ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs The case for Nick Foles (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=270213)

Dayze 02-20-2013 10:58 AM

I'm not sold on Peyton's son.

DJ's left nut 02-20-2013 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Detoxing (Post 9418686)
But as the OP pointed out, we have TWO holes at QB.

The only vet i see worth bringing in would be Hasselbeck. It might suck giving up a 3rd, but we do have two 3rd round picks (or at least we should, not sure if it's been confirmed yet) so we can still pick quality players.

We have a dozen holes all over this roster. If it's your position that trading a 3rd for Foles means we can't fill the 2nd QB hole, then I presume you're suggesting that the Chiefs have to use 2 of their first 3 picks on QBs this season?

That's crazy talk. Yeah, they need to use one of their first 3 on a QB, no question. The 2nd QB hole should probably be filled in some other fashion.

For instance, if they take Geno at 1.1, would you really think its wise to use the 2nd rounder, which could be our #2 corner/WR or the 3rd rounder, which could be our starting SS, on a backup QB?

No, I don't think this franchise has any business doing that right now. They need to decide who they're going to pick as their QBOTF this year and they need to aggressively pursue that option. If that's Geno Smith - get him. If it's Nick Foles, figure something out. Then from there you use the rest of your picks to fill other gaping holes on the roster and you try to be creative with the backup QB role. There's always a Henne or Orton or Moore to be had as a sound backup QB.

The fact that Scooter intentionally avoided ever having a viable backup quarterback on this roster to avoid pressuring his dipshit pet doesn't mean that they're actually that difficult to acquire.

Mr_Tomahawk 02-20-2013 11:00 AM

At least he has no problem getting the ball down the field...

crazycoffey 02-20-2013 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dayze (Post 9418706)
I'm not sold on Peyton's son.

Can we at least wait for him to be conceived before we start criticizing him?

htismaqe 02-20-2013 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 9418670)
Like I said, I don't agree with him there. If I give up a 3rd for him, it's because I think he can be the starter.

The Chiefs honestly have too many holes for me to be that comfortable with them loading up on QBs in this draft. I know it's the 'in' thing because that's what the Skins did, but A) the Skins sure could've used another pass-rusher or guy in the secondary last year, eh? And B) With RGIII, they Skins had to have a good backup; he's an ever-present injury risk.

If you're a bad team, you have to worry about a lot of holes on your roster. Either you think Foles is capable of being a top 1/2 of the league QB or you don't. If you do, I don't think you should be drafting another QB at that point.

I like some of his analysis but disagree with his conclusions. I don't think I'd give up a 3rd for him at this point, for the reasons I stated in my first post.

ABSOLUTELY agree with this.

htismaqe 02-20-2013 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 9418672)
The one thing I did find interesting was how much it would cost us to cut Cassel and trade for Smith. $12 million is a little much for a game manager.

Hopefully it's an insurmountable obstacle. I don't want Alex Smith.

HolyHat 02-20-2013 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dayze (Post 9418706)
I'm not sold on Peyton's son.

Yeah, I have to agree. Should we start a thread?

htismaqe 02-20-2013 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazycoffey (Post 9418718)
Can we at least wait for him to be conceived before we start criticizing him?

Why? This is a message board, we get paid to talk about stuff like this.

And whatnot...

Frosty 02-20-2013 11:04 AM

Quote:

In Foles last four games he completed 61.4 percent of his passes for 1,157 yards with five touchdowns and two interceptions.
That's not too bad.

Foles was third string through most of training camp (moved to 2nd string after playing well in the preseason games) so it would make sense that he would improve quite a bit with some actual playing time.

Quote:

Much has been made of his W/L record as a starter last year in Philadelphia. The Eagles had 4th quarter leads against Carolina and Dallas, were tied with Dallas in their other game and came within five yards of tying the Redskins to end their second game. Simply looking at the final score doesn't give you the whole story and context of what happened.
But I read right here on CP that all of Foles stats came in blowout losses. :rolleyes:

If the Chiefs were able to get Foles and a 2nd for swapping 1sts with the Eagles, who do you take at #4? Patterson? The best remaining QB?

Hammock Parties 02-20-2013 11:07 AM

The one thing I like about all those GIFs is you can see how strong his arm is. This is a 60-65 yard throw when you account for angle, and his feet are all messed up.

http://cdn2.sbnation.com/imported_as...787/foles2.gif

That's about all I like about Nicky Fools. He's tall and has a big arm.

htismaqe 02-20-2013 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frosty (Post 9418735)
But I read right here on CP that all of Foles stats came in blowout losses. :rolleyes:

Foles has a responsibility to win in spite of his horrendous defense.

At least that's what we've been told when it comes to Geno Smith.

Or are we just going to throw out all pretenses of objectivity and fairness? ;)

BigCatDaddy 02-20-2013 11:07 AM

Holy shit! By the time the draft rolls around the TrueFans are going to have converted 1/2 the Genoites.

Frosty 02-20-2013 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 9418713)
We have a dozen holes all over this roster. If it's your position that trading a 3rd for Foles means we can't fill the 2nd QB hole, then I presume you're suggesting that the Chiefs have to use 2 of their first 3 picks on QBs this season?

That's crazy talk. Yeah, they need to use one of their first 3 on a QB, no question. The 2nd QB hole should probably be filled in some other fashion.

For instance, if they take Geno at 1.1, would you really think its wise to use the 2nd rounder, which could be our #2 corner/WR or the 3rd rounder, which could be our starting SS, on a backup QB?


Absolutely, unless they can pick some extra picks. This draft looks to have a ton of talent in the 2nd through 4th rounds. I would hate to trade those away.

Dave Lane 02-20-2013 11:08 AM

Id give a next years 3 that could rise to a 2 with certain goals being met like win a playoff game.

And THEN draft a REAL QB at #1


Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 9418630)
Guys - read the article.

I do not like the Foles option personally, but Kissel is legit. I've been following him on Twitter for awhile and he's actually been doing a lot of homework over the last couple of weeks. He spent all weekend last weekend watching Foles games and giving updates.

I'm fairly confident saying that Kissel has spent more time studying Nick Foles than any of us has so at least give him the courtesy of reading what he has to say.

I still don't like the Foles option, but it's now no longer on my list of most hated scenarios, either. I would not, however, give up anything close to the 1st or 2nd that the Eagles are supposedly asking for. At worst I'd give a 3rd, but as I really want Rambo with that pick, I might not do that either.

Honestly, I'd have to convince myself that he's 'the man' that can lead this team and if so, I'd swap first rounders with the Eagles for Foles. If I can't convince myself of that, then I probably wouldn't make a trade for him at all.

But hey, thanks again, *****, for making sure we did absolutely nothing to put a young quarterback with starters potential on this roster over the last 2 years. It wouldn't have been nice to have taken a flyer on Wilson or Foles...


Frosty 02-20-2013 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 9418748)
Foles has a responsibility to win in spite of his horrendous defense.

At least that's what we've been told when it comes to Geno Smith.

Or are we just going to throw out all pretenses of objectivity and fairness? ;)

Don't lump me in with those folks. I'm all in with drafting Geno.

However, I was a big fan of Foles and pushed for him last year, so I am still good with that option. If the Chiefs aren't going to take Geno, that's my next favorite option.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:03 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.