106 replies to this topic

[pgcd3]

Signing Vick to an essentially 7 million dollar contract insinuates in a strong way that Kelly wants to use him as a 1-yr stopgap to implement his system. If he really thought Foles could be his QB he'd have given him a shot this year without Vick in the mix at 7 mil. The fact is Foles showed promise but he is a very slow man. Kelly obviously wants a QB who can run. His words sounded nice but his actions have spoken loudly.

Striving for a pocket passer, the kind of QB that has won the SB ever year, seems to gone from the plans of this team. AGAIN

[jonnyeagles12]

I must admit i'm beginning to agree now, I think Kelly wants his QB to have a running threat and Foles sadly just doesn't have that

[TV Guy]

Draft EJ Manuel and groom him to take over in 2014?

[vipakabp916]

pgcd3, on 12 February 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

Signing Vick to an essentially 7 million dollar contract insinuates in a strong way that Kelly wants to use him as a 1-yr stopgap to implement his system. If he really thought Foles could be his QB he'd have given him a shot this year without Vick in the mix at 7 mil. The fact is Foles showed promise but he is a very slow man. Kelly obviously wants a QB who can run. His words sounded nice but his actions have spoken loudly.

Striving for a pocket passer, the kind of QB that has won the SB ever year, seems to gone from the plans of this team. AGAIN

Too bad the running qb got beat... and i have said it once and I’ll say it again no RUNNING qb has every one a super bowl... Now the argument can be made for Steve Young who was a running QB but he had to learn to run when needed and keep his behind in the pocket to win.. and that’s what he did... The running qb will put points on the board and butts in the seats but not hard ware will be worn with these type of players... mark my words now that the league has a chance to watch film on RG3 and CK they will make them throw to beat people and shut the running stuff down... now you say "they both can pass the ball" and yes that is true but when you make a team one dimensional you have better odds...
i still think Vick will be a back up or be traded... cuz the deal helps with trading him for a 5th or 6th round pick... So will see ... no one really knows but the Eagles...

[jonnyeagles12]

Lets hope this team succeeds under Kelly. But I just can't help feeling we got Kelly at the wrong year, just bad timing. Imagine him in 2010 when Jackson was on song with Vick and we had a strong O line. He also wouldn't have hired Juan so we could have had a strong D too.

I just feel this is the one year we have a pocket passer who could become something great for the first time in agess!

[pgcd3]

TV Guy, on 12 February 2013 - 12:14 PM, said:

Draft EJ Manuel and groom him to take over in 2014?

Maybe or just suck this year and get Teddy Bridgewater or Johnny Football next year.

[DaveSpadaro]

I certainly understand that line of thinking. By keeping Vick, you would think the QB must be mobile. At the same time, there is only a $3.5 million guarantee on the table for Vick. That's what it would have cost the Eagles, essentially, had they cut him. So I think it's a low-risk situation here with Vick. I don't know if he will make the team, or if he will be the starting QB. If Chip ONLY wants a QB who is mobile, then clearly Foles has no shot. But I'll take Chip at his word that he has versatility built into the offense. I may be wrong, but until I SEE otherwise, I'm going to believe the guy.

[downundermike]

pgcd3, on 12 February 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

Signing Vick to an essentially 7 million dollar contract insinuates in a strong way that Kelly wants to use him as a 1-yr stopgap to implement his system. If he really thought Foles could be his QB he'd have given him a shot this year without Vick in the mix at 7 mil. The fact is Foles showed promise but he is a very slow man. Kelly obviously wants a QB who can run. His words sounded nice but his actions have spoken loudly.

Striving for a pocket passer, the kind of QB that has won the SB ever year, seems to gone from the plans of this team. AGAIN

I would rather suck with Dennis Dixon for a year then Mike Vick.  Get him outta here.

[mjkvol]

DaveSpadaro, on 12 February 2013 - 12:43 PM, said:

I certainly understand that line of thinking. By keeping Vick, you would think the QB must be mobile. At the same time, there is only a $3.5 million guarantee on the table for Vick. That's what it would have cost the Eagles, essentially, had they cut him. So I think it's a low-risk situation here with Vick. I don't know if he will make the team, or if he will be the starting QB. If Chip ONLY wants a QB who is mobile, then clearly Foles has no shot. But I'll take Chip at his word that he has versatility built into the offense. I may be wrong, but until I SEE otherwise, I'm going to believe the guy.

The key is that it's low risk, one year, provides a potential trade chip (pun intended), at the price we would have paid to cut him. No brainer.

[valleyguy]

It amazes me how many of you are coming to conclusions about the staff and the way Chip will run this team.  I would think after listening to, and hopefully reading about his nature, you realize
that this man is innovative and is bringing a new look to the NFL.  You do not see a man who is satisfied with the "good old boy network", therefore, I would sugguest that you all who are so negadelphians, wait until you see how he progresses during the season.  

Will Chip be successful or will he fail?  Only the future holds that to see regardless of whomever we hired as our new coach. One thing is certain, Chip brings an exciting time back to Philadellphia.

[pgcd3]

DaveSpadaro, on 12 February 2013 - 12:43 PM, said:

I certainly understand that line of thinking. By keeping Vick, you would think the QB must be mobile. At the same time, there is only a $3.5 million guarantee on the table for Vick. That's what it would have cost the Eagles, essentially, had they cut him. So I think it's a low-risk situation here with Vick. I don't know if he will make the team, or if he will be the starting QB. If Chip ONLY wants a QB who is mobile, then clearly Foles has no shot. But I'll take Chip at his word that he has versatility built into the offense. I may be wrong, but until I SEE otherwise, I'm going to believe the guy.

A few days ago the eagles could have cut vick and it would have cost them nothing or before this contract they had an offset that allowed them to cut him later and probably have little expense. Now my understanding is it really will cost them 3.5 million in real dollars and cap space to cut him. They can trade him now but I'm not sure that the economics of 3.5 mil for a late round draft pick make sense.

Seems like they essentially committed to Vick to me

[dmor]

The Vick restructure makes sense for the Eagles regardless of whether Vick stays with the team or not.  If he stays, Vick is a one year stopgap most likely.  Otherwise, much easier to trade him.  To not restructure simply would make no sense.

[patpikunas]

downundermike, on 12 February 2013 - 12:45 PM, said:

I would rather suck with Dennis Dixon for a year then Mike Vick.  Get him outta here.

Awesome sig...

just change it to "LOSE like Hell for Manziel"

More than 3 wins this year would not be good. I salivate at the prospect of Manziel running Chip Kelly's offense in 2014

[downundermike]

patpikunas, on 12 February 2013 - 02:04 PM, said:

Awesome sig...

just change it to "LOSE like Hell for Manziel"

More than 3 wins this year would not be good. I salivate at the prospect of Manziel running Chip Kelly's offense in 2014

I am leaning to Bridgewater.

[SBorBust]

Dave keeps saying $3.5 guaranteed.  IF HE MAKES THE OPENING DAY ROSTER IT IS $7 MILLION GUARANTEED.

[SBorBust]

pgcd3, on 12 February 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

Signing Vick to an essentially 7 million dollar contract insinuates in a strong way that Kelly wants to use him as a 1-yr stopgap to implement his system. If he really thought Foles could be his QB he'd have given him a shot this year without Vick in the mix at 7 mil. The fact is Foles showed promise but he is a very slow man. Kelly obviously wants a QB who can run. His words sounded nice but his actions have spoken loudly.

Striving for a pocket passer, the kind of QB that has won the SB ever year, seems to gone from the plans of this team. AGAIN

If only I could like this 100 times.

More of the same.  More losing for us.   This nightmare scenario is why I was so against the Eagles getting Chip in the first place.  Then I got fooled by the "adapts system to the players" nonsense and got false hope.  That didn't last long.  This is depressing.

What makes matters so much worse is that this would have been the year where we would see if we FINALLY had a quarterback capable of winning the Super Bowl.  Probably not, but it would have been fun to find out.

[mjkvol]

patpikunas, on 12 February 2013 - 02:04 PM, said:

Awesome sig...

just change it to "LOSE like Hell for Manziel"

More than 3 wins this year would not be good. I salivate at the prospect of Manziel running Chip Kelly's offense in 2014

I wouldn't get too jacked up for Manzeil - he's too damn small, and I'll bet will peak as a college player.  

Given the choice, I'd take Bridgewater in a second.

But I agree - anything better than 5-11 will be bad, and anything approaching 9-7 will be a disaster.

[Rodney_Zero]

Question about Vick

Did he get his roster bonus (3 Million?) and a new restructered deal that gurantees 3.5 million  and up to 10 million as well?

[f_dallas]

Rodney_Zero, on 12 February 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

Question about Vick

Did he get his roster bonus (3 Million?) and a new restructered deal that gurantees 3.5 million  and up to 10 million as well?

I'm curious about all that, as well.

Also, with regard to the idea that it will essentially cost them as much to keep him as cut him, all the reports out there are saying they still incur a $4.8 million cap hit if he's released this year or next, but it goes against the 2014 cap.

So, in essence, they are still going to take that cap hit...it just gets pushed back a year.

[patpikunas]

mjkvol, on 12 February 2013 - 02:47 PM, said:

I wouldn't get too jacked up for Manzeil - he's too damn small, and I'll bet will peak as a college player.  

Given the choice, I'd take Bridgewater in a second.

But I agree - anything better than 5-11 will be bad, and anything approaching 9-7 will be a disaster.

I thought the same thing about Russell Wilson but Manzeil is built very similarly.... and i think the kid is a flat out stud

[Runtherock]

I believe I heard Chip reference Vick's release. His release. Come on people, step off the ledge..

[CT Eagle]

SBorBust, on 12 February 2013 - 02:18 PM, said:

Dave keeps saying $3.5 guaranteed.  IF HE MAKES THE OPENING DAY ROSTER IT IS $7 MILLION GUARANTEED.

Well if he makes the roster, it will be as the starter and paying your vet starting qb 7mm isn't a big deal (even if it isn't the qb of the future).

[pgcd3]

Runtherock, on 12 February 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

I believe I heard Chip reference Vick's release. His release. Come on people, step off the ledge..

Huh?

CT Eagle, on 12 February 2013 - 05:36 PM, said:

Well if he makes the roster, it will be as the starter and paying your vet starting qb 7mm isn't a big deal (even if it isn't the qb of the future).

Do you think they are cutting him and eating 3.5 mil?

[Runtherock]

pgcd3, on 12 February 2013 - 09:17 PM, said:

Huh?



Do you think they are cutting him and eating 3.5 mil?

In his presser, Chip emphasized Vick's release, not his feet, not anything else that would lead you to conclude anything about a non-pocket QB system. You are absolutely losing your mind. Kelly has indicated he will match the offense to his personnel, he isn't married to any one system, Shurmur basically said the same thing. Chip said Vick will compete, that's it. Get a freaking grip on yourself.

[dmor]

pgcd3, on 12 February 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

Signing Vick to an essentially 7 million dollar contract insinuates in a strong way that Kelly wants to use him as a 1-yr stopgap to implement his system. If he really thought Foles could be his QB he'd have given him a shot this year without Vick in the mix at 7 mil. The fact is Foles showed promise but he is a very slow man. Kelly obviously wants a QB who can run. His words sounded nice but his actions have spoken loudly.

Striving for a pocket passer, the kind of QB that has won the SB ever year, seems to gone from the plans of this team. AGAIN

I disagree.  The pickings at QB in the draft and free agency are slim.  Foles had flashes last year, but let's face it, he won only one game.  I'll take Chip at his word when he says there will be competition at the QB position.  May the best man win the starting job.

[pgcd3]

I seriously doubt they intend to pay Vick 7 mil to be a backup nor do I think they signed him with the intention of eating 3.5mil when they didn't have to.

Sure Foles hasn't proved himself not arguing otherwise but the signs are very much there that Kelly wants a mobile QB. Forget Kelly's word and look at his actions.

Runtherock I'm actually glad you found optimism since I know on paper you hated each the OC, DC and Vick moves but you decided to have faith in Kelly

[badmeetsevil]

Guys we have and have had for over a decade now great salary cap situations.

Who cares how much it will cost them? This restructuring doesn't hurt them. They can still make whatever else moves they want to make. So the money aspect of it doesn't bother me.

It comes down to this:

Do you believe Chip when he says

1. He isn't married to one system over the other
2. There will be open competition

If yes then let's just all relax, wait, and see. Now I know I hated doing that myself but that was with Reid who time after time proved that no matter what he said publicly he was married to one system over all and lied constantly about the QB position. Until unless Chip does that we have to give him the benefit of doubt.

Now of course he is going to incorporate what worked for him at Oregon and what his overall philosophy is. I don't think he will just bring his style as it was in college 100% to the NFL, and nor can he. But I do think he wants a QB who can move if need be (though I think Foles can show this ability as well he doesn't need to be RG3) and he wants to instill a system that emphasizes running the ball and high tempo hurry up offense.

Again more worried about the defense, starting with the DC and massive problems at safety and CB. I believe with an improved OLINE and running the ball we can be a decent offense with either Vick or Foles. And I also believe neither of them are the QB of the future for this team of regime. Maybe that QB isn't available until next draft so for now whoever can run his system better, which at the same time allows Chip to experiment to see to what extent he can implement his own ideas at the NFL level, should get the starting job.

[pgcd3]

badmeetsevil, on 13 February 2013 - 12:14 PM, said:

It comes down to this:

Do you believe Chip when he says

1. He isn't married to one system over the other
2. There will be open competition

1. No I don't. I think he wants a mobile QB
2. Yes but not necessarily with Foles. They might bring in a different mobile guy to compete with Vick.

[Runtherock]

pgcd3, on 13 February 2013 - 09:08 AM, said:

I seriously doubt they intend to pay Vick 7 mil to be a backup nor do I think they signed him with the intention of eating 3.5mil when they didn't have to.

Sure Foles hasn't proved himself not arguing otherwise but the signs are very much there that Kelly wants a mobile QB. Forget Kelly's word and look at his actions.

Runtherock I'm actually glad you found optimism since I know on paper you hated each the OC, DC and Vick moves but you decided to have faith in Kelly

Not excited by the OC and DC, I'm ok with the Vick move because I see it for what it is, short term lets see what he can do. I am optimistic though because I like Chip and have faith.

[dmor]

This is all b.s.  The premise of the thread apparently is that Foles, all other things being equal, can win more games in this league than Vick.  We have no evidence to prove that, and much evidence to disprove that.