JuniorNB said:
Mr. Irrelevant said:
JuniorNB said:
ShaHBucks said:
Deamon, do you want my take on Chip now?
No, but I'd love to hear your take on your mancrush, Foles. He may have been the only QB in the league who sucked as much as Bradford.

Small sample size and all, I know, but through 2 games:
Foles - 59.3% CP, 2 TD, 0 INT, 7.45 ANY/A.
Bradford - 66.3% CP, 2 TD, 4 INT, 4.61 ANY/A.
The former, of course, is recording these stats under noted offensive genius Jeff Fisher.
And Foles' career average ANY/A is 6.91 to Bradford's 5.14.
We have plenty of evidence that Foles is a serviceable NFL QB with the potential to be an above-average one. Bradford may well be better - either in Chip's system or even overall - but what little evidence he's provided thus far isn't exactly a ringing endorsement of the hypothesis.
Foles showed last year that he is very average. He's showing it again this year. Chip rolled the dice and was/is betting that a healthy Bradford, with all of his tools, was a franchise-type quarterback that could get Philly to a Super Bowl or two. After two games, his vision doesn't seem to be working out. Maybe Bradford will never be the quarterback that he was supposed to be coming out of college. But I'm not blaming Chip for not wanting to go with an average Nick Foles. Just like I won't fault him if he sees that Bradford is nothing special and elects to let him sign elsewhere after the season. I don't want a coach who's satisfied with average.
I don't disagree with anything in that paragraph. In fact I don't disagree with anything you've written, other than your contention that Foles sucks.
Broadly speaking, there are 3 classifications of NFL QBs: (1) those who can put an average team on their shoulders and carry them to a Super Bowl; (2) those who can win a Super Bowl when given an excellent supporting cast; and (3) those who can't do either.
I feel pretty safe in tabbing Foles as a bucket #2 guy who's never going to grow into a bucket #1 guy. 99% of NFL head coaches would stick with that guy, work like hell to try to surround him with All-Pros, and cross their fingers that that's enough to do the trick. This natural risk-aversion is why guys like Cutler, Stafford, and Dalton earn monster contracts for being extremely average QBs.
Chip's one of the very few who would toss a bucket 2 guy overboard in favor of a guy whose performance and injury history to date gives him, let's say, a 20% chance of being a bucket 1 guy but a 40% chance of being a bucket 3 guy. I respect both his opinion and his willingness to take that risk. But just because he tossed Foles aside for Bradford in his specific situation doesn't mean that Foles sucks, or even that Bradford will ever be better than he will.