[News] Kelly: I Want To Coach Nick Foles
#1
Posted 21 February 2013 - 06:23 PM
View the full article
#2
Posted 21 February 2013 - 06:34 PM
#3
Posted 21 February 2013 - 06:35 PM
#4
Posted 21 February 2013 - 06:55 PM
#5
Posted 21 February 2013 - 07:00 PM
#6
Posted 21 February 2013 - 07:07 PM
#7
Posted 21 February 2013 - 07:19 PM
#8
Posted 21 February 2013 - 07:38 PM
#9
Posted 21 February 2013 - 08:14 PM
#10
Posted 21 February 2013 - 08:47 PM
One or more of the QB's are going. Does any team in the NFL have 4 QBs under contract?
BTW: What did New Hamshire do versus Oregon when Kelly was at each of those schools?
#11
Posted 21 February 2013 - 09:02 PM
hedge8727, on 21 February 2013 - 07:07 PM, said:
Kelly likes all his QBs right now (wink wink). He is saying the right things. He's keeping his options open. He want's to do what's best for winning. Either he will develop Foles to be his "guy" over time or choose his own "guy". Now is as good a time for him to get his own 'guy'. The Eagles can't do much worse than last year. No one is expecting the Eagles to be in the playoffs next year. A lot of you guys would even be happy with a 2-14 record if a lot of the current players were cut/traded/whatever as long as there is change. At least thats what I am hearing you say. I prefer to that we have a good year/winning year as we start making adjustments that are required for the medium term. I can't even say long term because nothing is guaranteed.
I think the important thing is that we get a good system in here and recruit the people than can excel in that system. Don't recruit the wrong person that doesn't fit into your system and then try to bend em. (square peg in a round hole doesn't work.)
#12
Posted 21 February 2013 - 09:06 PM
#14
Posted 21 February 2013 - 09:43 PM
#15
Posted 21 February 2013 - 10:38 PM
Vick - his pay gives him the upper hand
Foles - played against Kelly who wants to coach him
Dixon - his skill-set is well known as a former Oregon QB
Edwards - (?) Unknown to even Kelly
Vick still has the big strong arm, necessary for the 3 phrases of the field but has been inconsistent. His mobility may have lost a step or 2, but still is a threat to any defenses. He's at an age where getting bad hits puts him out to the sideline or out of other games. Is he teachable, to understand what the defenses does in the box. He might screw the run game if he can't read the defense setups.
Foles has good mentality to keep his eyes down field but has an above-average arm, necessary for the short and immediate routes on a consistent level, able to pass over 20 with some accuracy. Not much mobility but handles the pocket fairly well and runs okay to pick up yardage or first downs.
Dixon is mostly unknown except to Kelly. He can handle the back field well and is able to get the ball out quickly. Can't read him much except for what he has done at Oregon.
Edwards has a good arm for the short and immediate routes, when he played in preseason games. Plays the back field and within the pocket, fine. His mobility is a question mark and he has never played in any regular season games. The judgement is lacking where his skills are concerned.
I would use both Vick and Foles alternately especially the way Kelly likes to keep defenses thinking. In the up-tempo offense, Vick and Foles could present different timing and adjustments against defenses. In a sense, it wouldn't be wise to alternate starters, but I had hoped AR would have done so last year, instead of Vick losing so much with ball controls. It gave defenses a lot of predictable executions with Vick than it would have been with Foles. The outcome could have been much different if AR implemented the starting roles between Vick and Foles. That way he can see who he could keep on the field a little longer before he change on them. It could have minimized the TOs than the way it got.
I'm not purposely leaving out Dixon and Edwards, just don't know much about those 2. All I'm saying, since it's an open competition, find the best 2 out of those 4, and whoever else they bring in, use them alternatively. By doing so, Kelly could possibly have a tandem of QBs in his hands and the schemes would work for both. Just so we understands how Vick is from the good and bad perspectives, that it would be necessary to incorporate an alternative starting roles between 2 of the best QBs on the team. Both have bad and good traits when it comes to defenses and the up-tempo gives both of them added advantages.
For the record, Kelly abhors TOs and QB sacks. And I believe using 2 QBs alternately, could be in Kelly's favor of eliminating TOs and QB sacks to it's minimum. Out of the 2, Vick would have more TOs and sacks than the other, but the important thing is moving the chain and being RZ efficient would be the key. Just Vick or Foles or whoever it is as a perennial starter, just isn't going to cut it in my opinion. Foles has a solid football IQ and has much to learn, just not as quick as we would like him to be. Vick has nothing more than his arm and legs, he's not quick or instinctive but he is still in the league. I don't know what to make with Dixon and Edwards or any other that comes into the competition. Having one starter isn't going to make it, unless he is the typical QB you would want in every game. Right now, we don't have that "it" factor on the team, so why not take the best 2 and let each of them complement one another. How I would love to have Vick in Foles then we definitely have a starter and much to improve on.
#16
Posted 21 February 2013 - 10:42 PM
And that was at $500 grand vs 4 million.
Trading Foles would be foolish. What do you do then? Burn another draft pick on a maybe QB?
Vick is up for trade or his 1 year deal stings less then it would have before the contract was reworked and is good depth with a shot to start if a miracle happens with his short passing game and reads.
I don't get why some people are so down on Foles' rookie showing given that offensive line and defensive train wreck last season.
I watched a franchise that didn't exist until 1996 win its second Super Bowl.
Yes. I expect the Eagles to make the playoffs. Totally reasonable.
#17
Posted 21 February 2013 - 10:53 PM
#18
Posted 21 February 2013 - 11:06 PM
#19
Posted 21 February 2013 - 11:12 PM
#20
Posted 21 February 2013 - 11:19 PM
#21
Posted 21 February 2013 - 11:32 PM
#22
Posted 22 February 2013 - 07:18 AM
#23
Posted 22 February 2013 - 11:28 AM
EAGLESNY1, on 21 February 2013 - 11:06 PM, said:
We just don't know how it will all play out. Many thought and hoped Kelly wouldn't be here. He was all but gone and now he's here! Nearly everyone thought that Vick would be cut after the Super Bowl. He still here! Yes is contract has been adjusted downwards but he is still here. Let's not get all twisted because his salary has been cut. Any of you that have worked a job understands that sometimes the front office cuts your salary and benefits. Perhaps later on you get an increase or find a better job elsewhere.
BTW: At nearly every step, the geniuses on this forum have been wrong with their predictions. Whether it's which coaching staff are going to be here or which palyers are going to be here. Lot's of cold air blowing out of Philly and New York. lol
#24
Posted 22 February 2013 - 11:44 AM
SilvereignEagle, on 21 February 2013 - 10:38 PM, said:
Vick - his pay gives him the upper hand
Foles - played against Kelly who wants to coach him
Dixon - his skill-set is well known as a former Oregon QB
Edwards - (?) Unknown to even Kelly
Vick still has the big strong arm, necessary for the 3 phrases of the field but has been inconsistent. His mobility may have lost a step or 2, but still is a threat to any defenses. He's at an age where getting bad hits puts him out to the sideline or out of other games. Is he teachable, to understand what the defenses does in the box. He might screw the run game if he can't read the defense setups.
Foles has good mentality to keep his eyes down field but has an above-average arm, necessary for the short and immediate routes on a consistent level, able to pass over 20 with some accuracy. Not much mobility but handles the pocket fairly well and runs okay to pick up yardage or first downs.
Dixon is mostly unknown except to Kelly. He can handle the back field well and is able to get the ball out quickly. Can't read him much except for what he has done at Oregon.
Edwards has a good arm for the short and immediate routes, when he played in preseason games. Plays the back field and within the pocket, fine. His mobility is a question mark and he has never played in any regular season games. The judgement is lacking where his skills are concerned.
I would use both Vick and Foles alternately especially the way Kelly likes to keep defenses thinking. In the up-tempo offense, Vick and Foles could present different timing and adjustments against defenses. In a sense, it wouldn't be wise to alternate starters, but I had hoped AR would have done so last year, instead of Vick losing so much with ball controls. It gave defenses a lot of predictable executions with Vick than it would have been with Foles. The outcome could have been much different if AR implemented the starting roles between Vick and Foles. That way he can see who he could keep on the field a little longer before he change on them. It could have minimized the TOs than the way it got.
I'm not purposely leaving out Dixon and Edwards, just don't know much about those 2. All I'm saying, since it's an open competition, find the best 2 out of those 4, and whoever else they bring in, use them alternatively. By doing so, Kelly could possibly have a tandem of QBs in his hands and the schemes would work for both. Just so we understands how Vick is from the good and bad perspectives, that it would be necessary to incorporate an alternative starting roles between 2 of the best QBs on the team. Both have bad and good traits when it comes to defenses and the up-tempo gives both of them added advantages.
For the record, Kelly abhors TOs and QB sacks. And I believe using 2 QBs alternately, could be in Kelly's favor of eliminating TOs and QB sacks to it's minimum. Out of the 2, Vick would have more TOs and sacks than the other, but the important thing is moving the chain and being RZ efficient would be the key. Just Vick or Foles or whoever it is as a perennial starter, just isn't going to cut it in my opinion. Foles has a solid football IQ and has much to learn, just not as quick as we would like him to be. Vick has nothing more than his arm and legs, he's not quick or instinctive but he is still in the league. I don't know what to make with Dixon and Edwards or any other that comes into the competition. Having one starter isn't going to make it, unless he is the typical QB you would want in every game. Right now, we don't have that "it" factor on the team, so why not take the best 2 and let each of them complement one another. How I would love to have Vick in Foles then we definitely have a starter and much to improve on.
Interesting points you make. Especially about alternating the QBs. They need to run the ball more. I think both Vick and Foles would do much better if we ran the ball more. It would open more running chances for Vick. Iit would also open up the passing game for both Foles and Vick. I don't know what the impact on Vick and Foles would be having to start alternate games (uncertainty). It could be good or bad. The Eagles definitely need to have 2 QBs that can step in the game and win. I am not convinced that any of the QBs on the roster can make it through a whole season without an injury. Those NFL defenders hit HARD. Plus they are paid bounties to knock guys out of the game.
As per you comment above, Vick isn't as fast as he used to be but he is the fastest/quickest QB on the Eagles team.
#25
Posted 22 February 2013 - 11:52 AM
Kmarcelli, on 22 February 2013 - 07:18 AM, said:
Good points. Nothing lasts forever, we just all have to move on. I think I heard that somewhere.
I think that if Kelly brings in a good system (and is able to teach it) and we have a healthy team our QBs are good enough. The QB is is just one component (an important one) of the team. Manning, Brees, Brady and Rodgers would look bad playing on the Eagles 2012 team. One guy can't do it all in the NFL.
#26
Posted 22 February 2013 - 03:00 PM
I don't think the man has to say anything to raise Foles trade value. Teams watched him play last season. They know what they are getting in the kid.
Dave is right when he said no matter how many times Kelly says he likes Nick there will always be those that will question his honesty... to justify their own reason for not wanting the kid.
#27
Posted 22 February 2013 - 03:33 PM
forevereagles, on 22 February 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:
I don't think the man has to say anything to raise Foles trade value. Teams watched him play last season. They know what they are getting in the kid.
Dave is right when he said no matter how many times Kelly says he likes Nick there will always be those that will question his honesty... to justify their own reason for not wanting the kid.
forevereagles, I really don't think people are anti-Foles. I think some people including myself are not convinced about him being the best on the team right now. Further, I wasn't impressed last season either. That said, he came into a difficult situation with the state of the team and all. As I've said numerous times, NO QB would have looked good on our team last year. For me, I just don't like when people get over-hyped about any player when they haven't proved themselves yet. Now if he or anyother QB is the starter next year, I will be rooting for the Eagles . If he and the Eagles do well and he performs very well (not even super star) I will enjoy it.
Just don't over-hype and make things out to be more than they are. If he is great he will get to show that greatness in due time. He will also get the recognition for it to.
#28
Posted 22 February 2013 - 05:53 PM
#29
Posted 22 February 2013 - 11:09 PM
ThomasMaine, on 21 February 2013 - 10:42 PM, said:
And that was at $500 grand vs 4 million.
Trading Foles would be foolish. What do you do then? Burn another draft pick on a maybe QB?
Vick is up for trade or his 1 year deal stings less then it would have before the contract was reworked and is good depth with a shot to start if a miracle happens with his short passing game and reads.
I don't get why some people are so down on Foles' rookie showing given that offensive line and defensive train wreck last season.
I watched a franchise that didn't exist until 1996 win its second Super Bowl.
Yes. I expect the Eagles to make the playoffs. Totally reasonable.
Perhaps the Eagles can make the playoffs. I would love it. My hopes aren't too hig but I would expect it 2 years from now. By the way the comparison with Andrew Luck is not sensible. The Colts have mostly been solid (better than the Eagles) from 2002 - 2013. They had a terrible year before Luck but that was a blip. What I am saying is that they had a good team and system for a good 10 years and they had 1 terrible year.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users











