the number of games he has played, he’s not a liability, maturing quite well, and will only get better.

  97. 97 Andy124 said at 3:30 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    How you can you hope to maintain any credibility when you place Vick and Romo ahead of Peyton?

    Just, wow.

  98. 98 fran35 said at 4:02 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Yep, bout right. Eli over Peyton. Romo and Cutler too. Keep up the fight.

  99. 99 shah8 said at 4:27 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Why should I need to “keep up the good fight”? Peyton Manning has traditionally underperformed in the playoffs, largely due to how simple the basic offense he traditionally runs. It’s hard to stop, but more talent generally does. Now that he’s a noodle armed, elderly QB, what do you really think will happen if he can’t get so many easy throws? Remember, there have been plenty of offenses with high powered receivers and lackluster QBs that have shown up in the playoffs. Forget Andy Dalton and AJ Green. Forget Matt Schaub and Matt Ryan, go back in time, and check out Marc Bulger with the remnants of the Greatest Show On Turf. Vick totally dismantled that defense, and the offense got stifled, because while Bulger didn’t play that badly, and completed lots of passes, *he wasn’t able to make plays*. In the playoffs, no matter what, the QB will have to make plays. That typically means that no scheme will work to *cover* weaknesses. The QB has to supplement the scheme with his own BAMF qualities. A noodle-armed Peyton is really dependent on those crossing and pick routes to be working, because he’s not as capable of seizing yards like he used to be, or should be.

  100. 100 fran35 said at 4:37 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Ok. So when Vick crashed and burned as a Falcon in the playoffs, was that because *he wasn’t able to make plays*? Probably not, right? He didn’t have enough weapons, huh? Its amazing how WRs playing with Vick have exploded as soon as he left the lineup(see White, Roddy and Cooper, Riley).

  101. 101 shah8 said at 4:46 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Well, that’s easy. Check out the tape when Roddy White was playing with Vick. There’s a spectacular blooper of Roddy White doing one of the worst drops ever somewhere online, and you’d see Jim Mora Jr with the changes in his expression.

    Roddy White genuinely was not good when he was playing with Vick. In general, going back and watching old Falcons game generally shows that Vick, for all of his lackluster stats, was literally the only thing going on that offense. Just Alge Crumpler and Warrick Dunn to help out. There’s a reason why he didn’t have great totals, and there’s a reason JJ kept crushing him. Terrible pass blocking OL and a worthless WR corps.

    As far as Cooper? I just have that video clip in my head of him not coming back for the ball at the end of the Green Bay game. I still don’t think Cooper is any good. Maybe he is, and is blooming now, but I’ma gonna wait and see if he continues to do that.

  102. 102 BlindChow said at 4:23 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Don’t forget Joe Webb.

  103. 103 shah8 said at 4:34 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Joe Webb is a prospect, not anything like a refined product. I would be more comfortable thinking of Joe Webb as a future starter than I am with Foles, because he plainly has the arm, he doesn’t do crazy stuff on the field, etc, etc.

    Put plainly…Joe Webb can outright win games for you. He has a history of actually putting a team on his back and taking it to the promised land. As a technical matter, his play against Detroit and Washington is better than anything Foles has done. Those weren’t good defenses, but he beat them with a number of really good throws, along with his crappy ones. He also was absolutely dominant on the ground and defined the terms of the rush defense, such that Tony Gerhert had something like a career half against Washington. Foles has been feasting on bad safety play, for the most part, and when there has been good play, he’s been throwing balls that gives Eagles receivers a chance to make a play. Those plays have been falling in for us. They won’t, forever.

  104. 104 A_T_G said at 5:20 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    I once saw Joe Webb play action to himself, evade the blitz, then throw a deep post on a frozen rope before beating the press and catching the pass.

    I think it was against the Eagles.

    On a Tuesday.

  105. 105 Michael Winter Cho said at 5:25 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Never change, Shah ๐Ÿ™‚

  106. 106 shah8 said at 5:26 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    A strong arm and the moxie to use it is timeless, so I guess I won’t.

  107. 107 RobNE said at 5:56 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    What would you say about Brady his first year playing, before the playoffs?

  108. 108 shah8 said at 6:05 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Well, take a look at his stats. You can see he was getting up to speed, then had a bunch of really good games, and then started getting shut down towards the end of the year, with the defense and Antowaine Smith being focal that year.

    I don’t remember what he actually looked like in games and I’ve not seen any video.

    In general, Brady doesn’t have the strongest arm, but it’s perfectly functional, and when he had Moss, Moss didn’t go to waste in the sense that AJ Green has gone to waste the last two-three years. Brady has benefited from a great deal of stability and smooth transition to different offensive looks. He tends to need clean pockets because he’s got something of a glass jaw if he gets hit often.

  109. 109 RobNE said at 6:38 AM on November 28th, 2013:

    Right he wasn’t the QB he became a few years later. I was hoping maybe you would realize that you might have said (at the time) he can’t make the throws, then been proved wrong as he developed – then admit maybe you are being too harsh writing off Foles so early.

  110. 110 fran35 said at 3:55 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Wow. Ludicrous.

  111. 111 mksp said at 3:08 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    I’m curious (well, not really, but for argument’s sake) to hear your thoughts if Foles keeps up this level of play the rest of the season. Also, Foles’ % of intermediate completions (the very definition of “NFL throws”) has been trending higher all season.

    In your quest to be the “cynical voice of reason regarding the play of Nick Foles” I fear you might be overselling your skills of evaluation, particularly since you seem to have a complete disregard for the skill found in between a Quarterback’s ears.

  112. 112 shah8 said at 4:11 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    I’ve been clear on what throws I’m not seeing Foles make.

    I’ve also been clear that the QB is an athlete. It doesn’t matter how smart he his, if he can’t move around, and if he can’t make the throws, he can’t play, and you certainly cannot expect him to succeed against good defenses.

    Alex Smith is a worse QB than Kaepernick. He was benched because he was a worse QB than Kaepernick. Why was Smith a worse QB? Because Alex Smith can’t think and react fast enough to seize opportunities. Yet, for all that Kaepernick is a “one read” QB (he’s not), Kaepernick takes fewer sacks and hits far more bang bang plays–to his WR, and they don’t have to be wide open.

    Yet people whine about how Smith would be a better QB than Kaepernick in SF, look at him and his top KC team! Talking about how “smart” he is. Hmphf, those people care about a different and irrelevant quateria, methinks.

  113. 113 mksp said at 5:43 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Foles is athletic enough. He moves around the pocket well and can throw on the run.

    You may have been “clear on what throws” Foles isn’t making, but recent evidence suggests he is in fact making those throws.

    Hitting Desean on a corner route in between the CB & S in a Cover-2 is an “NFL throw.” So was that dig route to Cooper that he threw before Riley even made his break. Shady on the wheel route…..

    Foles > Alex Smith. Right now Foles is playing better than Kap, “arm talent” and athletic ability notwithstanding. I suppose we’ll see where they are in a couple years.

    If he carves up ARZ the way he has WAS/GB/OAK/TB/NYG then I’m not sure what else you can ask for.

  114. 114 shah8 said at 6:22 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Have you ever seen Matt Ryan try to run? Recall it? Okay. Now, have you ever seen Matt Stafford, Tony Romo, Jay Cutler try to run? Foles is much closer to the Matt Ryan and Drew Brees of the world than the Romos of the world. He does move well in the pocket, and he does do a functional roll-out, and when he has to run for yardage, he makes a go of it. That is part of what makes him a better QB than Blaine Gabbert, even though Gabbert is *much* faster than Foles. The thing is…Foles isn’t really fast enough, and teams with speed on the edges, like what the Deadskins have, can hit him, and hit him hard, and if the OL has a bad day, he’s really not going to cope that well.

    As far as throws? I want to see him hit outs. I want to see him muscle a stick play in there. I want to see him attack more than the middle of the field and floating deep sideline passes, deliberately underthrown. In general, I want to be confident that he can thread a genuine NFL sized window and not depend on bad/out of position secondaries. That djax throw was pretty good, but it was basically among the best throws I’ve ever seen Foles make, and it was still a really rather slow ball, and djax took a hit (and got a penalty).

    I doubt that Foles would thrive in KC. He throws a more catchable deep ball than Smith, but the offense Reid is running would require him to make harder throws as a routine basis, and the OL isn’t playing as well (Smith runs *alot*). And no, Foles would absolutely suck in SF and rack up INTs like Geno. It’s a pretty difficult situation there.

  115. 115 OregonDucker said at 1:53 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Deja vu? “The NFL’s best offense the first two games, the Eagles had three turnovers, running their season total to 12, and labored all day against the scrappy Cardinals.”

    Read more:

    IMHO, turnovers will decide this game. A top Offense (Eagles) against a top Defense (Cardinals). [From a skill standpoint, I think our D is about the same level as the Cardinal O – but our disquised blitz packages could drive turnovers.]

    Foles’ quick read ability, accuracy, and elusiveness in the pocket will be the difference. Oh, and so will the D and O game plans! Look for the Eagles O tempo to stymie the Cardinal substitutions.

  116. 116 Mitchell said at 1:55 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    I’m just nervous about the Cards takeaway stat. Like you said it could come down to turnovers. Let’s hope Nate gets his first int of the year!

  117. 117 jshort said at 2:14 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Really looking forward to this game. With both sides of the ball understanding the scheme, rested, and all but one player practicing. I’m wondering what new wrinkle we’re about to see. Sorry about your and my adopted Ducks, Started thinking they might be missing CK. Hope this doesn’t become a trend, and Helfrich doesn’t turn into Oregon’s version of Rich Kotite.

  118. 118 Mitchell said at 3:02 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Super excited to see what Chip does with a bye week. This could very well be an offensive explosion!

  119. 119 Ark87 said at 6:52 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Last time we met these guys, their front 7 dominated us. We need to at the very least do at least 1 of these hings to have a good shot: either establish the run to set up the pass (very very good run D) or the pass pro has to hold up pretty well if the run gets shut down.

    Interestingly, our D has been stout in the red zone. I’m not sure the point outcome would be too different between punting the ball away and turning the ball over. I wish field position mattered more, but teams just march on us wherever they get the ball and stall out in the redzone. If we can continue to get turn overs in the redzone, that really would be huge.

  120. 120 Mitchell said at 1:53 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    What are our thoughts on Jordan Lynch late, as a project?

  121. 121 RobNE said at 2:25 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Hey Tommy thanks for running this site and thanks to all of you (posters) who keep the comments section informative, interesting and civil. I often read other Eagles sites but rarely the comments. Happy thanksgiving.

  122. 122 ACViking said at 2:28 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Re: Speaking of Drafting a QB

    I’ve watched somewhere on the order of 30+ rookie QBs in the preseason, from Foles and Barkley, Kolb and Kafka, the likes of Andy Hall and Casey Weldon, McNabb and Cunningham . . . back to the likes of John Reaves, Rick Arrington, and Jack Concannon.

    All the recent conversation about Foles made me think back to his performance in his rookie 2012 training camp.

    He put on quite a good show last summer in practice (a long-ago time when the Eagles let everyone see everything) . . . and in the games. At least as I remember things.

    Compare Foles’ rookie camp to Matt Barkley’s this summer? I don’t know about practice, but his exhibition-game performances were not nearly as sharp as Foles’ were in 2012.

    Kevin Kolb and Mike Kafka? Anyone remember impressive rookie TC’s or exhibition games?

    McNabb or Cunningham? I think they showed great arms and great legs. But not especially good NFL QB skills — as would be expected.

    And all these QBs were facing vanilla defenses in exhibition games, along with lots of inexperienced players.

    Most rookie QBs tend to play somewhere between Barkley and Andy Hall in TC and preseason. (exceptions exist . . . yes.)

    Jump to Foles’s regular season last year. He didn’t light the world on fire.

    But compare what he did to Barkley this year? Or Jeff Tuel for the Bills.

    Generally, it’s not easy being a rookie QB in the NFL.

    So what if the Eagles decide to take a mobile QB in Rd 1, regardless of Foles’s performance down the stretch (short of a playoff sweep and SB win delivered almost entirely on his back). Why? Presumably the same reason that Vick “beat out” Foles for the QB job in TC . . . Kelly values mobile QBs.

    No matter who that rookie QB may be and how high he’s selected in the draft, it’s not only fair to expect but likely to expect that this highly-touted, mobile 1st Rd QB pick will *struggle* in training camp and preseason . . . other than running around and creating broken plays.

    On reflection, what Foles has done since July 2012 to the present, at times under some very difficult circumstances, has been damned impressive.

    He’s never looked like the rookie/2nd-year QB that so many other QBs who’ve come through have looked like.


    NOTE: AJ Feeley started 5 games in his 2nd year (2002), going 4-1.

    The Eagles’ defense allowed just 57 points in those 5 games.

    The Birds scored at total of 105 points — but 3 TDs came courtesy of the Defense (2 Ints, 1 FR). There were 7 FGs, 6 rushing TDs, and 5 passing TDs.

    Feeley was not asked to do much but avoid turnovers. And he actually struggled there, too.

    He threw 5 Ints in those 5 games, to go along with his 5 TD passes.

    But at the time, Feeley was a lifesaver.

    Now . . . compare Foles’ performance, without a defense nearly as good as that 2002 Eagles team, and think about what he’s done.

    Just saying that if Kelly wants a more mobile QB, even he comes in Rd 1, he’ll have a damned hard time doing what Foles has done so far.

    He may, as a rookie or 2nd or 3rd year guy . . . but it’s just damned hard to be a good QB in the NFL with as little experience as Foles has.

  123. 123 jshort said at 2:34 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Foles from the start, always left me wanting to see more of him.

  124. 124 Iskar36 said at 4:03 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    One minor correction. Leading into the preseason games, Foles actually had NOT looked all that impressive. At the time, Vick was the clear starter and Mike Kafka was pretty much the unchallenged back up. Meanwhile, Foles was a standard, uninspiring 3rd round rookie QB while Trent Edwards was seemingly about to be cut because up until the preseason games, he was rarely used and/or struggling.

    If I remember correctly, Vick got a minor injury early in the game and was pulled (although he was likely to get pulled early in the first preseason game anyway), and Kafka came in. Kafka then injured his hand and Foles went in at half time. Foles was put in and played a great 3rd quarter and that was the first time we had reason to be excited about Foles. When Vick got injured again in the second preseason game (ribs), Foles came in to back him up since Kafka was injured. He played another great game and officially started creating the question of can Foles be the legitimate backup. Foles then got the start in the third game and played great once again, earning the backup role.

    Interestingly, in TC this year, Barkley was actually said to have been ahead of where Foles was at that time the year before. Barkley seemed to have a great command of the offense and did not show signs of being a rookie, at least from the mental side of the game. However, that didn’t translate to the games the way it had for Foles.

  125. 125 Ark87 said at 6:00 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    Our memories line up pretty well. At the time Foles got drafted, there was sort of a feeling that Reid was just going to do his magic, make a back-up look good, flip the 3rd round pick for a second or something down the line tops. Besides that, even early a lot of people felt like Reid didn’t get the guy he wanted in the 3rd round.

    For whatever reason there was a lot of conflicting reports on what exactly Nick Foles was. A lot of people were given the impression that Nick was a big armed QB with feet of concrete. As time went along it became apparent that Foles did not have notable arm strength, in interviews he came off as a good kid, but seemed a little bit like a doofy boy scout. Until the preseason he was a major disappointment, he was like a bigger, unathletic, less adept, Mike Kafka. Oh and he was a loser in college. Wasn’t able to make a terrible team good. There was little reason to expect him to ever surpass Mike Kafka on the depth charts.

    ….and then the preseason happened….and he did something we hadn’t seen much of in a looooong time, he anticipated a receiver coming open. I’ve been pretty high on him ever since. I knew that rookies that play this style are vulnerable to a lot of picks, but if he could master that style, he could be great.

  126. 126 BlindChow said at 4:31 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    You know, I was just about to mention how we hadn’t had a “Kelly wants a mobile QB” comment from ACViking in awhile… ๐Ÿ™‚

  127. 127 Ark87 said at 6:24 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    I think you’re a little harsh on Kelly. If Foles proves to be a winner and gets this team to the playoffs, I think Kelly would gladly stick with him. Kelly does have a preferred way of doing things, but he has shown he won’t try to force it.

    The example for my case: James Casey. Chip Kelly came on board and the very first thing he did was make damned sure we got James Casey and brought Mike Vick back. We outbid everyone by a mile because we NEEDED that versatile chess piece. Our offense was going to look like New England’s did. but with the read option being a key piece of it. In the second round we picked up Zach Ertz, and it was clear. Right then we know, holy crap, we got James Casey, Zach Ertz, Clay Harbor, and Brent Celek. TE’S WOOOOOOW. Speed and versatility gallore! Jeez is Celek even going to make the team!?

    Well it turned out that Celek and Avant are pretty good and the 11 personnel package was better than the 12 so that’s been our base package ever since. And our prized FA pick-up has been relegated to special teams every since.

    My point is, I think chip is pretty good at gauging overall effectiveness. Yes big guys beat up little guys, but we still have Earl Wolffe, Brandon Boykin, and Mychal Kendricks on that D. And yes mobile QB’s can be deadly in the read option, but we still picked up Matt Barkley. Chip has demonstrated time after time that he won’t put a lesser football product on the field for a singular desirable trait.

    Or in this case, I don’t think he will take a good football product off the field for lack of a single desirable trait.

  128. 128 Ark87 said at 6:33 PM on November 27th, 2013:

    First off, nice article, you did excellent on the podcast….but I miss Jimmy. Those guys were good fans and all but… they could do with some seasonin’ on some good websites (like this one!)