21 replies to this topic

[erickprime]

Who's our starting QB? I can see us taking an offensive line guy with our first pick, but I see us coming back late in the 1st to get a Matt Barkley type (depending on who's our coach and his philosophy).

[skipsharp]

erickprime, on 27 December 2012 - 02:01 PM, said:

(depending on who's our coach and his philosophy).

[GrahamCracker]

I'd guess it depends on who is coach and what his philosophy might be.

[bobbywizdum]

we don't have two first round picks and we have a ton of holes to address. So we are going to go OL and then trade some picks while we are rebuilding to get back into the first round to draft of a crap shoot qb?

[axe_man_trotter]

Biggest question is : who's the coach?

[Sean Jerz]

I'd go with what defense will the new HC run, 4-3 or 3-4?

[BtotheH]

The new HC will determine if Foles is his guy. But then the question is who the hell does the new HC have to choose from? IMO Matt Moore and Matt Flynn haven't proved to be much better than what Foles has done and taking a QB in the 2013 draft just isn't smart because Barkley or McGlennon look to possibly be no better than Foles either. Both are second round guys. And yea I know Russell Wilson was taken in the third but how often does that happen?

I think the new HC will realize that were in no position to get a franchise QB for 2013 so we look ahead to the 2014 draft......or see how Foles does in 2013.

[time2rock]

axe_man_trotter, on 27 December 2012 - 02:15 PM, said:

Biggest question is : who's the coach?

Wish the biggest question was:  who's the new GM?

[odin8888]

I like Foles potential, i draft O-line, safety, and somewhere pick up a free agent or draft another qb for competition. Then quality depth everywhere

[vic92353]

erickprime, on 27 December 2012 - 02:01 PM, said:

Who's our starting QB? I can see us taking an offensive line guy with our first pick, but I see us coming back late in the 1st to get a Matt Barkley type (depending on who's our coach and his philosophy).

Yep,  it's a big one alright.  And at this point things do not look good.

[biglou22]

BtotheH, on 27 December 2012 - 03:03 PM, said:

The new HC will determine if Foles is his guy. But then the question is who the hell does the new HC have to choose from? IMO Matt Moore and Matt Flynn haven't proved to be much better than what Foles has done and taking a QB in the 2013 draft just isn't smart because Barkley or McGlennon look to possibly be no better than Foles either. Both are second round guys. And yea I know Russell Wilson was taken in the third but how often does that happen?

I think the new HC will realize that were in no position to get a franchise QB for 2013 so we look ahead to the 2014 draft......or see how Foles does in 2013.

I agree. I think whoever the new HC is,, he takes a chance with Foles and worrys about filling the other needs.
Then the question is can all the needs be filled in 1 off season ??????
I say yes. And 1 of the reasons is there isn't a real power house team that is far and away better then any team in the NFC.
Probably the best ALL AROUND TEAM is Seattle and they sure as hell dont scare anyone. Or maybe the Packers but their OL and defense are far from top not h that's for sure.
Add to the weakness of the NFL plus the high draft pick that the Eagles could trade for multiple picks and I'm thinking its possible.

[evilwaldo]

Let Foles get a year under the new coach.  If he sucks we get another high pick and draft a QB in a better QB draft.

If he improves, great, we have a starter for the next few years at least.

[FanSinceWayBack]

Probably depends on who the next HC is... just my .02 though

[bobbywizdum]

biglou22, on 27 December 2012 - 04:13 PM, said:

I agree. I think whoever the new HC is,, he takes a chance with Foles and worrys about filling the other needs.
Then the question is can all the needs be filled in 1 off season ??????
I say yes. And 1 of the reasons is there isn't a real power house team that is far and away better then any team in the NFC.
Probably the best ALL AROUND TEAM is Seattle and they sure as hell dont scare anyone. Or maybe the Packers but their OL and defense are far from top not h that's for sure.
Add to the weakness of the NFL plus the high draft pick that the Eagles could trade for multiple picks and I'm thinking its possible.

this goes back to my point. If Foles indeed is next years starting qb (which i think he should be)...Don't we risk hindering his growth by bringing in a new philosophy and a new coordinator in his first ever offseason? Doesn't that take away from the learning experience he has had this year? Obviously if our new coach has a history of developing qb's than it shouldn't be a big deal. We know Reid has a strong history in that department that's why i see more harm than good in making the change this offseason. It would give us a full year to evaluate foles and if he is not the guy than at that point i would see it as the time to start fresh. If Andy and Foles make great strides and end up having a good season....would everyone still be calling for his head next year?

[biglou22]

bobbywizdum, on 27 December 2012 - 04:25 PM, said:

this goes back to my point. If Foles indeed is next years starting qb (which i think he should be)...Don't we risk hindering his growth by bringing in a new philosophy and a new coordinator in his first ever offseason? Doesn't that take away from the learning experience he has had this year? Obviously if our new coach has a history of developing qb's than it shouldn't be a big deal. We know Reid has a strong history in that department that's why i see more harm than good in making the change this offseason. It would give us a full year to evaluate foles and if he is not the guy than at that point i would see it as the time to start fresh. If Andy and Foles make great strides and end up having a good season....would everyone still be calling for his head next year?

Listen, though I'm a huge Reid fan and I think it us time for change, I also am smart enough to know that the next coach will LIKELY not be as successful as Reid so I would have no problem letting Reid come back.

[evilwaldo]

bobbywizdum, on 27 December 2012 - 04:25 PM, said:

this goes back to my point. If Foles indeed is next years starting qb (which i think he should be)...Don't we risk hindering his growth by bringing in a new philosophy and a new coordinator in his first ever offseason? Doesn't that take away from the learning experience he has had this year? Obviously if our new coach has a history of developing qb's than it shouldn't be a big deal. We know Reid has a strong history in that department that's why i see more harm than good in making the change this offseason. It would give us a full year to evaluate foles and if he is not the guy than at that point i would see it as the time to start fresh. If Andy and Foles make great strides and end up having a good season....would everyone still be calling for his head next year?

...and if Andy sucks again next year do you wait to bring in another coach?

It is time to move on.  He is not so far in that another philosophy will hurt.  If anything a grounded philosophy that actually focuses on the run game would be a benefit.

[WestPaEaglesNest]

Philosophically speaking, it depends on who the new coach is.

[bobbywizdum]

biglou22, on 27 December 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

Listen, though I'm a huge Reid fan and I think it us time for change, I also am smart enough to know that the next coach will LIKELY not be as successful as Reid so I would have no problem letting Reid come back.

that's all i'm looking at is the smart thing to do. Do i personally care if reid goes? no if you get someone who will be better at developing foels. I'm just not sure we can get a better qb developer than andy reid. we can certainly get a "different" coach with a totally different philosophy. I just don't want the new coach screwing up foles development.

evilwaldo, on 27 December 2012 - 04:28 PM, said:

...and if Andy sucks again next year do you wait to bring in another coach?

It is time to move on.  He is not so far in that another philosophy will hurt.  If anything a grounded philosophy that actually focuses on the run game would be a benefit.

no. i wouldn't wait to replace reid if the team didn't show great progress next season. His contract would be up and you simply don't extend him. You at that time would have a better idea of where you are heading with foles and if you need to go a different direction there as well. You have no idea that a new philosophy won't hinder Foles. You have no idea that the new coach will even have a ground game philsophy. You are just assuming they will run more than andy or be better than andy in every way because at the end of the day you want anything that is not andy. The truth is run first coaches are prehistoric so you aren't likely going to get one. If the new coaches philsophy sucks it very well could set foles development back and the percentages of that happening are very high. What is the harm in waiting a year to see how foles continues to grow so we have a better understanding of what we have there? What quarterback has andy reid failed to develop other than mike mcmahon? As bad as vick as been here...it was still the most productive he's ever been in his career !!!

[time2rock]

evilwaldo, on 27 December 2012 - 04:15 PM, said:

Let Foles get a year under the new coach.  If he sucks we get another high pick and draft a QB in a better QB draft.

If he improves, great, we have a starter for the next few years at least.

Shhhhh ... don't let Audit in on this logic.

[AceofSpades]

The question about QB is more like 3rd or 4th down the line. The top 2 questions are:

1) Who will the head coach be?

2) What direction does he want the Eagles to go in as a team? or What type of team does he want the Eagles to be?

[VaBeach_Eagle]

erickprime, on 27 December 2012 - 02:01 PM, said:

Who's our starting QB?

That's not the biggest question about the offseason as of right now. Right now the biggest question is "Who's our Coach going to be?" Let's get that one answered first, then we can look at other questions.

[morphius12812003]

No, QB is not the biggest question.  Everything we do (personnel wise) is predicated on the new coaching staff.