Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

The Nick Foles era


Jed

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 4 weeks later...

Nick Foles had the 2nd best second half of football in history:

 	                Age 	Year 	Lg 	Tm 	G 	W 	L 	T 	Cmp 	Att 	Cmp% 	Yds 	TD 	Int 	Rate 	Y/A 	AY/A 	Att 	Yds 	Y/A 	TD1 	Tom Brady 	33 	2010 	NFL 	NWE 	8 	8 	0 	0 	158 	231 	68.40 	2074 	22 	0 	128.2 	8.98 	10.88 	13 	18 	1.38 	12 	Nick Foles 	24 	2013 	NFL 	PHI 	8 	7 	1 	0 	151 	227 	66.52 	2269 	21 	2 	126.3 	10.00 	11.45 	48 	193 	4.02 	23 	Tony Romo 	34 	2014 	NFL 	DAL 	7 	6 	1 	0 	139 	193 	72.02 	1707 	19 	3 	125.3 	8.84 	10.11 	12 	22 	1.83 	04 	Steve Young* 	33 	1994 	NFL 	SFO 	8 	7 	1 	0 	160 	227 	70.48 	2122 	20 	3 	123.6 	9.35 	10.52 	33 	164 	4.97 	45 	Aaron Rodgers 	26 	2010 	NFL 	GNB 	7 	5 	2 	0 	147 	206 	71.36 	1911 	16 	2 	122.0 	9.28 	10.39 	35 	224 	6.40 	16 	Drew Brees 	32 	2011 	NFL 	NOR 	8 	8 	0 	0 	226 	314 	71.97 	2730 	27 	4 	121.6 	8.69 	9.84 	8 	52 	6.50 	17 	Peyton Manning 	28 	2004 	NFL 	CLT 	8 	7 	1 	0 	157 	228 	68.86 	2128 	23 	6 	121.0 	9.33 	10.17 	10 	0 	0.00 	08 	Russell Wilson 	23 	2012 	NFL 	SEA 	8 	7 	1 	0 	123 	183 	67.21 	1652 	16 	2 	120.3 	9.03 	10.28 	58 	361 	6.22 	49 	Chris Chandler 	33 	1998 	NFL 	ATL 	7 	7 	0 	0 	98 	148 	66.22 	1616 	13 	5 	118.0 	10.92 	11.16 	23 	82 	3.57 	110 	Philip Rivers 	27 	2009 	NFL 	SDG 	8 	8 	0 	0 	151 	212 	71.23 	2009 	14 	3 	117.0 	9.48 	10.16 	11 	3 	0.27 	011 	Johnny Unitas* 	30 	1963 	NFL 	CLT 	6 	5 	1 	0 	113 	177 	63.84 	1883 	13 	3 	117.0 	10.64 	11.34 	22 	128 	5.82 	012 	Joe Montana* 	33 	1989 	NFL 	SFO 	7 	6 	1 	0 	144 	201 	71.64 	1898 	15 	5 	115.6 	9.44 	9.82 	24 	91 	3.79 	213 	R. Staubach* 	29 	1971 	NFL 	DAL 	6 	6 	0 	0 	63 	108 	58.33 	1050 	9 	1 	115.1 	9.72 	10.97 	20 	201 	10.05 	114 	Aaron Rodgers 	27 	2011 	NFL 	GNB 	7 	6 	1 	0 	151 	237 	63.71 	2024 	21 	3 	115.0 	8.54 	9.74 	23 	130 	5.65 	115 	Tony Romo 	31 	2011 	NFL 	DAL 	8 	4 	4 	0 	169 	239 	70.71 	1946 	18 	3 	114.8 	8.14 	9.08 	12 	-1 	-0.08 	116 	Brett Favre 	26 	1995 	NFL 	GNB 	8 	6 	2 	0 	183 	266 	68.80 	2223 	21 	4 	114.3 	8.36 	9.26 	19 	57 	3.00 	117 	Steve Young* 	32 	1993 	NFL 	SFO 	8 	5 	3 	0 	147 	217 	67.74 	2122 	18 	7 	113.5 	9.78 	9.99 	25 	142 	5.68 	218 	Drew Brees 	30 	2009 	NFL 	NOR 	7 	5 	2 	0 	182 	249 	73.09 	2052 	17 	4 	113.4 	8.24 	8.88 	5 	5 	1.00 	019 	Donovan McNabb 	27 	2004 	NFL 	PHI 	7 	6 	1 	0 	127 	199 	63.82 	1794 	17 	4 	112.9 	9.02 	9.82 	17 	114 	6.71 	120 	Y.A. Tittle* 	35 	1961 	NFL 	NYG 	6 	4 	1 	1 	84 	131 	64.12 	1264 	8 	1 	112.9 	9.65 	10.53 	14 	44 	3.14 	2

Foles and Wilson were the only ones who were in the top 20 all-time in QB rating under age 26.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/pgl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&year_min=1960&year_max=2015&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&game_type=R&league_id=&team_id=&opp_id=&game_num_min=9&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&stadium_id=&game_day_of_week=&game_month=&game_location=&game_result=&handedness=&is_active=&is_hof=&c1stat=pass_att&c1comp=gt&c1val=100&c2stat=rush_att&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5comp=&c5gtlt=lt&c6mult=1.0&c6comp=&order_by=pass_rating

Edited by cstu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick Foles had the 2nd best second half of football in history:

 	                Age 	Year 	Lg 	Tm 	G 	W 	L 	T 	Cmp 	Att 	Cmp% 	Yds 	TD 	Int 	Rate 	Y/A 	AY/A 	Att 	Yds 	Y/A 	TD1 	Tom Brady 	33 	2010 	NFL 	NWE 	8 	8 	0 	0 	158 	231 	68.40 	2074 	22 	0 	128.2 	8.98 	10.88 	13 	18 	1.38 	12 	Nick Foles 	24 	2013 	NFL 	PHI 	8 	7 	1 	0 	151 	227 	66.52 	2269 	21 	2 	126.3 	10.00 	11.45 	48 	193 	4.02 	23 	Tony Romo 	34 	2014 	NFL 	DAL 	7 	6 	1 	0 	139 	193 	72.02 	1707 	19 	3 	125.3 	8.84 	10.11 	12 	22 	1.83 	04 	Steve Young* 	33 	1994 	NFL 	SFO 	8 	7 	1 	0 	160 	227 	70.48 	2122 	20 	3 	123.6 	9.35 	10.52 	33 	164 	4.97 	45 	Aaron Rodgers 	26 	2010 	NFL 	GNB 	7 	5 	2 	0 	147 	206 	71.36 	1911 	16 	2 	122.0 	9.28 	10.39 	35 	224 	6.40 	16 	Drew Brees 	32 	2011 	NFL 	NOR 	8 	8 	0 	0 	226 	314 	71.97 	2730 	27 	4 	121.6 	8.69 	9.84 	8 	52 	6.50 	17 	Peyton Manning 	28 	2004 	NFL 	CLT 	8 	7 	1 	0 	157 	228 	68.86 	2128 	23 	6 	121.0 	9.33 	10.17 	10 	0 	0.00 	08 	Russell Wilson 	23 	2012 	NFL 	SEA 	8 	7 	1 	0 	123 	183 	67.21 	1652 	16 	2 	120.3 	9.03 	10.28 	58 	361 	6.22 	49 	Chris Chandler 	33 	1998 	NFL 	ATL 	7 	7 	0 	0 	98 	148 	66.22 	1616 	13 	5 	118.0 	10.92 	11.16 	23 	82 	3.57 	110 	Philip Rivers 	27 	2009 	NFL 	SDG 	8 	8 	0 	0 	151 	212 	71.23 	2009 	14 	3 	117.0 	9.48 	10.16 	11 	3 	0.27 	011 	Johnny Unitas* 	30 	1963 	NFL 	CLT 	6 	5 	1 	0 	113 	177 	63.84 	1883 	13 	3 	117.0 	10.64 	11.34 	22 	128 	5.82 	012 	Joe Montana* 	33 	1989 	NFL 	SFO 	7 	6 	1 	0 	144 	201 	71.64 	1898 	15 	5 	115.6 	9.44 	9.82 	24 	91 	3.79 	213 	R. Staubach* 	29 	1971 	NFL 	DAL 	6 	6 	0 	0 	63 	108 	58.33 	1050 	9 	1 	115.1 	9.72 	10.97 	20 	201 	10.05 	114 	Aaron Rodgers 	27 	2011 	NFL 	GNB 	7 	6 	1 	0 	151 	237 	63.71 	2024 	21 	3 	115.0 	8.54 	9.74 	23 	130 	5.65 	115 	Tony Romo 	31 	2011 	NFL 	DAL 	8 	4 	4 	0 	169 	239 	70.71 	1946 	18 	3 	114.8 	8.14 	9.08 	12 	-1 	-0.08 	116 	Brett Favre 	26 	1995 	NFL 	GNB 	8 	6 	2 	0 	183 	266 	68.80 	2223 	21 	4 	114.3 	8.36 	9.26 	19 	57 	3.00 	117 	Steve Young* 	32 	1993 	NFL 	SFO 	8 	5 	3 	0 	147 	217 	67.74 	2122 	18 	7 	113.5 	9.78 	9.99 	25 	142 	5.68 	218 	Drew Brees 	30 	2009 	NFL 	NOR 	7 	5 	2 	0 	182 	249 	73.09 	2052 	17 	4 	113.4 	8.24 	8.88 	5 	5 	1.00 	019 	Donovan McNabb 	27 	2004 	NFL 	PHI 	7 	6 	1 	0 	127 	199 	63.82 	1794 	17 	4 	112.9 	9.02 	9.82 	17 	114 	6.71 	120 	Y.A. Tittle* 	35 	1961 	NFL 	NYG 	6 	4 	1 	1 	84 	131 	64.12 	1264 	8 	1 	112.9 	9.65 	10.53 	14 	44 	3.14 	2

Foles and Wilson were the only ones who were in the top 20 all-time in QB rating under age 26.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/pgl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&year_min=1960&year_max=2015&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&game_type=R&league_id=&team_id=&opp_id=&game_num_min=9&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&stadium_id=&game_day_of_week=&game_month=&game_location=&game_result=&handedness=&is_active=&is_hof=&c1stat=pass_att&c1comp=gt&c1val=100&c2stat=rush_att&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5comp=&c5gtlt=lt&c6mult=1.0&c6comp=&order_by=pass_rating

Yep. There was so much hope for him. I remember the Luck vs. Foles thread and it makes me sad. :kicksrock:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. There was so much hope for him. I remember the Luck vs. Foles thread and it makes me sad. :kicksrock:

Don't say it like he died, he just turned 26. :lol:

Think he could have a very good NFL career with the Rams, just not huge fantasy stats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick Foles had the 2nd best second half of football in history:

Age 	Year 	Lg 	Tm 	G 	W 	L 	T 	Cmp 	Att 	Cmp% 	Yds 	TD 	Int 	Rate 	Y/A 	AY/A 	Att 	Yds 	Y/A 	TD1 	Tom Brady 	33 	2010 	NFL 	NWE 	8 	8 	0 	0 	158 	231 	68.40 	2074 	22 	0 	128.2 	8.98 	10.88 	13 	18 	1.38 	12 	Nick Foles 	24 	2013 	NFL 	PHI 	8 	7 	1 	0 	151 	227 	66.52 	2269 	21 	2 	126.3 	10.00 	11.45 	48 	193 	4.02 	23 	Tony Romo 	34 	2014 	NFL 	DAL 	7 	6 	1 	0 	139 	193 	72.02 	1707 	19 	3 	125.3 	8.84 	10.11 	12 	22 	1.83 	04 	Steve Young* 	33 	1994 	NFL 	SFO 	8 	7 	1 	0 	160 	227 	70.48 	2122 	20 	3 	123.6 	9.35 	10.52 	33 	164 	4.97 	45 	Aaron Rodgers 	26 	2010 	NFL 	GNB 	7 	5 	2 	0 	147 	206 	71.36 	1911 	16 	2 	122.0 	9.28 	10.39 	35 	224 	6.40 	16 	Drew Brees 	32 	2011 	NFL 	NOR 	8 	8 	0 	0 	226 	314 	71.97 	2730 	27 	4 	121.6 	8.69 	9.84 	8 	52 	6.50 	17 	Peyton Manning 	28 	2004 	NFL 	CLT 	8 	7 	1 	0 	157 	228 	68.86 	2128 	23 	6 	121.0 	9.33 	10.17 	10 	0 	0.00 	08 	Russell Wilson 	23 	2012 	NFL 	SEA 	8 	7 	1 	0 	123 	183 	67.21 	1652 	16 	2 	120.3 	9.03 	10.28 	58 	361 	6.22 	49 	Chris Chandler 	33 	1998 	NFL 	ATL 	7 	7 	0 	0 	98 	148 	66.22 	1616 	13 	5 	118.0 	10.92 	11.16 	23 	82 	3.57 	110 	Philip Rivers 	27 	2009 	NFL 	SDG 	8 	8 	0 	0 	151 	212 	71.23 	2009 	14 	3 	117.0 	9.48 	10.16 	11 	3 	0.27 	011 	Johnny Unitas* 	30 	1963 	NFL 	CLT 	6 	5 	1 	0 	113 	177 	63.84 	1883 	13 	3 	117.0 	10.64 	11.34 	22 	128 	5.82 	012 	Joe Montana* 	33 	1989 	NFL 	SFO 	7 	6 	1 	0 	144 	201 	71.64 	1898 	15 	5 	115.6 	9.44 	9.82 	24 	91 	3.79 	213 	R. Staubach* 	29 	1971 	NFL 	DAL 	6 	6 	0 	0 	63 	108 	58.33 	1050 	9 	1 	115.1 	9.72 	10.97 	20 	201 	10.05 	114 	Aaron Rodgers 	27 	2011 	NFL 	GNB 	7 	6 	1 	0 	151 	237 	63.71 	2024 	21 	3 	115.0 	8.54 	9.74 	23 	130 	5.65 	115 	Tony Romo 	31 	2011 	NFL 	DAL 	8 	4 	4 	0 	169 	239 	70.71 	1946 	18 	3 	114.8 	8.14 	9.08 	12 	-1 	-0.08 	116 	Brett Favre 	26 	1995 	NFL 	GNB 	8 	6 	2 	0 	183 	266 	68.80 	2223 	21 	4 	114.3 	8.36 	9.26 	19 	57 	3.00 	117 	Steve Young* 	32 	1993 	NFL 	SFO 	8 	5 	3 	0 	147 	217 	67.74 	2122 	18 	7 	113.5 	9.78 	9.99 	25 	142 	5.68 	218 	Drew Brees 	30 	2009 	NFL 	NOR 	7 	5 	2 	0 	182 	249 	73.09 	2052 	17 	4 	113.4 	8.24 	8.88 	5 	5 	1.00 	019 	Donovan McNabb 	27 	2004 	NFL 	PHI 	7 	6 	1 	0 	127 	199 	63.82 	1794 	17 	4 	112.9 	9.02 	9.82 	17 	114 	6.71 	120 	Y.A. Tittle* 	35 	1961 	NFL 	NYG 	6 	4 	1 	1 	84 	131 	64.12 	1264 	8 	1 	112.9 	9.65 	10.53 	14 	44 	3.14 	2
Foles and Wilson were the only ones who were in the top 20 all-time in QB rating under age 26.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/pgl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&year_min=1960&year_max=2015&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&game_type=R&league_id=&team_id=&opp_id=&game_num_min=9&game_num_max=99&week_num_min=0&week_num_max=99&stadium_id=&game_day_of_week=&game_month=&game_location=&game_result=&handedness=&is_active=&is_hof=&c1stat=pass_att&c1comp=gt&c1val=100&c2stat=rush_att&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5comp=&c5gtlt=lt&c6mult=1.0&c6comp=&order_by=pass_rating

Yep. There was so much hope for him. I remember the Luck vs. Foles thread and it makes me sad. :kicksrock:

Foles still has the higher comp%, TD%, QB rate and AY/A while having a lower int% than Luck for their career. 14-4 winning record the past two season. I know he won't have the luxury of playing Jax and Tenn 4x a year to pat his FF stats or the volume of plays playing for Chip, but cheer up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Dude's getting no respect right now. Looking for him to exceed expectations in 2015.

Fine with him as a QB2 with top 10 potential, but I don't see him cracking the top-5 without the volume of plays ran in philly. Eventually, I think he settles there, just not now.

The Rams also constructed a team that wants to run the ball and play defense. Foles would have to be really efficient to have huge FF upside here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much was the 2013 version worth? The 2014 version? Do you split the difference, and if so, how much would that be (less than $20 million, no doubt - more than $15 million?).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Rams could be hurt if they wait, he plays more like 2013, and his price goes through the roof. Of course, it is very possible that was a career TD/INT ratio which he never comes close to again (it was an outlier, NFL record-type season). The Rams scheme is expected to be a lot different than Kelly's in PHI, which could present another obstacle (besides regression to the mean) to approximating those kinds of passing numbers. Conversely, the Rams could also be hurt if they sign him to a better than average deal, and he looks more like the 2014 than 2013 version

OTOH, Foles could be hurt if he sells himself short, settles for an intermediate deal and plays more like he did in 2013. But he could also be hurt if he bets on himself, doesn't settle for an average or lesser deal, and plays more like he did in 2014.

Kind of a thorny problem for both sides, as Foles doesn't have a lot of experience, and his body of work has two very different seasons and outcomes (though it sounds like there were some mitigating circumstances last year, due to OL injury-related turnover and churning). Maybe it recommends a compromise between both sides? Foles has the leverage to not sign and he is a free agent in 2016. The Rams have the leverage of being able to use the franchise tag next year (but that would be expensive), and also of course, they could avoid that by signing him to a long term deal, once he is a bit more established and proven than currently. True, he would cost more, but than he would have demonstrated to the Rams he was worth it in a stronger way than he possibly could at present. Maybe they will end up waiting, unless they can sign him to a somewhat team friendly deal.

Again, maybe Foles will prefer a compromise, intermediate deal, which won't pay what he could max out with if he plays more like 2013, but will provide more financial security and risk avoidance than waiting, if he plays more like 2014.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, apparently all he has to do is sign a contract with $50 million guaranteed and come up with better than a 79.3 QB rating to be considered successful. Lucky for Foles that Bradford set the bar so low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO that will be completely irrelevant to Foles contract, if he agrees to terms with the Rams.

Maybe he gets dinged if he doesn't light it up with better WRs than the Packers?

* Foles had a QB rating of 79.1 in 2014, with a 6/5 TD/INT ratio, so technically he set the bar lower last year. Clearly Kelly didn't value him as much (took on the higher salary, parted with a second in 2016, etc.), and he was in as good a position as anybody to know what he had in Foles. Almost certainly multiple teams didn't value Foles as high. Didn't hear of any first round pick offers from CLE for Foles?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO that will be completely irrelevant to Foles contract, if he agrees to terms with the Rams.

Maybe he gets dinged if he doesn't light it up with better WRs than the Packers?

* Foles had a QB rating of 79.1 in 2014, with a 6/5 TD/INT ratio, so technically he set the bar lower last year. Clearly Kelly didn't value him as much (took on the higher salary, parted with a second in 2016, etc.), and he was in as good a position as anybody to know what he had in Foles. Almost certainly multiple teams didn't value Foles as high. Didn't hear of any first round pick offers from CLE for Foles?

Yet, he still choose Mike Vick over him to start the year before, so let's not not pretend this matters at all in regards to his talent or future contract. Edited by ShaHBucks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO that will be completely irrelevant to Foles contract, if he agrees to terms with the Rams.

Maybe he gets dinged if he doesn't light it up with better WRs than the Packers?

* Foles had a QB rating of 79.1 in 2014, with a 6/5 TD/INT ratio, so technically he set the bar lower last year. Clearly Kelly didn't value him as much (took on the higher salary, parted with a second in 2016, etc.), and he was in as good a position as anybody to know what he had in Foles. Almost certainly multiple teams didn't value Foles as high. Didn't hear of any first round pick offers from CLE for Foles?

Yet, he still choose Mike Vick over him to start the year before, so let's not not pretend this matters at all in regards to his talent or future contract.

He put Foles in a competition against Vick--one that Vick won. You can't start the loser of a QB competition and maintain any credibility. That goes double when it's your first year in the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO that will be completely irrelevant to Foles contract, if he agrees to terms with the Rams.

Maybe he gets dinged if he doesn't light it up with better WRs than the Packers?

* Foles had a QB rating of 79.1 in 2014, with a 6/5 TD/INT ratio, so technically he set the bar lower last year. Clearly Kelly didn't value him as much (took on the higher salary, parted with a second in 2016, etc.), and he was in as good a position as anybody to know what he had in Foles. Almost certainly multiple teams didn't value Foles as high. Didn't hear of any first round pick offers from CLE for Foles?

Yet, he still choose Mike Vick over him to start the year before, so let's not not pretend this matters at all in regards to his talent or future contract.

He put Foles in a competition against Vick--one that Vick won. You can't start the loser of a QB competition and maintain any credibility. That goes double when it's your first year in the league.

Doesn't change the fact that he watched them both everyday in practice and thought Vick was a better QB since he "knows what he has".

He said he knew Matt Barkley too *shoulder shrug*

He knows Sanchez couldn't win 1 game that mattered to get into the playoffs and resigned him to possibly be in the same position

Really.. Kelly's handling of QB's could be a fatal flaw, but it's being treated like some almighty benchmark. Foles plays for the Rams now. The Rams have been pretty savvy lately. They just never had a QB. Kelly opinion, not that it should matter in a competitive league, has nothing to do with how they value Foles. If Foles is your guy, then take care of business. F around, and you'll look stupid if he plays at an elite level or goes 11-5/12-4. He's shown he's capable of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO that will be completely irrelevant to Foles contract, if he agrees to terms with the Rams.

Maybe he gets dinged if he doesn't light it up with better WRs than the Packers?

* Foles had a QB rating of 79.1 in 2014, with a 6/5 TD/INT ratio, so technically he set the bar lower last year. Clearly Kelly didn't value him as much (took on the higher salary, parted with a second in 2016, etc.), and he was in as good a position as anybody to know what he had in Foles. Almost certainly multiple teams didn't value Foles as high. Didn't hear of any first round pick offers from CLE for Foles?

Yet, he still choose Mike Vick over him to start the year before, so let's not not pretend this matters at all in regards to his talent or future contract.

He put Foles in a competition against Vick--one that Vick won. You can't start the loser of a QB competition and maintain any credibility. That goes double when it's your first year in the league.

Doesn't change the fact that he watched them both everyday in practice and thought Vick was a better QB since he "knows what he has".

He said he knew Matt Barkley too *shoulder shrug*

He knows Sanchez couldn't win 1 game that mattered to get into the playoffs and resigned him to possibly be in the same position

Really.. Kelly's handling of QB's could be a fatal flaw, but it's being treated like some almighty benchmark. Foles plays for the Rams now. The Rams have been pretty savvy lately. They just never had a QB. Kelly opinion, not that it should matter in a competitive league, has nothing to do with how they value Foles. If Foles is your guy, then take care of business. F around, and you'll look stupid if he plays at an elite level or goes 11-5/12-4. He's shown he's capable of that.

Again, it was a competition. If Vick was better at the time Vick has to start. Kelly didn't just see this at that time, we all did. Foles was good that pre-season but Vick was better

Barkley was a 4th round pick for a reason. Had Kelly "known" he would have gone much earlier...

How many teams have a back-up QB that fits your Sanchez description? 30? 32?

No HC in the past 2 years has got more from less in the position than Chip has. Look at just the QB's that made the playoffs last season...where would Sanchez rank in that group? Calling it a fatal flaw is almost laughable. As much as I like Foles I see a Kevin Kolb future for him...former slightly injury prone QB of the future leaves a potent offense and goes to a team that needs a QB gets a big deal and does what? Could be wrong on Foles but I feel like I read this book before...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO that will be completely irrelevant to Foles contract, if he agrees to terms with the Rams.

Maybe he gets dinged if he doesn't light it up with better WRs than the Packers?

* Foles had a QB rating of 79.1 in 2014, with a 6/5 TD/INT ratio, so technically he set the bar lower last year. Clearly Kelly didn't value him as much (took on the higher salary, parted with a second in 2016, etc.), and he was in as good a position as anybody to know what he had in Foles. Almost certainly multiple teams didn't value Foles as high. Didn't hear of any first round pick offers from CLE for Foles?

Tannehill contract seems like it would be the right range based on actual accomplishments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO that will be completely irrelevant to Foles contract, if he agrees to terms with the Rams.

Maybe he gets dinged if he doesn't light it up with better WRs than the Packers?

* Foles had a QB rating of 79.1 in 2014, with a 6/5 TD/INT ratio, so technically he set the bar lower last year. Clearly Kelly didn't value him as much (took on the higher salary, parted with a second in 2016, etc.), and he was in as good a position as anybody to know what he had in Foles. Almost certainly multiple teams didn't value Foles as high. Didn't hear of any first round pick offers from CLE for Foles?

Yet, he still choose Mike Vick over him to start the year before, so let's not not pretend this matters at all in regards to his talent or future contract.
He put Foles in a competition against Vick--one that Vick won. You can't start the loser of a QB competition and maintain any credibility. That goes double when it's your first year in the league.
Doesn't change the fact that he watched them both everyday in practice and thought Vick was a better QB since he "knows what he has".

He said he knew Matt Barkley too *shoulder shrug*

He knows Sanchez couldn't win 1 game that mattered to get into the playoffs and resigned him to possibly be in the same position

Really.. Kelly's handling of QB's could be a fatal flaw, but it's being treated like some almighty benchmark. Foles plays for the Rams now. The Rams have been pretty savvy lately. They just never had a QB. Kelly opinion, not that it should matter in a competitive league, has nothing to do with how they value Foles. If Foles is your guy, then take care of business. F around, and you'll look stupid if he plays at an elite level or goes 11-5/12-4. He's shown he's capable of that.

Again, it was a competition. If Vick was better at the time Vick has to start. Kelly didn't just see this at that time, we all did. Foles was good that pre-season but Vick was better

I don't know who we is referring to. I said to trade Vick. His value would never be higher. As for the competition, 7 of 8 of Foles drives went to the end zone, the Jags game, ect.. he wasn't just good. Kelly, "he was in as good a position as anybody to know what he had in Foles." Instead, he took Vick and his system and one of the most historic runs from a QB you'll ever see wasn't supposed to happen.

Barkley was a 4th round pick for a reason. Had Kelly "known" he would have gone much earlier...

If Kelly had "known" he wouldn't have traded up here or consider Barkley a top-50 prospect. Repetitive accuracy? We forgot about all of this?

How many teams have a back-up QB that fits your Sanchez description? 30? 32?

perhaps a new backup is needed vs a whole new team? We're not saying much here

No HC in the past 2 years has got more from less in the position than Chip has. what did he get from Vick, Barkley and Sanchez?losses. Foles was playing well before Kelly arrived. This is just saying Foles sucks in another language Look at just the QB's that made the playoffs last season...where would Sanchez rank in that group? Calling it a fatal flaw is almost laughable. reread you're last two sentences. It's contradicting As much as I like Foles I see a Kevin Kolb future for him...former slightly injury prone QB of the future leaves a potent offense and goes to a team that needs a QB gets a big deal and does what? Rams haven't had great QB play since Warner. They seem a buy low window. What should they have done?Could be wrong on Foles but I feel like I read this book before...At least you leave some wiggle room not to look stupid, unlike rotoworld

Edited by ShaHBucks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, it was a competition. If Vick was better at the time Vick has to start. Kelly didn't just see this at that time, we all did. Foles was good that pre-season but Vick was better

I don't know who we is referring to. I said to trade Vick. His value would never be higher. As for the competition, 7 of 8 of Foles drives went to the end zone, the Jags game, ect.. he wasn't just good. Kelly, "he was in as good a position as anybody to know what he had in Foles." Instead, he took Vick and his system and one of the most historic runs from a QB you'll ever see wasn't supposed to happen.

Barkley was a 4th round pick for a reason. Had Kelly "known" he would have gone much earlier...

If Kelly had "known" he wouldn't have traded up here or consider Barkley a top-50 prospect. Repetitive accuracy? We forgot about all of this?

How many teams have a back-up QB that fits your Sanchez description? 30? 32?

perhaps a new backup is needed vs a whole new team? We're not saying much here

No HC in the past 2 years has got more from less in the position than Chip has. what did he get from Vick, Barkley and Sanchez?losses. Foles was playing well before Kelly arrived. This is just saying Foles sucks in another language Look at just the QB's that made the playoffs last season...where would Sanchez rank in that group? Calling it a fatal flaw is almost laughable. reread you're last two sentences. It's contradicting As much as I like Foles I see a Kevin Kolb future for him...former slightly injury prone QB of the future leaves a potent offense and goes to a team that needs a QB gets a big deal and does what? Rams haven't had great QB play since Warner. They seem a buy low window. What should they have done?Could be wrong on Foles but I feel like I read this book before...At least you leave some wiggle room not to look stupid, unlike rotoworld

Foles did have a good/ great pre-season that year. I think we just remember it different is all. Vick that year was 13-15 total and one of those incompletions was a pick on what I believe was a hail mary. Foles also had a pick and a fumble I believe and didn't look as impressive as Vick did at that time.

Looking at the Barkly pick mirrors what he's doing today. He bought low (4th round pick....4th) on a guy that had potential. Many 4th round picks don't make it and some from that same draft aren't even in the league already.

You're not getting Andrew Luck as a back-up. Back-ups look like Sanchez, in fact, he may be better than 80% of the ones on teams now.

Its not saying Foles sucks it's saying that Kelly has maximized what he's had at that position. You're trying to quantify it with wins when that's a team accomplishment.

Nothing is contradicting either. You said "The handling of the QB's has been a fatal flaw" --how can that be when he's got the most out of guys many would see as ordinary? Im hoping you're not implying he should have just went and got a franchise QB as if it were easy...

As far as who bought low on who that remains to be seen. I agree with your overall point that Kelly's opinion holds no weight on Foles' future as a Ram but like Reid before him, Kelly seems to be able to make quarterbacks look a tad better than they are. Vick leaves here after being a starter and backs up Geno Smith, Sanchez gets no interest and ends up finishing with a rating over 10 points higher than his best year, Foles has a 27-2 under his belt and goes for Bradford (in your eyes a bad player) and a 5...why is that? I liked Foles....here. Outside of here I worry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO that will be completely irrelevant to Foles contract, if he agrees to terms with the Rams.

Maybe he gets dinged if he doesn't light it up with better WRs than the Packers?

* Foles had a QB rating of 79.1 in 2014, with a 6/5 TD/INT ratio, so technically he set the bar lower last year. Clearly Kelly didn't value him as much (took on the higher salary, parted with a second in 2016, etc.), and he was in as good a position as anybody to know what he had in Foles. Almost certainly multiple teams didn't value Foles as high. Didn't hear of any first round pick offers from CLE for Foles?

Yet, he still choose Mike Vick over him to start the year before, so let's not not pretend this matters at all in regards to his talent or future contract.

He put Foles in a competition against Vick--one that Vick won. You can't start the loser of a QB competition and maintain any credibility. That goes double when it's your first year in the league.

Doesn't change the fact that he watched them both everyday in practice and thought Vick was a better QB since he "knows what he has".

He said he knew Matt Barkley too *shoulder shrug*

He knows Sanchez couldn't win 1 game that mattered to get into the playoffs and resigned him to possibly be in the same position

Really.. Kelly's handling of QB's could be a fatal flaw, but it's being treated like some almighty benchmark. Foles plays for the Rams now. The Rams have been pretty savvy lately. They just never had a QB. Kelly opinion, not that it should matter in a competitive league, has nothing to do with how they value Foles. If Foles is your guy, then take care of business. F around, and you'll look stupid if he plays at an elite level or goes 11-5/12-4. He's shown he's capable of that.

Again, it was a competition. If Vick was better at the time Vick has to start. Kelly didn't just see this at that time, we all did. Foles was good that pre-season but Vick was better

Barkley was a 4th round pick for a reason. Had Kelly "known" he would have gone much earlier...

How many teams have a back-up QB that fits your Sanchez description? 30? 32?

No HC in the past 2 years has got more from less in the position than Chip has. Look at just the QB's that made the playoffs last season...where would Sanchez rank in that group? Calling it a fatal flaw is almost laughable. As much as I like Foles I see a Kevin Kolb future for him...former slightly injury prone QB of the future leaves a potent offense and goes to a team that needs a QB gets a big deal and does what? Could be wrong on Foles but I feel like I read this book before...

This not my memory at all. I remember a lot of people thinking Foles should get the job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO that will be completely irrelevant to Foles contract, if he agrees to terms with the Rams.

Maybe he gets dinged if he doesn't light it up with better WRs than the Packers?

* Foles had a QB rating of 79.1 in 2014, with a 6/5 TD/INT ratio, so technically he set the bar lower last year. Clearly Kelly didn't value him as much (took on the higher salary, parted with a second in 2016, etc.), and he was in as good a position as anybody to know what he had in Foles. Almost certainly multiple teams didn't value Foles as high. Didn't hear of any first round pick offers from CLE for Foles?

Tannehill contract seems like it would be the right range based on actual accomplishments.

I like Tannehill and Foles. Two differences with Tannehill. He has been healthier. And he has been trending up (if Foles 2013 and 2014 seasons had been reversed, possibly he would be in a stronger bargaining position now?). Do you pay Foles based on his 2013 play? 2014? Somewhere in between? If the latter, down the middle, or closer to 2013 or 2014? Lot of possibilities.

I haven't heard any preliminary figures. My conjecture is if Foles is looking for $20 million per year, that might be too rich for the Rams, and they wait and see what he does this year. Whereas $15 million is probably too low a floor for Foles. So maybe in the $17-18 range? If appreciably lower, maybe he prefers to bet on himself and stand to cash in in 2016 free agency, or make franchise tag money (good work for a QB if you can get it), or more likely, he signs a better long term deal with the Rams based on improved leverage THEN, if he plays well.

I just looked up Tannehill. They said in new money terms he is averaging $19 million per year, which was around seventh among QBs (or maybe eighth after Newton), but that in actual money, it was worth $16 million, which would be around 14th with Dalton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO that will be completely irrelevant to Foles contract, if he agrees to terms with the Rams.

Maybe he gets dinged if he doesn't light it up with better WRs than the Packers?

* Foles had a QB rating of 79.1 in 2014, with a 6/5 TD/INT ratio, so technically he set the bar lower last year. Clearly Kelly didn't value him as much (took on the higher salary, parted with a second in 2016, etc.), and he was in as good a position as anybody to know what he had in Foles. Almost certainly multiple teams didn't value Foles as high. Didn't hear of any first round pick offers from CLE for Foles?

Yet, he still choose Mike Vick over him to start the year before, so let's not not pretend this matters at all in regards to his talent or future contract.

I was talking about a few things, but that may not have been clear.

1 - I wouldn't expect Bradford's contract to have anything to do with Foles (no need to spend a lot of time on this, I didn't take the initial prompting comment as a serious attempt to describe a likely contract parameter starting point for Foles). He was the last pre-current labor contract bonus baby. Foles will get slotted by his comps and precedents, though as noted, he presents some challenges.

2 - The business about Kelly was indirectly referring to Bradford's contract status with PHI, not Foles with the Rams. Clearly Kelly valued Bradford more (probably CLE, too). So that could position him to make more money in PHI than Kelly might have been willing to pay Foles, if hypothetically, he had kept him as the starter, instead of trading for Bradford. If both the Eagles extend Bradford and the Rams Foles before 2016, I think Bradford may receive the bigger contract.

What are your contract expectations, for Foles and Bradford?

I have no idea what Kelly intends to do, but seemingly you don't make that trade without the intent to extend or re-sign Bradford at some point, but who knows. Maybe they want to see if his ACL explodes for a third time?

For the record, I hope the Rams sign Foles. I think 2013 was an outlier, but 2014 had some mitigating circumstances. Hopefully he can play a lot better than last year for the Rams, if not up to the 2013 heights. Stability (and related health) at the QB position has been the biggest obstacle to taking the next step for the Rams in recent years. This is the most talented roster in the Fisher/Snead era, by far, imo. If Foles is the real deal, than adding him on a long term basis couldn't come at a more perfect time to begin making a serious playoff push.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO that will be completely irrelevant to Foles contract, if he agrees to terms with the Rams.

Maybe he gets dinged if he doesn't light it up with better WRs than the Packers?

* Foles had a QB rating of 79.1 in 2014, with a 6/5 TD/INT ratio, so technically he set the bar lower last year. Clearly Kelly didn't value him as much (took on the higher salary, parted with a second in 2016, etc.), and he was in as good a position as anybody to know what he had in Foles. Almost certainly multiple teams didn't value Foles as high. Didn't hear of any first round pick offers from CLE for Foles?

Tannehill contract seems like it would be the right range based on actual accomplishments.

I like Tannehill and Foles. Two differences with Tannehill. He has been healthier. And he has been trending up (if Foles 2013 and 2014 seasons had been reversed, possibly he would be in a stronger bargaining position now?). Do you pay Foles based on his 2013 play? 2014? Somewhere in between? If the latter, down the middle, or closer to 2013 or 2014? Lot of possibilities.

I haven't heard any preliminary figures. My conjecture is if Foles is looking for $20 million per year, that might be too rich for the Rams, and they wait and see what he does this year. Whereas $15 million is probably too low a floor for Foles. So maybe in the $17-18 range? If appreciably lower, maybe he prefers to bet on himself and stand to cash in in 2016 free agency, or make franchise tag money (good work for a QB if you can get it), or more likely, he signs a better long term deal with the Rams based on improved leverage THEN, if he plays well.

I just looked up Tannehill. They said in new money terms he is averaging $19 million per year, which was around seventh among QBs (or maybe eighth after Newton), but that in actual money, it was worth $16 million, which would be around 14th with Dalton.

I don't think that looking at the average is a very good way to look at it. He makes $4.8 million this year, and 11.6 next year. Then his dead cap money for 2017-2020 goes down each year from 6.9 to 4.6 to 2.3 to 0. Plus the Dolphins can opt out after 2016.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After years of being saddled with Bradford's contract, I'm shocked the Rams are interested in talking extension before seeing Foles play for them. Especially with all the cheap great defensive draft picks they stacked their roster with from the Griffin trade approaching contract extension time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO that will be completely irrelevant to Foles contract, if he agrees to terms with the Rams.

Maybe he gets dinged if he doesn't light it up with better WRs than the Packers?

* Foles had a QB rating of 79.1 in 2014, with a 6/5 TD/INT ratio, so technically he set the bar lower last year. Clearly Kelly didn't value him as much (took on the higher salary, parted with a second in 2016, etc.), and he was in as good a position as anybody to know what he had in Foles. Almost certainly multiple teams didn't value Foles as high. Didn't hear of any first round pick offers from CLE for Foles?

Tannehill contract seems like it would be the right range based on actual accomplishments.

I like Tannehill and Foles. Two differences with Tannehill. He has been healthier. And he has been trending up (if Foles 2013 and 2014 seasons had been reversed, possibly he would be in a stronger bargaining position now?). Do you pay Foles based on his 2013 play? 2014? Somewhere in between? If the latter, down the middle, or closer to 2013 or 2014? Lot of possibilities.

I haven't heard any preliminary figures. My conjecture is if Foles is looking for $20 million per year, that might be too rich for the Rams, and they wait and see what he does this year. Whereas $15 million is probably too low a floor for Foles. So maybe in the $17-18 range? If appreciably lower, maybe he prefers to bet on himself and stand to cash in in 2016 free agency, or make franchise tag money (good work for a QB if you can get it), or more likely, he signs a better long term deal with the Rams based on improved leverage THEN, if he plays well.

I just looked up Tannehill. They said in new money terms he is averaging $19 million per year, which was around seventh among QBs (or maybe eighth after Newton), but that in actual money, it was worth $16 million, which would be around 14th with Dalton.

I don't think that looking at the average is a very good way to look at it. He makes $4.8 million this year, and 11.6 next year. Then his dead cap money for 2017-2020 goes down each year from 6.9 to 4.6 to 2.3 to 0. Plus the Dolphins can opt out after 2016.

Hey Larry, below was the first article I found, that is what I was going by. But I realize contracts are complex, and can be parsed different ways. What figure did you have in mind for Tannehill's yearly average (and by implication, Foles)? I am aware that some of the recent deals are basically a gussied up series of one year deals. Kaepernick. Even Newton was I think widely reported as $61 million guaranteed, but really $31 million (less guaranteed money for skill than injury). Technically, I think CAR could cut him in 2016, not that it will happen. Another factor, contracts could be structured differently, so salary cap implications could be more or less onerous if players are cut before the end of the contract (which might than discourage that). I think the Rams contract writer Demoff prefers to not mortgage the future by excessively backloading many contracts. BTW, Over the Cap is another good site for salary cap info, though not sure if they have a lot of articles.

http://www.thephinsider.com/2015/6/4/8728969/cam-newton-contract-versus-ryan-tannehill-contract

"The deal averages pay for Tannehill at $19.25 million per season in new money, or $16 million in actual per season average. The $19.25 million made Tannehill the 7th highest paid quarterback in the league, while the $16 million average tied him with Andy Dalton for 14th in the league."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I look at contracts is the earliest the team can get out of it without a huge cap hit.

In Tannehill's case he has the following guaranteed:

- $11.5m signing bonus

- $10m in salary from 2015-2016

Over the next 2 years the Dolphins will pay him $21.5m, with $6.9m in dead money from his pro-rated signing bonus if he's cut/traded.

His 2017 salary isn't guaranteed until the 5th day of the league year in 2017 so his deal is really 2 years/$21m.

Edited by cstu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think I have it, but in case the exchange is of interest to others in the thread - the $19 million and $16 million figures in the above article are averages if you divided from the total length and maxed out dollar value of the contract, which thereby inflates the stated value, relative to the actual value? And since it is essentially a two year deal, that explains the reduction.

Tannehill could be in a different position relative to Foles as far as the money over and above what he was already going to make part of the contract description. He was a former top 10 pick, Foles a third rounder.

How much are the following QBs making next year (thinking of recent QB contracts, feel free to add any oversights):

Ryan

Kaepernick

Dalton

Newton

Lastly, unless I'm missing something, I didn't see Foles settling for a $10 million per year contract, but I do see Tannehill as a potential in the ball park proxy. I was thinking more like north of $15 million but less than $20 million. But if I was operating with inflated Tannehill figures, maybe I'm off. As a Rams fan, I'd be very happy with a $10 million per year contract, it just somehow doesn't look right to me, too low. On the upper bound or range for recent QB second contracts, I have been thinking of Newton in about $20 million a year terms, Wilson wanting between $20-25 million (Luck may command $25 million by 2016?), but maybe those are similarly inflated terms when broken down differently. Reportedly structure and especially regarding guaranteed money could be tricky matters with Wilson's negotiations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After years of being saddled with Bradford's contract, I'm shocked the Rams are interested in talking extension before seeing Foles play for them. Especially with all the cheap great defensive draft picks they stacked their roster with from the Griffin trade approaching contract extension time.

They really need a QB, though. If they are believers (they did do the trade, so it wasn't completely random or accidental), the advantage to getting something done now, especially if on semi team-friendly terms, if he lights it up in 2015, he just gets more expensive (I understand your perspective, too).

Demoff has done a good job with the cap. DE Chris Long makes a lot of money (second after Quinn, I think $12 milllion to $14 million in 2016?). If he doesn't play better than last year, he could be vulnerable to at least some form of restructure.

Upcoming 2016 contracts. The 2012 class is coming up, plus various free agents:

Offense (pretty much Foles and Quick)

Foles :)

Not sure about Cook, but Kendricks re-signed, the OL is pretty locked up (Saffold re-upped in 2014)

Quick and Givens come up in 2016. This is an important year for Quick, he did break out last year. If he sustains the momentum built from last year, I hope they can work something out. Givens almost certainly a goner after this season. Britt is on a two year deal just signed that could be a one year deal.

Defense (Brockers could wait until 2017, DL depth, probably one starting CB, likely Jenkins, not sure about Barron or McLeod - maybe Jenkins only priority signing here, if they wait on Brockers due to fifth year option in 2016, maybe Fairley or Barron?)

The Rams exercised the fifth year option on Brockers, so they have him through 2016 if they want (offer can be pulled by the rules), or negotiate an extension between now and then. They did not exercise the option for Mark Barron (traded a 4th and 6th for him in 2014). Brockers is an important part of the defense, hope they re-sign him. Not sure about Barron, he doesn't start, but plays a lot and is a key part of the big nickel. Don't know if they want to play him like a starter, and if not, he may want to explore options in 2016 free agency.

Key rotational/depth DEs Williams Hayes and Eugene Sims are in contract years. Rotational DT Fairley is on a one year deal, I think worth up to $5 million with incentives. Hard to tell if they will want to re-sign him, if they will be able to if he does well (may price himself out of their budget?), is he is just a one year luxury rental. I would like to see them keep him as well if there aren't weight fluctuation, effort and health issues, but not over Brockers, if it comes to that.

At LB, Ayers just signed a two year deal.

At CB, 2012 2nd and 3rd rounders Janoris Jenkins and Trumaine Johnson are in contract years. ESPN beat reporter Nick Wagoner (my main source of Rams news, Jim Thomas to a lesser extent) thinks they will prioritize Jenkins and not Johnson, who lost his job to 2014 6th rounder E.J. Gaines (I think top 5 in league performance-based pay, not among rookies, but period, FS Rodney McLeod was around top 15).

At S, Barron already addressed above, McLeod is in a contract year, but has been year to year for a few seasons, they surprised some by using the second round tender on him (equating to about a $2.4 million contract?). He did play better in 2014 than 2013, is a big hitter, gets lost and gives up big plays at times, not an outstanding coverage DB for a FS, not a blue chip, elite talent. T.J. McDonald is a becoming a very good SS (father Tim a serial Pro Bowler with ARI/SF), so if they go in another direction from McLeod, like the 2016 draft, they seemingly need a FS to complement him. This dynamic made the drafting of Maurice Alexander in the fourth round, and the acquisition of Barron by trade last year, both SS-types like McDonald, somewhat puzzling, headscratcher moves. Though they are making good use of Barron in the big nickel, who basically plays LB in passing situations, and is on the field with McDonald and McLeod. It will be interesting to see if Ayers or Barron play more in nickel in 2015. You could make a strong case that Ogletree and Ayers are the Rams two most athletic LBs, and they could have Ayers and Barron on the field together, but they haven't pulled Laurinaitis in the nickel previously (he is great at making the calls and pre-snap reads, keys, adjustments, getting the players lined up). Ogletree is the dime LB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think I have it, but in case the exchange is of interest to others in the thread - the $19 million and $16 million figures in the above article are averages if you divided from the total length and maxed out dollar value of the contract, which thereby inflates the stated value, relative to the actual value? And since it is essentially a two year deal, that explains the reduction.

Tannehill could be in a different position relative to Foles as far as the money over and above what he was already going to make part of the contract description. He was a former top 10 pick, Foles a third rounder.

How much are the following QBs making next year (thinking of recent QB contracts, feel free to add any oversights):

Ryan

Kaepernick

Dalton

Newton

Lastly, unless I'm missing something, I didn't see Foles settling for a $10 million per year contract, but I do see Tannehill as a potential in the ball park proxy. I was thinking more like north of $15 million but less than $20 million. But if I was operating with inflated Tannehill figures, maybe I'm off. As a Rams fan, I'd be very happy with a $10 million per year contract, it just somehow doesn't look right to me, too low. On the upper bound or range for recent QB second contracts, I have been thinking of Newton in about $20 million a year terms, Wilson wanting between $20-25 million (Luck may command $25 million by 2016?), but maybe those are similarly inflated terms when broken down differently. Reportedly structure and especially regarding guaranteed money could be tricky matters with Wilson's negotiations.

If Foles does decent this year they'll sign him to a contract similar to what Tannehill got that's inflated on paper to make him look good. I think he'd need a repeat of 2013 (or relatively close to it) to get into the $15m (in real guaranteed money) range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think I have it, but in case the exchange is of interest to others in the thread - the $19 million and $16 million figures in the above article are averages if you divided from the total length and maxed out dollar value of the contract, which thereby inflates the stated value, relative to the actual value? And since it is essentially a two year deal, that explains the reduction.

Tannehill could be in a different position relative to Foles as far as the money over and above what he was already going to make part of the contract description. He was a former top 10 pick, Foles a third rounder.

How much are the following QBs making next year (thinking of recent QB contracts, feel free to add any oversights):

Ryan

Kaepernick

Dalton

Newton

Lastly, unless I'm missing something, I didn't see Foles settling for a $10 million per year contract, but I do see Tannehill as a potential in the ball park proxy. I was thinking more like north of $15 million but less than $20 million. But if I was operating with inflated Tannehill figures, maybe I'm off. As a Rams fan, I'd be very happy with a $10 million per year contract, it just somehow doesn't look right to me, too low. On the upper bound or range for recent QB second contracts, I have been thinking of Newton in about $20 million a year terms, Wilson wanting between $20-25 million (Luck may command $25 million by 2016?), but maybe those are similarly inflated terms when broken down differently. Reportedly structure and especially regarding guaranteed money could be tricky matters with Wilson's negotiations.

Yes, to the first part. In the NFL, it almost never makes sense to worry about the full possible value of a contract, because it will almost never be paid (unless you are trying to kill Shick. Then talk about that, in-depth analysis of the 1962 championship game, and grade everyone's 2015 draft right now).

As for comparing contracts, go here: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/contracts/quarterback/

For 2015

Ryan - $17.5

Kaepernick - $15.2

Dalton - $9.6

Newton - $19.5

Alex Smith - $15.6

Cutler - $16.5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think I have it, but in case the exchange is of interest to others in the thread - the $19 million and $16 million figures in the above article are averages if you divided from the total length and maxed out dollar value of the contract, which thereby inflates the stated value, relative to the actual value? And since it is essentially a two year deal, that explains the reduction.

Tannehill could be in a different position relative to Foles as far as the money over and above what he was already going to make part of the contract description. He was a former top 10 pick, Foles a third rounder.

How much are the following QBs making next year (thinking of recent QB contracts, feel free to add any oversights):

Ryan

Kaepernick

Dalton

Newton

Lastly, unless I'm missing something, I didn't see Foles settling for a $10 million per year contract, but I do see Tannehill as a potential in the ball park proxy. I was thinking more like north of $15 million but less than $20 million. But if I was operating with inflated Tannehill figures, maybe I'm off. As a Rams fan, I'd be very happy with a $10 million per year contract, it just somehow doesn't look right to me, too low. On the upper bound or range for recent QB second contracts, I have been thinking of Newton in about $20 million a year terms, Wilson wanting between $20-25 million (Luck may command $25 million by 2016?), but maybe those are similarly inflated terms when broken down differently. Reportedly structure and especially regarding guaranteed money could be tricky matters with Wilson's negotiations.

Yes, to the first part. In the NFL, it almost never makes sense to worry about the full possible value of a contract, because it will almost never be paid (unless you are trying to kill Shick. Then talk about that, in-depth analysis of the 1962 championship game, and grade everyone's 2015 draft right now).

As for comparing contracts, go here: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/contracts/quarterback/

For 2015

Ryan - $17.5

Kaepernick - $15.2

Dalton - $9.6

Newton - $19.5

Alex Smith - $15.6

Cutler - $16.5

Interesting. So on the basis of the which monster doesn't belong pattern recognition game, five of the names in this group range from $15 million to $20 million. Dalton stands out as the only one of the group under $10 million.

And to that, we could add Tannehill from above at $10 million.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think I have it, but in case the exchange is of interest to others in the thread - the $19 million and $16 million figures in the above article are averages if you divided from the total length and maxed out dollar value of the contract, which thereby inflates the stated value, relative to the actual value? And since it is essentially a two year deal, that explains the reduction.

Tannehill could be in a different position relative to Foles as far as the money over and above what he was already going to make part of the contract description. He was a former top 10 pick, Foles a third rounder.

How much are the following QBs making next year (thinking of recent QB contracts, feel free to add any oversights):

Ryan

Kaepernick

Dalton

Newton

Lastly, unless I'm missing something, I didn't see Foles settling for a $10 million per year contract, but I do see Tannehill as a potential in the ball park proxy. I was thinking more like north of $15 million but less than $20 million. But if I was operating with inflated Tannehill figures, maybe I'm off. As a Rams fan, I'd be very happy with a $10 million per year contract, it just somehow doesn't look right to me, too low. On the upper bound or range for recent QB second contracts, I have been thinking of Newton in about $20 million a year terms, Wilson wanting between $20-25 million (Luck may command $25 million by 2016?), but maybe those are similarly inflated terms when broken down differently. Reportedly structure and especially regarding guaranteed money could be tricky matters with Wilson's negotiations.

Yes, to the first part. In the NFL, it almost never makes sense to worry about the full possible value of a contract, because it will almost never be paid (unless you are trying to kill Shick. Then talk about that, in-depth analysis of the 1962 championship game, and grade everyone's 2015 draft right now).

As for comparing contracts, go here: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/contracts/quarterback/

For 2015

Ryan - $17.5

Kaepernick - $15.2

Dalton - $9.6

Newton - $19.5

Alex Smith - $15.6

Cutler - $16.5

Cap hit is misleading.

Dalton was already under contract for 2014, and they signed him to a "6 year, $96M" extension for 2015-2020.

If he plays out the entire contract, he'll get $16M/yr in new money for the 6 new years (in addition to the tiny contract he was on for 2014). If they cut him after 4 years, he'll average $15.5M/yr in new money for those 4 new years. If they cut him after this year, he will have received $24.2M in new money for a 1 year extension. If they cut him at some other time, he'll average somewhere in between $15.6M/yr and $17.5M/yr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The $15 million to $17 million number is more in line with what I thought (or expectation I had based on what I heard/read earlier).

Which reminds me, on some players, like Cam Newton, for instance, if we are pretty sure they aren't going ot be cut in a year or two, than looking at the contract further out COULD be more realistic. With QBs that are young, seemingly in a teams good graces, relatively established, consistent, that is the kind of player that could see the contract until the end (Dalton does seem more vulnerable if he can't get over the playoff hump at some point). Barring a catastrophic injury or unanticipated regression (suspension, something off field?), hard to see him not being on the team in 3-4 years. Anything could happen in theory, he could be on thin ice if they go 0-32, 0-48 next 2-3 seasons and really stinks up the place, looks personally responsilbe, but that isn't very likely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Britt is a starter. Bailey might not be if Quick returns to form. In dynasty, if Quick isn't retained (and even Britt not assured of returning based on contract structure), Bailey could start in 2016 if not sooner. Britt is only 27 in 2015, Fisher seems to like him, he looked good last season, he would be my choice if both available.

  • Like 1
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...