Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

The Nick Foles era


Jed

Recommended Posts

...and the Eagles go 9 - 7 and just miss the playoffs or get the last wild card spot and lose in the first round.

If the Eagles go 9-7 they might win that Division by two games!

Seriously. We're 3-3 right now. If we win our next 2, we'll be 5-3 with a 4-0 record in the division. I'd say we run away with the division in that scenario.

Good point I forgot how bad the division is. I would still like to hear from some Philly homers. My gut tells me even if this happens the Eagles and Kelly will take a quarterback early in the draft next year.

If Vick goes in FA, then they'll be taking a QB. Do you consider late 2nd or 3rd round early? If so, I'd bet you're right, but right now it's hard to envision a scenario where the Eagles take a QB in the top 10.

This will have a lot to do with where they think Barkley is at that time. IF he doesnt play this year and gets his shoulder back to 100% while learning he could be in line for the #2 job next season if Foles takes the starting job.

With everyone wanting and taking QB's next year I would love to have Foles take the starting job and get a top defesnive player due to everyone going QB crazy.

That would be the dream scenario. Win the division and we get a pick in the 20s. Maybe a top 10 guy drops because teams are reaching for qbs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Foles is too good for the Eagles to abandon ship and start over.

Again, he's played 6.5 games. I think we should let the guy play before we anoint him anything either way.

It didn't take Was, Mia, Sea, Ind long before they put faith in their QB from Foles class.

I think that is a little different. 2 of those were the top 2 picks and the other only had to beat out Matt Flynn and Tarvaras Jackson.

Exactly. Foles didn't win the camp battle. Will take time for him to cement the job. Comparing him to Luck, RG3, Tannenhill and Wilson doesn't do Foles justice because those situations are completely different. He's on the right track though. Just keep winning and playing well.

This makes me think a little bit. Why ever draft a quarterback outside of the first round? If you don't have the conviction to make a quarterback the leader of your team, I don't think it usually works out very well. Of course there are exceptions to the rule (Russell Wilson jumps out the most), but what's the point of wasting a third or fourth round pick on a quarterback that you expect to be a backup?

With that being said, I really like Foles. I also was cheering when the Eagles traded up for Barkley. I guess it shows my Eagles fan bias.

Teams need backups too. Can't always pay a vet $5mil to hold a clipboard. Much cheaper to have a young backup. Then you have the potential to grow him into something. Doesn't always happen but you never know if Tom Brady is waiting in the 6th round to be plucked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Foles is too good for the Eagles to abandon ship and start over.

Again, he's played 6.5 games. I think we should let the guy play before we anoint him anything either way.

It didn't take Was, Mia, Sea, Ind long before they put faith in their QB from Foles class.

I think that is a little different. 2 of those were the top 2 picks and the other only had to beat out Matt Flynn and Tarvaras Jackson.

Exactly. Foles didn't win the camp battle. Will take time for him to cement the job. Comparing him to Luck, RG3, Tannenhill and Wilson doesn't do Foles justice because those situations are completely different. He's on the right track though. Just keep winning and playing well.

When Foles is getting fitted for a gold jacket some time after his career is over, these are the guys he will be compared to. Lets just start now. I know he doesn't pass some of your "eye test" or have the draft status, but his numbers are exceptional and stack up well with those names pound for pound. It's just a matter of maintaining his efficiency with more playing time. That's usually something players do across all sports if you follow stats. Players play consistently over the years(cough Mike Vick). The only problem with Foles is he doesn't have a coaching staff and front office backing him like Luck, Tanne, RG3 and Wilson.

As far as FF goes, you can make a case for Foles over all of those guys because of this offensive system. Luck, RG and Wilson play for boring running teams. Foles might be more productive over the year due to sheer volume and a innovative coach if we are really witnessing the next NE/NO kind of offense. Ehh I'll hold that thought..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Foles is too good for the Eagles to abandon ship and start over.

Again, he's played 6.5 games. I think we should let the guy play before we anoint him anything either way.

It didn't take Was, Mia, Sea, Ind long before they put faith in their QB from Foles class.

I think that is a little different. 2 of those were the top 2 picks and the other only had to beat out Matt Flynn and Tarvaras Jackson.

Exactly. Foles didn't win the camp battle. Will take time for him to cement the job. Comparing him to Luck, RG3, Tannenhill and Wilson doesn't do Foles justice because those situations are completely different. He's on the right track though. Just keep winning and playing well.

When Foles is getting fitted for a gold jacket some time after his career is over, these are the guys he will be compared to. Lets just start now. I know he doesn't pass some of your "eye test" or have the draft status, but his numbers are exceptional and stack up well with those names pound for pound. It's just a matter of maintaining his efficiency with more playing time. That's usually something players do across all sports if you follow stats. Players play consistently over the years(cough Mike Vick). The only problem with Foles is he doesn't have a coaching staff and front office backing him like Luck, Tanne, RG3 and Wilson.

As far as FF goes, you can make a case for Foles over all of those guys because of this offensive system. Luck, RG and Wilson play for boring running teams. Foles might be more productive over the year due to sheer volume and a innovative coach if we are really witnessing the next NE/NO kind of offense. Ehh I'll hold that thought..

Easy there, baby steps young grasshopper. You have to crawl before you walk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Foles is too good for the Eagles to abandon ship and start over.

Again, he's played 6.5 games. I think we should let the guy play before we anoint him anything either way.

It didn't take Was, Mia, Sea, Ind long before they put faith in their QB from Foles class.

I think that is a little different. 2 of those were the top 2 picks and the other only had to beat out Matt Flynn and Tarvaras Jackson.

Exactly. Foles didn't win the camp battle. Will take time for him to cement the job. Comparing him to Luck, RG3, Tannenhill and Wilson doesn't do Foles justice because those situations are completely different. He's on the right track though. Just keep winning and playing well.
When Foles is getting fitted for a gold jacket some time after his career is over, these are the guys he will be compared to. Lets just start now. I know he doesn't pass some of your "eye test" or have the draft status, but his numbers are exceptional and stack up well with those names pound for pound. It's just a matter of maintaining his efficiency with more playing time. That's usually something players do across all sports if you follow stats. Players play consistently over the years(cough Mike Vick). The only problem with Foles is he doesn't have a coaching staff and front office backing him like Luck, Tanne, RG3 and Wilson.

As far as FF goes, you can make a case for Foles over all of those guys because of this offensive system. Luck, RG and Wilson play for boring running teams. Foles might be more productive over the year due to sheer volume and a innovative coach if we are really witnessing the next NE/NO kind of offense. Ehh I'll hold that thought..

Hyperbole aside, Foles situation is different BECAUSE he doesn't have the full backing of the coaching staff and front office. This was and Andy Reid pick. Kelly has no obligation to start him. He's looking at it from a pure football standpoint of can Foles play. That's why he wasn't handed the job.

Those other situations all had the coaching staff and front office heads on the line. Luck and RG3 are the franchise being the #1 & #2 picks overall. Wash gave up 3 first rounders even for RG3. They were invested fully before either player ever stepped into the locker room. Tannehill was drafted by Philbin. His coaching career is tied directly to Tannehill. Wilson had Matt Flynn to beat out in camp not a former #1 overall pick. So there's no pressure in Seattle's FO and fanbase to get Flynn in there should Wilson have faltered.

Foles is earning it and that might be better for him. Like Brady he's had to fight to get a chance and prove he should keep it with a veteran hovering over his shoulder.

As for FF, I completely agree. This is the #2 offense in the league and they manhandled the #5 defense in the league last week with Foles in there. A defense that shutdown Brady and Brees. I traded Luck away with Wilson and Amendola to get Vick and Foles back with other pieces 3 weeks ago. I'm buying in.

Edited by Insein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the most encouraging things for Foles is that he's only taken two sacks on 63 drop backs. He has some more proving to do yet, but I think his upside is a strong-armed Matt Schaub with more attempts.

Let's see how he does against a proven pass defense, but I like what I'm seeing a lot so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the most encouraging things for Foles is that he's only taken two sacks on 63 drop backs. He has some more proving to do yet, but I think his upside is a strong-armed Matt Schaub with more attempts.

Let's see how he does against a proven pass defense, but I like what I'm seeing a lot so far.

Tampa was ranked around 11 against the pass before this past week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a bit surprised at the tone of this conversation, with everyone assuming it is Foles' job to lose. Hasn't Kelly come out and said Vick will be the starter as soon as he's healthy? Why would he say that if it wasn't his intention?

No he hasn't. He gave the old "We'll evaluate the situation as we go."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Foles is too good for the Eagles to abandon ship and start over.

Again, he's played 6.5 games. I think we should let the guy play before we anoint him anything either way.

It didn't take Was, Mia, Sea, Ind long before they put faith in their QB from Foles class.

I think that is a little different. 2 of those were the top 2 picks and the other only had to beat out Matt Flynn and Tarvaras Jackson.

Exactly. Foles didn't win the camp battle. Will take time for him to cement the job. Comparing him to Luck, RG3, Tannenhill and Wilson doesn't do Foles justice because those situations are completely different. He's on the right track though. Just keep winning and playing well.
When Foles is getting fitted for a gold jacket some time after his career is over, these are the guys he will be compared to. Lets just start now. I know he doesn't pass some of your "eye test" or have the draft status, but his numbers are exceptional and stack up well with those names pound for pound. It's just a matter of maintaining his efficiency with more playing time. That's usually something players do across all sports if you follow stats. Players play consistently over the years(cough Mike Vick). The only problem with Foles is he doesn't have a coaching staff and front office backing him like Luck, Tanne, RG3 and Wilson.

As far as FF goes, you can make a case for Foles over all of those guys because of this offensive system. Luck, RG and Wilson play for boring running teams. Foles might be more productive over the year due to sheer volume and a innovative coach if we are really witnessing the next NE/NO kind of offense. Ehh I'll hold that thought..

Hyperbole aside, Foles situation is different BECAUSE he doesn't have the full backing of the coaching staff and front office. This was and Andy Reid pick. Kelly has no obligation to start him. He's looking at it from a pure football standpoint of can Foles play. That's why he wasn't handed the job.

Those other situations all had the coaching staff and front office heads on the line. Luck and RG3 are the franchise being the #1 & #2 picks overall. Wash gave up 3 first rounders even for RG3. They were invested fully before eother player ever stepped into the locker room. Tannehill was deafted by Philbin. His coaching career is tied directly to Tannehill. Wilson had Matt Flynn to beat out in camp not a former #1 overall pick. So there's no pressure in Seattle's FO and fanbase to get Flynn in there should Wilson have faltered.

Foles is earning it and that might be better for him. Like Brady he's had to fight to get a chance and prove he should keep it with a veteran hovering over his shoulder.

I know that already. We sold our soul to Chip Kelly, not Nick Foles. That's not Foles fault though.

The bolded is probably necessary with our fan base. I said before that Foles has to overprove himself to shake the late round draftpick stigma just like Russel Wilson did. He's getting there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Despite Foles’ strong showing, there will not be a quarterback controversy in Philadelphia, and rightly so, since Vick being taken out of the game was due to injury instead of his play.

“Yes,” Kelly said emphatically when asked if Vick would be his starter if fully healthy.

:shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Foles is too good for the Eagles to abandon ship and start over.

Again, he's played 6.5 games. I think we should let the guy play before we anoint him anything either way.

It didn't take Was, Mia, Sea, Ind long before they put faith in their QB from Foles class.

I think that is a little different. 2 of those were the top 2 picks and the other only had to beat out Matt Flynn and Tarvaras Jackson.

Exactly. Foles didn't win the camp battle. Will take time for him to cement the job. Comparing him to Luck, RG3, Tannenhill and Wilson doesn't do Foles justice because those situations are completely different. He's on the right track though. Just keep winning and playing well.
When Foles is getting fitted for a gold jacket some time after his career is over, these are the guys he will be compared to. Lets just start now. I know he doesn't pass some of your "eye test" or have the draft status, but his numbers are exceptional and stack up well with those names pound for pound. It's just a matter of maintaining his efficiency with more playing time. That's usually something players do across all sports if you follow stats. Players play consistently over the years(cough Mike Vick). The only problem with Foles is he doesn't have a coaching staff and front office backing him like Luck, Tanne, RG3 and Wilson.

As far as FF goes, you can make a case for Foles over all of those guys because of this offensive system. Luck, RG and Wilson play for boring running teams. Foles might be more productive over the year due to sheer volume and a innovative coach if we are really witnessing the next NE/NO kind of offense. Ehh I'll hold that thought..

Hyperbole aside, Foles situation is different BECAUSE he doesn't have the full backing of the coaching staff and front office. This was and Andy Reid pick. Kelly has no obligation to start him. He's looking at it from a pure football standpoint of can Foles play. That's why he wasn't handed the job.

Those other situations all had the coaching staff and front office heads on the line. Luck and RG3 are the franchise being the #1 & #2 picks overall. Wash gave up 3 first rounders even for RG3. They were invested fully before eother player ever stepped into the locker room. Tannehill was deafted by Philbin. His coaching career is tied directly to Tannehill. Wilson had Matt Flynn to beat out in camp not a former #1 overall pick. So there's no pressure in Seattle's FO and fanbase to get Flynn in there should Wilson have faltered.

Foles is earning it and that might be better for him. Like Brady he's had to fight to get a chance and prove he should keep it with a veteran hovering over his shoulder.

I know that already. We sold our soul to Chip Kelly, not Nick Foles. That's not Foles fault though.

The bolded is probably necessary with our fan base. I said before that Foles has to overprove himself to shake the late round draftpick stigma just like Russel Wilson did. He's getting there...

Like I said, he may be better off for it though. Maybe he's the next Brady. :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Despite Foles strong showing, there will not be a quarterback controversy in Philadelphia, and rightly so, since Vick being taken out of the game was due to injury instead of his play.

Yes, Kelly said emphatically when asked if Vick would be his starter if fully healthy.

:shrug:

You're looking at the quote from 10/6. Here's this weeks.

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2013/10/14/chip-kelly-remains-noncommittal-on-vick-or-nick/

"Depends on where we are from a health standpoint. Until we know what the health is I'm not saying what anybody or anybody is."

And

"We just have to get ready to go play the next team. All of our decisions are based on whos going to give us the best opportunity to win."

:shrug:

Edited by Insein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Foles loses to Dal what would you guys think of him? This is probably the only reason I've been grabing Vick on discount in my dynasty leagues.

Depends how he played. If we lose 45-42 and he has another monster stat line with no turnovers, I think he stays. If we lose and he throws a bunch of picks well then Kelly will go back to Vick. A lot riding on this game for Nick.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Despite Foles strong showing, there will not be a quarterback controversy in Philadelphia, and rightly so, since Vick being taken out of the game was due to injury instead of his play.

Yes, Kelly said emphatically when asked if Vick would be his starter if fully healthy.

:shrug:

You're looking at the quote from 10/6. Here's this weeks.

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2013/10/14/chip-kelly-remains-noncommittal-on-vick-or-nick/

"Depends on where we are from a health standpoint. Until we know what the health is I'm not saying what anybody or anybody is."

And

"We just have to get ready to go play the next team. All of our decisions are based on whos going to give us the best opportunity to win."

:shrug:

Another way to look at this is coach speak to hide who will be the starter to slow the opponent's game planning. They are very different QBs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Foles loses to Dal what would you guys think of him? This is probably the only reason I've been grabing Vick on discount in my dynasty leagues.

Depends how he played. If we lose 45-42 and he has another monster stat line with no turnovers, I think he stays. If we lose and he throws a bunch of picks well then Kelly will go back to Vick. A lot riding on this game for Nick.

Such a week-to-week league
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Despite Foles strong showing, there will not be a quarterback controversy in Philadelphia, and rightly so, since Vick being taken out of the game was due to injury instead of his play.

Yes, Kelly said emphatically when asked if Vick would be his starter if fully healthy.

:shrug:

You're looking at the quote from 10/6. Here's this weeks.

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2013/10/14/chip-kelly-remains-noncommittal-on-vick-or-nick/

"Depends on where we are from a health standpoint. Until we know what the health is I'm not saying what anybody or anybody is."

And

"We just have to get ready to go play the next team. All of our decisions are based on whos going to give us the best opportunity to win."

:shrug:

Seems like a pretty reasonable interpretation is, Vick will still be the starter if he's healthy. If Kelly has decided to go with Foles, then Vick's health wouldn't be a factor, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Foles loses to Dal what would you guys think of him? This is probably the only reason I've been grabing Vick on discount in my dynasty leagues.

Depends how he played. If we lose 45-42 and he has another monster stat line with no turnovers, I think he stays. If we lose and he throws a bunch of picks well then Kelly will go back to Vick. A lot riding on this game for Nick.

I agree with this and would like to add for the season. I still am worried going into the draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Foles loses to Dal what would you guys think of him? This is probably the only reason I've been grabing Vick on discount in my dynasty leagues.

Depends how he played. If we lose 45-42 and he has another monster stat line with no turnovers, I think he stays. If we lose and he throws a bunch of picks well then Kelly will go back to Vick. A lot riding on this game for Nick.

Such a week-to-week league

We also probably have the most unstable QB situation in the NFC

Edited by Bigboy10182000
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Foles loses to Dal what would you guys think of him? This is probably the only reason I've been grabing Vick on discount in my dynasty leagues.

Depends how he played. If we lose 45-42 and he has another monster stat line with no turnovers, I think he stays. If we lose and he throws a bunch of picks well then Kelly will go back to Vick. A lot riding on this game for Nick.

That AND it's Dallas week AND we have like a 10 game losing streak at home. He may be a victim of the pressure thsi time around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Despite Foles strong showing, there will not be a quarterback controversy in Philadelphia, and rightly so, since Vick being taken out of the game was due to injury instead of his play.

Yes, Kelly said emphatically when asked if Vick would be his starter if fully healthy.

:shrug:

You're looking at the quote from 10/6. Here's this weeks.

http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2013/10/14/chip-kelly-remains-noncommittal-on-vick-or-nick/

"Depends on where we are from a health standpoint. Until we know what the health is I'm not saying what anybody or anybody is."

And

"We just have to get ready to go play the next team. All of our decisions are based on whos going to give us the best opportunity to win."

:shrug:

Seems like a pretty reasonable interpretation is, Vick will still be the starter if he's healthy. If Kelly has decided to go with Foles, then Vick's health wouldn't be a factor, right?

If he gave a definitive "yes" last week and a "we'll see" this week, how do you reasonably interpret Vick the starter? I reasonably interpret that if Foles plays well, he'll stay in there. If he doesn't, Kelly will go back to Vick. Pretty simple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Foles loses to Dal what would you guys think of him? This is probably the only reason I've been grabing Vick on discount in my dynasty leagues.

Depends how he played. If we lose 45-42 and he has another monster stat line with no turnovers, I think he stays. If we lose and he throws a bunch of picks well then Kelly will go back to Vick. A lot riding on this game for Nick.
Such a week-to-week league

We also probably have the most unstable QB situation in the NFC

I think Minny, Tampa, Arizona and Stl would beg to differ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Foles loses to Dal what would you guys think of him? This is probably the only reason I've been grabing Vick on discount in my dynasty leagues.

Depends how he played. If we lose 45-42 and he has another monster stat line with no turnovers, I think he stays. If we lose and he throws a bunch of picks well then Kelly will go back to Vick. A lot riding on this game for Nick.
Such a week-to-week league

We also probably have the most unstable QB situation in the NFC

I think Minny, Tampa, Arizona and Stl would beg to differ.

Maybe Minnesota but I just assumed after Freeman thats it.

Tampa, Arizona and Stl all have starters with no one breathing down their necks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Foles loses to Dal what would you guys think of him? This is probably the only reason I've been grabing Vick on discount in my dynasty leagues.

Depends how he played. If we lose 45-42 and he has another monster stat line with no turnovers, I think he stays. If we lose and he throws a bunch of picks well then Kelly will go back to Vick. A lot riding on this game for Nick.
Such a week-to-week league

We also probably have the most unstable QB situation in the NFC

I think Minny, Tampa, Arizona and Stl would beg to differ.

Maybe Minnesota but I just assumed after Freeman thats it.

Tampa, Arizona and Stl all have starters with no one breathing down their necks

Well if that's what you meant then yea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the most encouraging things for Foles is that he's only taken two sacks on 63 drop backs. He has some more proving to do yet, but I think his upside is a strong-armed Matt Schaub with more attempts.

Let's see how he does against a proven pass defense, but I like what I'm seeing a lot so far.

with the opponents the eagles play for the next bunch we may not see that... dallas,giants,oakland,gb,wash,bye,ari,detroit,minn, chi, dallas... Looks like all ####ty pass d... FOLES FOR PRESIDENT... Im all in.. Vick should be bench warmer if Chip has a clue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Foles loses to Dal what would you guys think of him? This is probably the only reason I've been grabing Vick on discount in my dynasty leagues.

Depends how he played. If we lose 45-42 and he has another monster stat line with no turnovers, I think he stays. If we lose and he throws a bunch of picks well then Kelly will go back to Vick. A lot riding on this game for Nick.
Such a week-to-week league

We also probably have the most unstable QB situation in the NFC

I think Minny, Tampa, Arizona and Stl would beg to differ.

Maybe Minnesota but I just assumed after Freeman thats it.

Tampa, Arizona and Stl all have starters with no one breathing down their necks

I think he meant Buffalo and cleveland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Foles loses to Dal what would you guys think of him? This is probably the only reason I've been grabing Vick on discount in my dynasty leagues.

Depends how he played. If we lose 45-42 and he has another monster stat line with no turnovers, I think he stays. If we lose and he throws a bunch of picks well then Kelly will go back to Vick. A lot riding on this game for Nick.
Such a week-to-week league

We also probably have the most unstable QB situation in the NFC

I think Minny, Tampa, Arizona and Stl would beg to differ.

Maybe Minnesota but I just assumed after Freeman thats it.

Tampa, Arizona and Stl all have starters with no one breathing down their necks

I think he meant Buffalo and cleveland.

he said NFC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a bit surprised at the tone of this conversation, with everyone assuming it is Foles' job to lose. Hasn't Kelly come out and said Vick will be the starter as soon as he's healthy? Why would he say that if it wasn't his intention?

Seems to me they've had a chance to review the game film. Here's the latest quote from OC Pat Shurmur:

“I can probably answer some of the [questions] that are going to come along here. Coach Kelly will address those issues about who the quarterback is when both of them are healthy. At this point we’ll go with Nick, and when Mike’s healthy we’ll have that discussion.”

That is different then saying, “when Mike’s healthy he’s our guy.” There is a discussion to be had, apparently.

If you notice, the conversation is changing. Chip Kelly, when asked following the Giants game if Vick is the starter when healthy, firmly responded, “Yes.”

On Monday when asked if that is still the case, Kelly said: “Until we know what the health is I’m not saying what anybody or anybody is.”

For now, the quarterback decision is based on health. How about when Vick’s hamstring is all healed up? That’s where the intrigue lies.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a bit surprised at the tone of this conversation, with everyone assuming it is Foles' job to lose. Hasn't Kelly come out and said Vick will be the starter as soon as he's healthy? Why would he say that if it wasn't his intention?

Seems to me they've had a chance to review the game film. Here's the latest quote from OC Pat Shurmur:

“I can probably answer some of the [questions] that are going to come along here. Coach Kelly will address those issues about who the quarterback is when both of them are healthy. At this point we’ll go with Nick, and when Mike’s healthy we’ll have that discussion.”

That is different then saying, “when Mike’s healthy he’s our guy.” There is a discussion to be had, apparently.

If you notice, the conversation is changing. Chip Kelly, when asked following the Giants game if Vick is the starter when healthy, firmly responded, “Yes.”

On Monday when asked if that is still the case, Kelly said: “Until we know what the health is I’m not saying what anybody or anybody is.”

For now, the quarterback decision is based on health. How about when Vick’s hamstring is all healed up? That’s where the intrigue lies.

Thank you. Someone gets it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a bit surprised at the tone of this conversation, with everyone assuming it is Foles' job to lose. Hasn't Kelly come out and said Vick will be the starter as soon as he's healthy? Why would he say that if it wasn't his intention?

Seems to me they've had a chance to review the game film. Here's the latest quote from OC Pat Shurmur:

“I can probably answer some of the [questions] that are going to come along here. Coach Kelly will address those issues about who the quarterback is when both of them are healthy. At this point we’ll go with Nick, and when Mike’s healthy we’ll have that discussion.”

That is different then saying, “when Mike’s healthy he’s our guy.” There is a discussion to be had, apparently.

If you notice, the conversation is changing. Chip Kelly, when asked following the Giants game if Vick is the starter when healthy, firmly responded, “Yes.”

On Monday when asked if that is still the case, Kelly said: “Until we know what the health is I’m not saying what anybody or anybody is.”

For now, the quarterback decision is based on health. How about when Vick’s hamstring is all healed up? That’s where the intrigue lies.

Thank you. Someone gets it.

To be clear, that someone is Tim McManus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For now, the quarterback decision is based on health. How about when Vick’s hamstring is all healed up? That’s where the intrigue lies.

Thank you. Someone gets it.

If Foles has played his way into the starting spot, then the decision would not be based on health at all. It'd be based on performance.

Now maybe Kelly is blowing smoke. But if he's not, then it seems the only thing keeping Vick from starting is his health, not Foles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For now, the quarterback decision is based on health. How about when Vicks hamstring is all healed up? Thats where the intrigue lies.

Thank you. Someone gets it.

If Foles has played his way into the starting spot, then the decision would not be based on health at all. It'd be based on performance.

Now maybe Kelly is blowing smoke. But if he's not, then it seems the only thing keeping Vick from starting is his health, not Foles.

Kelly doesn't have to make definitive statements because Vick is hurt. By the time he's healthy he will be able to see enough to decide if Foles stays in there. Completely different from "Vick is the starter when healthy."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For now, the quarterback decision is based on health. How about when Vick’s hamstring is all healed up? That’s where the intrigue lies.

Thank you. Someone gets it.

If Foles has played his way into the starting spot, then the decision would not be based on health at all. It'd be based on performance.

Now maybe Kelly is blowing smoke. But if he's not, then it seems the only thing keeping Vick from starting is his health, not Foles.

"At this point we’ll go with Nick, and when Mike’s healthy we’ll have that discussion.”

That's the OC saying when Mike's healthy, they'll discuss who will be the starting QB.

Edited by Amused to Death
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Foles loses to Dal what would you guys think of him? This is probably the only reason I've been grabing Vick on discount in my dynasty leagues.

Depends. Offense could put up 450 yards of offense and 35 points, and the pathetic Eagles defense allow 42 points. IE: Foles could play great and the team lose because of the defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think it's not really based on health at all.

Vick's hurt right now. When he's healthy, the OC and the HC will discuss who to start at QB. Is that confusing?

It contradicts what Kelly has said.

Kelly's own statement after the TB game:

So what did Chip have to say about the Eagles quarterback situation after the game?

"We'll evaluate everything. We'll go back and watch the film."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think it's not really based on health at all.

Vick's hurt right now. When he's healthy, the OC and the HC will discuss who to start at QB. Is that confusing?

It contradicts what Kelly has said.

Remember when Andy Reid said in no uncertain terms that Kevin Kolb, not Michael Vick, would be his starter going forward? Guess who started the rest of the year?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think it's not really based on health at all.

Vick's hurt right now. When he's healthy, the OC and the HC will discuss who to start at QB. Is that confusing?
It contradicts what Kelly has said.

Remember when Andy Reid said in no uncertain terms that Kevin Kolb, not Michael Vick, would be his starter going forward? Guess who started the rest of the year?

Even that was a more definitive statement than Kelly. After the Giants he said yes. After the Bucs he said we'll see. Foles is making him change his mind. And I'm glad he doesn't make such hard statements like Andy did. He approaches things in a logical way. Foles keeps playing good, he keeps starting. Simple as that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think it's not really based on health at all.

Vick's hurt right now. When he's healthy, the OC and the HC will discuss who to start at QB. Is that confusing?
It contradicts what Kelly has said.

No. It doesn't.

Did Kelly not say that the QB situation depended on health?

For that statement to be true, then the only logical conclusion one can reach is that if he's 100%, Vick will start.

Maybe this will make more sense. If Vick is 100% on Sunday, but does not start, then we will know with certainty that the decision was NOT driven by the health of the two guys, but by some other consideration(s).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Foles loses to Dal what would you guys think of him? This is probably the only reason I've been grabing Vick on discount in my dynasty leagues.

Depends. Offense could put up 450 yards of offense and 35 points, and the pathetic Eagles defense allow 42 points. IE: Foles could play great and the team lose because of the defense.
Lets say he plays like he did in his start vs Dal last season, or a little worse, and Shady + D/St account for 20-24 points? Just a avg-good game where the Eagles have a chance to win late in the 4th but don't pull it out.

This scenario would send me off of a cliff. Piggybacking off a comment that I made erlier, I just read Terrell Pryor is the future lol. Foles can't even afford a game like Luck did on MNF. Everyone will call for Vick. No one will say "He's a young QB with a lot of potential. The Eagles should move on with Foles. He's a QB1 vs the Giants this week if afforded the start." The headlines will read "Foles had a chance to secure the job but he didn't impress like he did vs the Giants and Bucs who sport a combined 0-11 record on the season. When Mike Vick is healthy he will be the starting QB."

Not knowing if Foles is the QB to build around by 2014 can be the biggest mistake of the season for the Eagles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think it's not really based on health at all.

Vick's hurt right now. When he's healthy, the OC and the HC will discuss who to start at QB. Is that confusing?
It contradicts what Kelly has said.

No. It doesn't.

Did Kelly not say that the QB situation depended on health?

For that statement to be true, then the only logical conclusion one can reach is that if he's 100%, Vick will start.

Maybe this will make more sense. If Vick is 100% on Sunday, but does not start, then we will know with certainty that the decision was NOT driven by the health of the two guys, but by some other consideration(s).

Vick is not 100% and he's far from it, so the question is irrelevant. Right now, Kelly has said he'll address the issue when he's forced to. He did not say "Vick is my starter". When they are both 100% healthy, we'll see who Chip chooses. No one will know till then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think it's not really based on health at all.

Vick's hurt right now. When he's healthy, the OC and the HC will discuss who to start at QB. Is that confusing?
It contradicts what Kelly has said.
There is no decision to make right now is what Chip is saying. Dallas is a big game to Eagles fans. If Vick isn't available to CK than he shouldn't be worried about him, except as the emergency #3 QB. It's out of his control. Edited by ShaHBucks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think it's not really based on health at all.

Vick's hurt right now. When he's healthy, the OC and the HC will discuss who to start at QB. Is that confusing?
It contradicts what Kelly has said.
No. It doesn't.
Did Kelly not say that the QB situation depended on health?

For that statement to be true, then the only logical conclusion one can reach is that if he's 100%, Vick will start.

Maybe this will make more sense. If Vick is 100% on Sunday, but does not start, then we will know with certainty that the decision was NOT driven by the health of the two guys, but by some other consideration(s).

I think you're over thinking this. Vick is hurt so kelly has no decision to make. When asked after the Tampa game if Vick starts when he comes back he basically said "we'll see when it happens." He hasn't said yes Vick is the starter so that leads us to believe that he'll see when Vick is healthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...