Jon Gruden considers Nick Foles outstanding.

You mean deep ball accuracy problems right?

Who doesn't Grunden think is outstanding?

Reid may want both QBs but no way he chooses Foles over Geno

Al Davis.
Posted via Mobile Device

ROFL REP!!

That and he struggled with overall accuracy in college, IIRC.


Frankly, I'm a little tired of inaccurate QB's. If we do take Foles, I'd like to see them play it a little like Flacco with that big arm.

He completed 60+ % ever year in college and then was 60.8% as a rookie. Are you seeing something I'm not?

Not understanding this inaccurate argument.

Look at the teams he had good games against. It was some of the worst secondaries in the league.


Now, he also had some good games against good teams and he didn't have much around him. So i tend to give him a pass on some of that.


But he had alot of questions about his accuracy coming out and was supposedly really innacurate in the evaluation process.


He showed last year that he isn't awful in that area, but he also wasn't consistent.

He was very much an underneath passer in college. When he tried to go past about 15 yards, he really fell to hell.

Foles is exactly the same guy he was in college and I had no reason in giving more than a 4th for him then. Now the 4th would be even higher and I'm still not willing to give more than that for him.

He's not bad; he has some tools. But he's inaccurate and he's probably going to stay that way.

4 of his 7 games he had over a 64% completion percentage. He had two bad games and two good games. I don't know, this could be what he is, but like I said, I've seen some recent 1st founders that didn't show the promise that Foles showed in albeit a small sample size.

He does have some upside, but IMO, it's not enough upside to give up more than a 3/4 round pick at this point.

I wouldn't either.

oh **** Foles in the ass already....
Posted via Mobile Device

A well reasoned critique of Foles.