Can someone explain this to me? (1 Viewer)

[Bobtender]

Am I missing something?

Copy & paste from Week 16 "Passing Matchups" 

The big story to watch for the Eagles offense is whether or not the Vikings can pull off a win on Saturday. A Vikings victory would mean the Eagles have clinched their division, and very likely also lead to many starters, such as Foles and Ertz, seeing rest for some or all of this game. If the Vikings do win, pay very close attention to the active/inactive list for this game and proceed with extreme caution. If Foles were to sit out, Nate Sudfeld suddenly becomes a massive value on most daily fantasy sites

This is just a typo correct?

First of all the Eagles have already clinched their division.

Secondly, if the Vikings win on Saturday they will have 12 wins (same as the Eagles) and technically still in contention for the #1 overall seed in the NFC.

No matter what happens on Saturday the Eagles still want to win on Sunday... correct?

 

[msudaisy26]

I find it hard to believe they would sit Foles. The guy has played 1 full game all year and now they are going to rest him if, for some or all of the games if, the Vikings lose for week 16, week 17 and then they have a bye. So Foles will have roughly 2 full games of action in the span of 5 weeks? Sounds like a recipe for getting bounced in their 1st game because of rust. 

The Vikings win thing is a typo, to your last question I would say the Eagles don't care if they win on Sunday if the Vikings lose, but I can't see them resting Foles because he just lacks the reps and game action this year. Ertz is a different story.

 

[belljr]

Am I missing something?

Copy & paste from Week 16 "Passing Matchups" 

The big story to watch for the Eagles offense is whether or not the Vikings can pull off a win on Saturday. A Vikings victory would mean the Eagles have clinched their division, and very likely also lead to many starters, such as Foles and Ertz, seeing rest for some or all of this game. If the Vikings do win, pay very close attention to the active/inactive list for this game and proceed with extreme caution. If Foles were to sit out, Nate Sudfeld suddenly becomes a massive value on most daily fantasy sites

This is just a typo correct?

First of all the Eagles have already clinched their division.

Secondly, if the Vikings win on Saturday they will have 12 wins (same as the Eagles) and technically still in contention for the #1 overall seed in the NFC.

No matter what happens on Saturday the Eagles still want to win on Sunday... correct?

If the VIkings lose either of their last 2 games - Eagles #1

If Eagles win Sunday - -Eagles #1

Only way for Minnesota to be #1 is Win both and Eagles lose both.

I have no idea what that blurb is saying.

If the Vikings lose then you need to be concerned imo

 

[Go DC Yourself]

I find it hard to believe they would sit Foles. The guy has played 1 full game all year and now they are going to rest him if, for some or all of the games if, the Vikings lose for week 16, week 17 and then they have a bye. So Foles will have roughly 2 full games of action in the span of 5 weeks? Sounds like a recipe for getting bounced in their 1st game because of rust. 

The Vikings win thing is a typo, to your last question I would say the Eagles don't care if they win on Sunday if the Vikings lose, but I can't see them resting Foles because he just lacks the reps and game action this year. Ertz is a different story.

The objective is not to rest Foles, it is to get his backup, Sudfeld, experience in the event he is needed during the playoffs.  IIRC, Sudfeld was picked up by them when he was cut by the Redskins, and he's never played a down in an NFL regular season game.

 

[Bobtender]

Am I missing something?

Copy & paste from Week 16 "Passing Matchups" 

The big story to watch for the Eagles offense is whether or not the Vikings can pull off a win on Saturday. A Vikings victory would mean the Eagles have clinched their division, and very likely also lead to many starters, such as Foles and Ertz, seeing rest for some or all of this game. If the Vikings do win, pay very close attention to the active/inactive list for this game and proceed with extreme caution. If Foles were to sit out, Nate Sudfeld suddenly becomes a massive value on most daily fantasy sites

This is just a typo correct?

First of all the Eagles have already clinched their division.

Secondly, if the Vikings win on Saturday they will have 12 wins (same as the Eagles) and technically still in contention for the #1 overall seed in the NFC.

No matter what happens on Saturday the Eagles still want to win on Sunday... correct?

Ok, I think I know what the author meant to say...

If the Packers pull off a win Saturday and the Vikings lose, then the Eagles will clinch the #1 seed and home field throughout the playoffs. 

 

[steelers1080]

If the Vikings lose then the Eagles have locked the #1 seed and the bye. That said, the Eagles SHOULD play Foles because he needs the reps. Whether they will or not, or if they play him for a half this week and a half next week, remains to be seen. 

I currently have Foles starting and if the Vikings win (which they will) then I'll leave him in. If they lose I'll pull him and put in Alex Smith. The benefit of the Vikings playing Saturday.

 

[Jed]

The objective is not to rest Foles, it is to get his backup, Sudfeld, experience in the event he is needed during the playoffs.  IIRC, Sudfeld was picked up by them when he was cut by the Redskins, and he's never played a down in an NFL regular season game.

If they have to play Sudfeld at all in the playoffs they might as well shut it down. Much better to get Foles more reps.

 

[belljr]

I am allowed one pickup a week - I am so torn on Keenum or FOles   This is not helping

 

[msudaisy26]

The objective is not to rest Foles, it is to get his backup, Sudfeld, experience in the event he is needed during the playoffs.  IIRC, Sudfeld was picked up by them when he was cut by the Redskins, and he's never played a down in an NFL regular season game.

I understand that most of the time, but this is a special case. Foles has hardly played all year, with Foles they are still legit contenders to win the super bowl. With Sudfeld they aren't. Foles needs all the reps he can get so this team can go far, worrying about what might happen if Sudfeld has to go in shouldn't be on their list of priorities.

 

[msudaisy26]

Keenum

 

[zftcg]

If they have to play Sudfeld at all in the playoffs they might as well shut it down. Much better to get Foles more reps.

"We don't practice f###ed."

 

[Go DC Yourself]

I understand that most of the time, but this is a special case. Foles has hardly played all year, with Foles they are still legit contenders to win the super bowl. With Sudfeld they aren't. Foles needs all the reps he can get so this team can go far, worrying about what might happen if Sudfeld has to go in shouldn't be on their list of priorities.

If they have to play Sudfeld at all in the playoffs they might as well shut it down. Much better to get Foles more reps.

So if Foles gets his bell rung with the Eagles up 14 in the fourth quarter they should shut it down?  Getting Sudfeld a couple of series so he gets his feet wet isn't going to kill Foles' development. 

 

[zftcg]

So if Foles gets his bell rung with the Eagles up 14 in the fourth quarter they should shut it down?  Getting Sudfeld a couple of series so he gets his feet wet isn't going to kill Foles' development. 

Sure, but from a fantasy perspective I think there's a low probability that Sudfeld will take meaningful reps away from Foles this week, and I wouldn't weigh it too heavily in deciding whether to start Foles. Some people on this board seem to think Foles will get pulled after two series or something.

 

[JohnnyU]

If the Eagles wind up playing a meaningless game or two, we'll probably see a mixture of Nick Foles and Nate Sudfeld at quarterback, head coach Doug Pederson indicated Monday.
 
The Eagles, 12-2, have clinched a first-round bye and can clinch home-field advantage in the NFC playoffs as early as Saturday, if the Packers beat the Vikings.

 If that doesn't happen, they can clinch with a win over the Raiders at the Linc or on the final day of the season with a win over the Cowboys or a Vikings loss to the Bears.
 
If the Eagles have the No. 1 seed locked up at any point, Pederson will have to figure out a way to balance getting Foles work that he desperately needs after sitting on the bench for most of the last 14 months and also making sure Foles is healthy going into the playoffs.
 
The only other quarterback on the roster is Sudfeld, who has never played a regular-season snap in the NFL and has never even played in a preseason game for the Eagles.
 
In 2004, the Eagles clinched home-field with two weeks left, and Andy Reid -- who Pederson played for here and coached under both here and in Kansas City -- rested Donovan McNabb for most of the last two games.
 
McNabb played one series against the Rams and didn't play at all against the Bengals, and the Eagles suffered blowout losses in both games with Koy Detmer and Jeff Blake at quarterback on their way to the Super Bowl.
 
But McNabb had been the starter all year and for most of the last six years, since replacing Pederson in 1999. This is a totally different situation, since Foles' start against the Giants was his first in 14 months and first for the Eagles in three years.
 
Even with Sundays' win against the Giants, he's thrown only 107 passes since November of 2015.
 
"You want Nick to play as much as you can and get as many reps as you can and let him play and continue to work through some things and work the rapport with the offense and all of that," Pederson said.
 
Pederson wouldn't say exactly how much Foles would play against the Raiders and Cowboys if the Eagles do clinch Saturday.
 
"When we win and if we get to cross that bridge, we'll make that decision," Pederson said.
 
As for Sudfeld, his only NFL experience has been in the preseason with the Redskins the last two years, and obviously the Eagles don't want to go into the postseason with a No. 2 quarterback who's never played a regular-season snap in his life.
 
As a rookie last year, Sudfeld was 28-for-53 for 238 yards with three touchdowns and no interceptions in preseason games against the Falcons, Jets and Buccaneers. This past summer, he was 33-for-56 for 360 yards with no TDs or INTs in appearances against the Ravens, Packers and Buccaneers.
 
His last action was Aug. 31 in Tampa. Four days later, the Redskins released him and the Eagles signed him to the practice squad. They signed him to the 53-man roster last month.
 
"Ideally, yeah, you'd like to get him some time and some reps here in the next couple of ballgames," Pederson said.

https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/sports/csn/eagles/The_plan_for_Nick_Foles__Nate_Sudfeld_if_Eagles_clinch-465226273.html

It gets dicey if the Packers win, but I don't expect that to happen.  If the Eagles have to win against the Raiders to clinch #1 seed I expect Foles to play the entire game, or until it gets out of hand, and it will.

 

[voiceofunreason]

So if Foles gets his bell rung with the Eagles up 14 in the fourth quarter they should shut it down?  Getting Sudfeld a couple of series so he gets his feet wet isn't going to kill Foles' development. 

Nobody builds their strategy around winning the super bowl with there third string qb.

 

[Hot Sauce Guy]

Not to be “that guy”, but y’all keep talking about the Eagles winning on Sunday. 

There’s no way that the Eagles will win on Sunday.

Because they play on Monday. 

 

[-OZ-]

The objective is not to rest Foles, it is to get his backup, Sudfeld, experience in the event he is needed during the playoffs.  IIRC, Sudfeld was picked up by them when he was cut by the Redskins, and he's never played a down in an NFL regular season game.

I'm just thinking it's best to ensure foles doesn't get hurt.

I am allowed one pickup a week - I am so torn on Keenum or FOles   This is not helping

Seriously? How is keenum not taken already?

 

[belljr]

I'm just thinking it's best to ensure foles doesn't get hurt.

Seriously? How is keenum not taken already?

   

 

[whiskey7]

Seriously? How is keenum not taken already?

I think its like someone (zfctg?) said in another thread...people cant get over the fact its Case Keenum and wonder when he turns back into a pumpkin.

 

[zftcg]

I think its like someone (zfctg?) said in another thread...people cant get over the fact its Case Keenum and wonder when he turns back into a pumpkin.

Ha, thanks for the shoutout! Maybe Keenum should pull an Albert Belle/Giancarlo Stanton and just change his name to improve his image. "Man, who is that hot young QB for the Vikings?" "Why, it's Charlie Keenum!"

Hell, it worked for David Carr. (Wait, don't tell me you actually bought the ridiculous cover story that the Raiders QB is actually David's younger brother!)