Iron_Eagle_04, on 28 February 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:
How exactly do you figure this?
And even if it were true for Foles, I could care less if he got the red badge of courage, I want a Lombardi. Last year he was courageously leading us to a 1-6 record.
While he was surrounded by injuries and his defense had quit. The defense held the opposing team under 30 points twice during that time frame and the Eagles won one, and were a dropped TD pass by 3rd, maybe 4th, string TE from going to overtime in the other. He showed plenty of improvement as the games went on and kept his eyes down the field. Give the kid some credit Iron. It doesn't mean you have to consider him a future pro-bowler or even a good player, but at least acknowledge he flashed some good things.
The article below is more like a reminder to those that think its crystal clear that Andy chose Smith over Foles.
Report: Kansas City Chiefs told Nick Foles unavailable
By Gregg Rosenthal
- Updated: Feb. 23, 2013 at 04:51 p.m.
INDIANAPOLIS -- The Kansas City Chiefs
and Philadelphia Eagles
both insisted Thursday that a trade involving quarterback Nick Foles
was unlikely. Eagles
coach Chip Kelly
said that he wanted to coach Foles, and Chiefs
coach Andy Reid
believed the Eagles
liked Foles too much to deal him.
Behind the scenes, the Chiefs
at least wanted to find out
how serious the Eagles
were about their Foles fever.
Mike Garafolo of USA Today reported Saturday that the two teams spoke this week about Foles, but no progress was made toward a deal. The conversation took place after Reid publicly said Foles was "not available."
It appears Reid is right. The Eagles
reiterated to the Chiefs
that Foles was not available at this time. That possibly could change in the coming weeks with the league year starting March 12. Either the Eagles
are trying to gain leverage and not show their hand or they actually mean what they say.
Our guess: Foles unlikely will go anywhere.