Foles next year

Team Discussions regarding games, players, coaches, or anything else related to Buccaneer Football.
post

Re: Foles next year

Postby DreadNaught » Tue Jul 10, 2018 11:25 am

Bootz2004 wrote:
Caradoc wrote:Let's put it out there. Who here thinks if Jameis is Wentz's backup Philly wins the SB?

I don't think they win the NFCCG.


I don't think they win the NFCCG with Wentz honestly.


The Falcons were a slip by Julio Jones in the end zone away from beating the Eagles in the divisional round as well.

But imo the Eagles are better w/ a healthy Wentz than they are with Foles over a full season. Wentz would've been the MVP of the NFL last season if not for his injury imo.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 12779
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 528 times
Been thanked: 550 times

Re: Foles next year

Postby MJW » Tue Jul 10, 2018 12:31 pm

Foles has had two years in his career when he was more than a replacement level quarterback. One was when he was helming an offensive scheme nobody had any idea how to defend yet. The other was when he was gifted an elite line, running game, defense, and above-average weapons to boot.

I'm curious which of those two scenarios his next team can offer him.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8678
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: Foles next year

Postby Doctor » Thu Jul 19, 2018 10:13 am

Bootz2004 wrote:
Doctor wrote:

Why? I'm not here for the next guy I'm here for me. If Winston has a bad year we will probably still take him into his 5th year. We may lose DK as well. Heck I'll probably be out of a job. The kid already cost us 3 games. Foles is a proven winner. Say what you want but Winston would not have won it all with the Eagles last year, Foles did, he's a QB you can win with. Maybe not a Rodgers or Wilson, but you can win. You only have short windows in this league. You go from being 8-8 with Tebow to back to back Superbowls with a GOAT to looking for a QB all over again like that *snap*. You don't have many windows in the NFL. We've put together a damn fine defense and supporting cast. JL has a closing window and IDK if I wouldn't adjust the gamplan if I was him.

I mean, it would never happen. Just saying, if it could, I would.


Foles is also a proven failure.

Image
Image
User avatar
Doctor
 
Posts: 5193
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 6:54 pm
Location: Out of the Office. Will return next Fall.
Has thanked: 222 times
Been thanked: 152 times

Re: Foles next year

Postby Bootz2004 » Thu Jul 19, 2018 10:15 am

Doctor wrote:
Bootz2004 wrote:
Foles is also a proven failure.

Image


I guess you're too stupid to know what the word "also" means. It means he's succeeded and has failed. Should've stayed in the womb a little longer kyddo. Didn't come out too bright.
User avatar
Bootz2004
 
Posts: 23566
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:17 pm
Has thanked: 102 times
Been thanked: 504 times

Re: Foles next year

Postby Doctor » Thu Jul 19, 2018 11:16 am

Foles problem is that he wasn't a first rounder. Dumb but true. If not he would've been given a far greater grace period to develop as well as probably never left philly. In his first three years he averaged 245 yards a game, 61.5% completion, 46:17 TD:INT, and went 15-9 (14-4 after his rookie year). All numbers that are comparable to or even better than our darling first overall pick. You don't let Pat Shurmur trade that for his man crush Bradford if he's a first rounder. And yeah, he had an ugly year with the Rams, everyone else did. But you don't measure Warner by what he did with the Giants or Moss by his time in Oakland. Players are allowed outlier seasons and if you remove the Rams he's 17-5 as a starter since the end of his rookie year. Not to mention he's 72%, 291 ypg, and 8:1 ratio in the playoffs isn't anything to scoff at either.

If you aren't crowned QBOTF in your first offseason, you have to pull a freaking Brady or Wilson to get any love, and even then you can still end up an underappreciated Kirk Cousins. Heck Foles wins a superbowl and he's still called a failure. Meanwhile, if you are Ryan Tannehill, Blake Bortles, or Jameis Winston, well then you get all the time, excuses, and faith in the world.
Image
User avatar
Doctor
 
Posts: 5193
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 6:54 pm
Location: Out of the Office. Will return next Fall.
Has thanked: 222 times
Been thanked: 152 times

Re: Foles next year

Postby Bootz2004 » Thu Jul 19, 2018 12:02 pm

Doctor wrote:Foles problem is that he wasn't a first rounder. Dumb but true. If not he would've been given a far greater grace period to develop as well as probably never left philly. In his first three years he averaged 245 yards a game, 61.5% completion, 46:17 TD:INT, and went 15-9 (14-4 after his rookie year). All numbers that are comparable to or even better than our darling first overall pick. You don't let Pat Shurmur trade that for his man crush Bradford if he's a first rounder. And yeah, he had an ugly year with the Rams, everyone else did. But you don't measure Warner by what he did with the Giants or Moss by his time in Oakland. Players are allowed outlier seasons and if you remove the Rams he's 17-5 as a starter since the end of his rookie year. Not to mention he's 72%, 291 ypg, and 8:1 ratio in the playoffs isn't anything to scoff at either.

If you aren't crowned QBOTF in your first offseason, you have to pull a freaking Brady or Wilson to get any love, and even then you can still end up an underappreciated Kirk Cousins. Heck Foles wins a superbowl and he's still called a failure. Meanwhile, if you are Ryan Tannehill, Blake Bortles, or Jameis Winston, well then you get all the time, excuses, and faith in the world.


Paxton Lynch says hi. He got a nice grace period didn't he?
User avatar
Bootz2004
 
Posts: 23566
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:17 pm
Has thanked: 102 times
Been thanked: 504 times

Re: Foles next year

Postby MJW » Fri Jul 20, 2018 12:10 am

Doctor's point is valid; the more capital expended on a venture (ie, a high draft pick, or a big contract), the longer the investor will wait on a return. Bootz is correct also that sometimes, such an investment is clearly a sunk cost (Lynch is a good example) and it would be foolish to continuing to double-down on it.

I don't think the issue with Foles is that he was or wasn't a first rounder. For his "doubters" like myself, the issue is that he has spent most of his career being a replacement-level quarterback. To use a Bootzism, I think anyone looking to give him a phat contract or trade a high pick for him are being "prisoners of the moment." This is a quarterback that three different franchises have dumped.

It's fair to ask how his career trajectory would have been altered if he HAD been a first rounder. It's also fair to posit that it shouldn't matter that he wasn't a first rounder (I'd tend to agree.) But I don't think that mitigates that he's at the absolute top of his value right now.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8678
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Previous

post

Return to Team Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bootz2004, BucaRican, Buccs99, Deja Entendu, Google [Bot], IchabodCrane84, Jason Bourne, Ken Carson, Native Son, Noles1724, PanteraCanes, PrimeMinister, real bucs fan, Rocker, SIBucsFan, snarler, viva la Reagan, Zarniwoop and 27 guests