69 replies to this topic

[james1345]

Hey Dave, we have Dixon and Vick who are mobile QBs. Please explain how Foles will fit in. For example, Vick is the starter, but then he doesn't do well, which leads to him getting benched. You would think that they would go with Dixon over Foles because of the blocking scheme they had with Vick. Changing a blocking scheme for Foles would mess up the chemistry.

Thanks Dave

[HarborTheClay]

Please just keep Foles so that when the disaster of the Vick/Dixon experiment fails, we have something to fall back on. I really thought we were going to dump this scrambling QB Reid era for good...gdamnit.

[patpikunas]

Maybe Foles gets traded and not Vick- who knows?

Maybe both of them gets traded and Chip decides Dixon is his best option to run his system for this year.

Doesn't really matter for this coming season.... they will be looking long and hard for their Franchise QB over the next year.

These guys aren't stupid... they know you can't win without one.

[Erie]

HarborTheClay, on 15 February 2013 - 09:16 AM, said:

Please just keep Foles so that when the disaster of the Vick/Dixon experiment fails, we have something to fall back on. I really thought we were going to dump this scrambling QB Reid era for good...gdamnit.

Scrambling isn't the right term for a Kelly QB.

[HarborTheClay]

Mobile, whatever...label him whatever

But I'd rather a guy back there that intends to throw the football and think nothing else but it. These mobile guys always have it in their head that they don't HAVE to make the play with their arms and then it gets them in trouble. Leave the running to the runningback, it's what he trains himself to do. A quarterback should train himself to pass the damn ball.

Anything in between usually results in inconsistency over time. Inconsistency doesn't win super bowls.

[Mr_Philly]

Hopefully Chip will be a man of his word and at least give Foles an opportunity to compete.

[PhillyPhan13]

Mr_Philly, on 15 February 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

Hopefully Chip will be a man of his word and at least give Foles an opportunity to compete.

I'll be surprised if Foles is at Lehigh.

[Mr_Philly]

PhillyPhan13, on 15 February 2013 - 01:43 PM, said:

I'll be surprised if Foles is at Lehigh.

Me too but I'm still hoping the kid at least gets a chance.

[eaglepride]

I think Howie REALLY likes Foles and part of the Kelly interview and hiring includes at least giving Foles a shot in camp. I doubt Kelly wants him but I think he will give him an opportunity as both he and howie keep saying in the media. But, if KC blows them away like their 2nd round pick for him, they will jump on it.

[mav81]

Say hello to EJ Manuel. Say goodbye to Nick Foles.

[CT Eagle]

According to Mike Garafolo ofUSA Today, there was no real progress toward a deal, but it was made clear to the Chiefs that the Eagles still want to take a look at Foles.

[mav81]

So they are talking, but not interested in a deal.

lol

[DaveSpadaro]

Since I don't know the scheme, I can't tell you how Nick would fit in. I would hope that the system is flexible enough to take advantage of what Nick does very well. I also think Nick knows he has to work on his delivery, his footwork and his general quickness. I sure hope there is some flexibility in this scheme. I expect there to be. I'm excited to see what it looks like and I'm excited to see how Foles fits in.

[mjkvol]

DaveSpadaro, on 25 February 2013 - 10:32 AM, said:

I sure hope there is some flexibility in this scheme.

That would be a novelty here, huh?

[Thrive]

DaveSpadaro, on 25 February 2013 - 10:32 AM, said:

Since I don't know the scheme, I can't tell you how Nick would fit in. I would hope that the system is flexible enough to take advantage of what Nick does very well. I also think Nick knows he has to work on his delivery, his footwork and his general quickness. I sure hope there is some flexibility in this scheme. I expect there to be. I'm excited to see what it looks like and I'm excited to see how Foles fits in.

That's bull**** Dave. Nick has more going for him that ANY quarterback on the roster and ANY quarterback that will be drafted in April. That we are even having this conversation just shows me how ridiculous this Chip Kelly experiment has gotten already. While we are wasting time have a pseudo-competition to force feed a TERRIBLE quarterback (Vick) the job, we should be DESIGNING a scheme that takes advantage of Foles' skillset and not "waiting" for Foles to prove himself.

Foles has nothing to prove. There is no one else out there better than he is and screw Chip Kelly for his obsession with runners.

[f_dallas]

It's so weird, but it really doesn't feel like the organization has changed at all despite Reid being replaced.  It's very early, obviously, but I guess I expected a different energy or a bold new direction.

[f_dallas]

DaveSpadaro, on 25 February 2013 - 10:32 AM, said:

Since I don't know the scheme, I can't tell you how Nick would fit in. I would hope that the system is flexible enough to take advantage of what Nick does very well. I also think Nick knows he has to work on his delivery, his footwork and his general quickness. I sure hope there is some flexibility in this scheme. I expect there to be. I'm excited to see what it looks like and I'm excited to see how Foles fits in.

His system is fairly specific...I'm not sure how he can install a read-option for two QBs and run a separate offense for Foles.  While I think they probably should have let Vick go, I also think it's a little strange to breathlessly chase a read-option college offensive genius and look forward to seeing how he'll change the system that earned him his reputation, success, and the job here.

It's a little strange to me that they are so hush-hush about the offense, anyway. I assume it's to increase the trade value for Foles and/or conceal their draft plans, but it feels unusual.

[Rodney_Zero]

mjkvol, on 25 February 2013 - 10:39 AM, said:

That would be a novelty here, huh?

Your about to see it unfold, or IMO,..... fold

[Highboy]

f_dallas, on 25 February 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

His system is fairly specific...I'm not sure how he can install a read-option for two QBs and run a separate offense for Foles.  While I think they probably should have let Vick go, I also think it's a little strange to breathlessly chase a read-option college offensive genius and look forward to seeing how he'll change the system that earned him his reputation, success, and the job here.

It's a little strange to me that they are so hush-hush about the offense, anyway. I assume it's to increase the trade value for Foles and/or conceal their draft plans, but it feels unusual.

He wasn't signed simply because of a system he ran in college. After watching the Pats run an offense he helped design its obvious he's not scheme specific. As far as trading Foles, if the reports of today are true, Reid is about to sign Alex Smith and probably draft Joeckel. That was probably the only realistic trade partner that would/would have given up the compensation for Foles that the Eagles were looking for.

[f_dallas]

Highboy, on 25 February 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

He wasn't signed simply because of a system he ran in college. After watching the Pats run an offense he helped design its obvious he's not scheme specific. As far as trading Foles, if the reports of today are true, Reid is about to sign Alex Smith and probably draft Joeckel. That was probably the only realistic trade partner that would/would have given up the compensation for Foles that the Eagles were looking for.

The Pats designed their own offense and incorporated elements from Kelly's offense (which is what most offenses are...a system that gets tweaked and added to over time).  As far as it being obvious he's not scheme specific...how is it obvious?  He could have recruited any kind of QB or run any kind of system he wanted in college, but recruited athletic QBs and ran a read-option.  As head coach of the Eagles, his first two major decisions were retaining Vick and signing Dennis Dixon, which doesn't exactly convince me he's going to make drastic changes.

In fairness, I'm not sure I'd make drastic changes, either.  I think the system is gimmicky, but it's his trademark and he's gone all the way to head coach of an NFL franchise on the strength of his offensive success using that system.

[Highboy]

f_dallas, on 25 February 2013 - 01:21 PM, said:

The Pats designed their own offense and incorporated elements from Kelly's offense (which is what most offenses are...a system that gets tweaked and added to over time).  As far as it being obvious he's not scheme specific...how is it obvious?  He could have recruited any kind of QB or run any kind of system he wanted in college, but recruited athletic QBs and ran a read-option.  As head coach of the Eagles, his first two major decisions were retaining Vick and signing Dennis Dixon, which doesn't exactly convince me he's going to make drastic changes.

In fairness, I'm not sure I'd make drastic changes, either.  I think the system is gimmicky, but it's his trademark and he's gone all the way to head coach of an NFL franchise on the strength of his offensive success using that system.

Chip himself has said numerous times he doesn't plan on running what he ran at Oregon. Belichek didn't just look at tape on Oregon football and "tweak" something, he's had multiple meetings personally with Chip Kelly where Kelly explained the whole concept, which isn't predicated on zone read option but simply on one word play calling to make the tempo faster. He and Pat Shurmur, a WCO guy, I think are competent enough to design an offense around what the players do well. Sure, he could have recruited anybody but the type of offense he ran in Oregon works in college. Its never worked, at least consistently, in the pros.

[f_dallas]

Highboy, on 25 February 2013 - 03:03 PM, said:

Chip himself has said numerous times he doesn't plan on running what he ran at Oregon. Belichek didn't just look at tape on Oregon football and "tweak" something, he's had multiple meetings personally with Chip Kelly where Kelly explained the whole concept, which isn't predicated on zone read option but simply on one word play calling to make the tempo faster. He and Pat Shurmur, a WCO guy, I think are competent enough to design an offense around what the players do well. Sure, he could have recruited anybody but the type of offense he ran in Oregon works in college. Its never worked, at least consistently, in the pros.

Forgive me if I don't take coachspeak at face value.  Essentially, I'll believe it when I see it.

Regarding Belichick, what you're explaining is the definition of a tweak.  He worked with Chip, took some elements of his scheme he thought were interesting, and incorporated them into their scheme.  Chip's scheme is, in fact, predicated on the read-option.  Lots of teams preach tempo and Chip may have his own way of doing it, but "tempo" isn't a scheme.  He might change his scheme this year, but I'm very incredulous.

[mjkvol]

Rodney_Zero, on 25 February 2013 - 01:12 PM, said:

Your about to see it unfold, or IMO,..... fold

One thing for sure, Rodney - Chip can go 13 years without winning a championship here, and he still won't have even matched Reid's record of ineptitude.

[mjkvol]

f_dallas, on 25 February 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

It's a little strange to me that they are so hush-hush about the offense, anyway. I assume it's to increase the trade value for Foles and/or conceal their draft plans, but it feels unusual.

For the life of me, I will never get why fans expect coaches and GM's to give up any sense of strategy and gamesmanship for the benefit of full transparency.    I see stuff on here about Reid being a "liar', and my thought is "who the hell gives a rat's a** what he says - it's what he is doing that counts".

Wouldn't you rather Kelly kept his cards hidden, and possibly raised the value of Foles a bit, if he's looking to move him? Who does it benefit for us to know exactly what Kelly and Roseman are thinking?   How can it possibly help the Eagles cause?

I've always said that I wouldn't care if a coach walked into a PC, farted into the mic, and walked out.   Just win, that's all.

[f_dallas]

mjkvol, on 25 February 2013 - 04:36 PM, said:

For the life of me, I will never get why fans expect coaches and GM's to give up any sense of strategy and gamesmanship for the benefit of full transparency.    I see stuff on here about Reid being a "liar', and my thought is "who the hell gives a rat's a** what he says - it's what he is doing that counts".

Wouldn't you rather Kelly kept his cards hidden, and possibly raised the value of Foles a bit, if he's looking to move him? Who does it benefit for us to know exactly what Kelly and Roseman are thinking?   How can it possibly help the Eagles cause?

I've always said that I wouldn't care if a coach walked into a PC, farted into the mic, and walked out.   Just win, that's all.

If you look at my post, I think you'll notice I suggested it was probably to maintain Foles' trade value or the trade value of their pick.  I'm not demanding he tell us what kind of offense he's going to run, either, but you have to admit that it's a little unusual that the Eagles haven't talked about what kind of offense or defense they'll run.

I'm pretty sure the Eagles are the only team in the league that has decided to keep their offensive and defensive schemes a secret.  I can't remember that happening...ever.  

[KOJO]

mjkvol, on 25 February 2013 - 04:36 PM, said:

For the life of me, I will never get why fans expect coaches and GM's to give up any sense of strategy and gamesmanship for the benefit of full transparency.    I see stuff on here about Reid being a "liar', and my thought is "who the hell gives a rat's a** what he says - it's what he is doing that counts".

Wouldn't you rather Kelly kept his cards hidden, and possibly raised the value of Foles a bit, if he's looking to move him? Who does it benefit for us to know exactly what Kelly and Roseman are thinking?   How can it possibly help the Eagles cause?

I've always said that I wouldn't care if a coach walked into a PC, farted into the mic, and walked out.   Just win, that's all.

I honestly wish they'd do away with the whole concept of coaches interacting with the media. The whole thing is a sham.

[mjkvol]

KOJO, on 25 February 2013 - 05:56 PM, said:

I honestly wish they'd do away with the whole concept of coaches interacting with the media. The whole thing is a sham.

Amen to that, brother.

f_dallas, on 25 February 2013 - 05:55 PM, said:

I'm pretty sure the Eagles are the only team in the league that has decided to keep their offensive and defensive schemes a secret.  I can't remember that happening...ever.  

Quite frankly, I love it.        I wish it was more the rule than the exception.

[Highboy]

f_dallas, on 25 February 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:

Forgive me if I don't take coachspeak at face value.  Essentially, I'll believe it when I see it.

Regarding Belichick, what you're explaining is the definition of a tweak.  He worked with Chip, took some elements of his scheme he thought were interesting, and incorporated them into their scheme.  Chip's scheme is, in fact, predicated on the read-option.  Lots of teams preach tempo and Chip may have his own way of doing it, but "tempo" isn't a scheme.  He might change his scheme this year, but I'm very incredulous.

That's fine, but until I have a reason to doubt what Chip is saying, I'm taking what he says for what he says. He's widely respected as being an innovative, adaptable coach who plays to his players strengths. I don't think he would be considered "innovative" if he played literally the same scheme over and over again regardless. That's not innovation and he's not the first coach to play zone read in college football.

[PoconoDon]

Highboy, on 25 February 2013 - 09:20 PM, said:

That's fine, but until I have a reason to doubt what Chip is saying, I'm taking what he says for what he says. He's widely respected as being an innovative, adaptable coach who plays to his players strengths. I don't think he would be considered "innovative" if he played literally the same scheme over and over again regardless. That's not innovation and he's not the first coach to play zone read in college football.

That would be the last guy that was here.

[f_dallas]

Highboy, on 25 February 2013 - 09:20 PM, said:

That's fine, but until I have a reason to doubt what Chip is saying, I'm taking what he says for what he says. He's widely respected as being an innovative, adaptable coach who plays to his players strengths. I don't think he would be considered "innovative" if he played literally the same scheme over and over again regardless. That's not innovation and he's not the first coach to play zone read in college football.

That's literally what he's done, though.  He's been innovative within the zone-read. but that's different than being innovative outside of it.  His tazer package is an example, but it's still read-option.

I think this idea that he's going to completely change his offense is fantasy.  Going with Foles (or a QB with a similar skill set) would require him to completely abandon most of what he's done in the past.  I know he said something along the lines of "Do you think I'd run this offense if I had Tom Brady?" a while back, but the rub there is he would never recruit a player like Tom Brady and an NFL team with Tom Brady would never hire a read-option coach, so it's kind of moot.