(04-08-2019, 07:48 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2019, 07:24 AM)SeldomRite Wrote: [ -> ]Do you think you're showing I'm wrong? My whole point was that the eagles would rather have a guy that's been badly injured repeatedly and didn't win Superbowl MVP, and whom they could probably trade to some team for a pick than having Foles.
If the Jaguars think they can lean on Foles like they couldn't on Bortles they're in for a long season, and if they don't think they can do that then what the heck are they even bothering with screwing up the cap so much for? They could have used that money to pay ngakoue and Ramsey and keep the cap healthy and looked for real QB talent in the draft. Instead they're replaying all the bad aspects of the late 90's and early aughts.
They intend to lean on their defense.
They merely expect Foles to move chains more efficiently than Bortles did.
Not a big ask.
And I've kept quiet on this whole Foles issue since I voiced my displeasure at the very beginning. But if this is
all they want, I have a real issue with it. You could name several quarterbacks that could moved the chains better than Bortles...quite possibly some rookies included. If that is
all they want him to do, they overpaid.
(04-08-2019, 08:15 AM)Rico Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2019, 07:48 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]They intend to lean on their defense.
They merely expect Foles to move chains more efficiently than Bortles did.
Not a big ask.
And I've kept quiet on this whole Foles issue since I voiced my displeasure at the very beginning. But if this is all they want, I have a real issue with it. You could name several quarterbacks that could moved the chains better than Bortles...quite possibly some rookies included. If that is all they want him to do, they overpaid.
I do think they overpaid for what Foles is on paper. And I may be understating their expectations to make a point about the defense being leaned upon more so than the QB.
But I do believe the Jags brass isn't expecting Foles to ride in on a white horse and turn the team into an offensive powerhouse. I think they expect him to do "enough."
Hopefully we see enough wins that the price and cap ramifications seem justified in the end.
Obviously - I'm more optimistic than you and several others on that working out favorably for the Jags.
(04-08-2019, 08:35 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2019, 08:15 AM)Rico Wrote: [ -> ]And I've kept quiet on this whole Foles issue since I voiced my displeasure at the very beginning. But if this is all they want, I have a real issue with it. You could name several quarterbacks that could moved the chains better than Bortles...quite possibly some rookies included. If that is all they want him to do, they overpaid.
I do think they overpaid for what Foles is on paper. And I may be understating their expectations to make a point about the defense being leaned upon more so than the QB.
But I do believe the Jags brass isn't expecting Foles to ride in on a white horse and turn the team into an offensive powerhouse. I think they expect him to do "enough."
Hopefully we see enough wins that the price and cap ramifications seem justified in the end.
Obviously - I'm more optimistic than you and several others on that working out favorably for the Jags.
Something needs to happen
this year (playoffs) to justify this signing, in my opinion. I just don't see it happening. There are too many holes on offense. I would rather have had a low-end FA at QB and draft someone...looking towards next year. I don't have much of a choice but to wait and see. I hope I'm wrong.
(04-08-2019, 08:35 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2019, 08:15 AM)Rico Wrote: [ -> ]And I've kept quiet on this whole Foles issue since I voiced my displeasure at the very beginning. But if this is all they want, I have a real issue with it. You could name several quarterbacks that could moved the chains better than Bortles...quite possibly some rookies included. If that is all they want him to do, they overpaid.
I do think they overpaid for what Foles is on paper. And I may be understating their expectations to make a point about the defense being leaned upon more so than the QB.
But I do believe the Jags brass isn't expecting Foles to ride in on a white horse and turn the team into an offensive powerhouse. I think they expect him to do "enough."
Hopefully we see enough wins that the price and cap ramifications seem justified in the end.
Obviously - I'm more optimistic than you and several others on that working out favorably for the Jags.
Then why did they parade him around like he was riding a white horse?
Foles has a ton of pressure and if it doesn't result in a playoff appearance and most likely a playoff win, it's a failure.
(04-08-2019, 08:41 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2019, 08:35 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ]I do think they overpaid for what Foles is on paper. And I may be understating their expectations to make a point about the defense being leaned upon more so than the QB.
But I do believe the Jags brass isn't expecting Foles to ride in on a white horse and turn the team into an offensive powerhouse. I think they expect him to do "enough."
Hopefully we see enough wins that the price and cap ramifications seem justified in the end.
Obviously - I'm more optimistic than you and several others on that working out favorably for the Jags.
Then why did they parade him around like he was riding a white horse?
Foles has a ton of pressure and if it doesn't result in a playoff appearance and most likely a playoff win, it's a failure.
Did you expect them to give a quarterback $50M guaranteed and not sell him to the fanbase?
That's just par for the course marketing for any team.
I can't disagree with you on the playoff expectation and potential failure. It's reasonable given the team's 2017 run and the contract given to Foles.
I don't know why people are nitpicking this deal. Foles is a lot better than Bortles. That is obvious to anyone who has ever seen the two of them play. We gave him a contract befitting a non-elite-but-good free agent QB. We've been crying for years about needing a decent QB. Now we have one.
(04-08-2019, 09:11 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know why people are nitpicking this deal. Foles is a lot better than Bortles. That is obvious to anyone who has ever seen the two of them play. We gave him a contract befitting a non-elite-but-good free agent QB. We've been crying for years about needing a decent QB. Now we have one.
And the crying continues, almost like it's really the point. Almost.
(04-08-2019, 09:11 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know why people are nitpicking this deal. Foles is a lot better than Bortles. That is obvious to anyone who has ever seen the two of them play. We gave him a contract befitting a non-elite-but-good free agent QB. We've been crying for years about needing a decent QB. Now we have one.
That is not the point. There are a lot of QBs 'better than Bortles'. The point is...and I think the point the vast majority of us that were against this to begin with...is they damn well better make the playoffs
this year because there are a lot of QBs that are 'better than Bortles' and cheaper. As I said in my previous post, I think the prudent decision would have been to bring in a low-end FA and draft a QB with eyes towards next year. This move screams of desperation and win-now. So they'd damn well better win now.
(04-08-2019, 09:11 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know why people are nitpicking this deal. Foles is a lot better than Bortles. That is obvious to anyone who has ever seen the two of them play. We gave him a contract befitting a non-elite-but-good free agent QB. We've been crying for years about needing a decent QB. Now we have one.
Foles is a clear upgrade. Not many people (except our lone Bortles apologist) can argue that.
My issue would be if they pass on a potential true franchise QB in this draft (and I think Haskins is the only one) for 3 years of Foles.
(04-08-2019, 09:34 AM)Rico Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2019, 09:11 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know why people are nitpicking this deal. Foles is a lot better than Bortles. That is obvious to anyone who has ever seen the two of them play. We gave him a contract befitting a non-elite-but-good free agent QB. We've been crying for years about needing a decent QB. Now we have one.
That is not the point. There are a lot of QBs 'better than Bortles'. The point is...and I think the point the vast majority of us that were against this to begin with...is they damn well better make the playoffs this year because there are a lot of QBs that are 'better than Bortles' and cheaper. As I said in my previous post, I think the prudent decision would have been to bring in a low-end FA and draft a QB with eyes towards next year. This move screams of desperation and win-now. So they'd damn well better win now.
What youre talking about has a high chance of throwing a season away. A lot of room for the possibility of failure.
What if a QB isnt available in the draft that they project to competent starter? Every team knowing the Jags wanting a QB would make it pricey to maneuver draft position.
Is going into the season with Tyrod or Fitz and no viable starting rookie QB an okay outcome? We can agree Foles is better than what was available. Right?
There are just too many variables and too many outcomes that are just dreadful going that route because of the draft position.
I would've much rather the Jags take that route IF they had a high pick almost guaranteeing their choice of QB. But thats not the case. Hoping and praying that a QB you like is available is just too much of a risk. More risk than Foles failing.
And this is all without consideration that the rookie might fail.
The signing of Foles was to appease the #anyonebutblake Crowd. The reason we could not move the chains was the OC and HC where incompetent and had no clue how to use the weapons they had to bring out the best. Foles is only slightly better the blake throwing the ball. And blake is the 3rd best running QB in the history of the league, foles cant run to get out of his way. With our trouble protecting the QB would you rather have a QB who could run or one who will sit there and take a sack. Blake is gone so the discussion is moot. So we have a QB now who we have to build the pieces around to make him average at best, when we could have done what baltimore and other teams have done and built around a running QB. Ill be glad when these idiots are gone and we have some personell who are attune to the current day NFL.
(04-08-2019, 10:32 AM)JAGFAN88 Wrote: [ -> ]The signing of Foles was to appease the #anyonebutblake Crowd. The reason we could not move the chains was the OC and HC where incompetent and had no clue how to use the weapons they had to bring out the best. Foles is only slightly better the blake throwing the ball. And blake is the 3rd best running QB in the history of the league, foles cant run to get out of his way. With our trouble protecting the QB would you rather have a QB who could run or one who will sit there and take a sack. Blake is gone so the discussion is moot. So we have a QB now who we have to build the pieces around to make him average at best, when we could have done what baltimore and other teams have done and built around a running QB. Ill be glad when these idiots are gone and we have some personell who are attune to the current day NFL.
Give it up. Bortles was awful. He was gone anyway.
(04-08-2019, 10:32 AM)JAGFAN88 Wrote: [ -> ]The signing of Foles was to appease the #anyonebutblake Crowd. The reason we could not move the chains was the OC and HC where incompetent and had no clue how to use the weapons they had to bring out the best. Foles is only slightly better the blake throwing the ball. And blake is the 3rd best running QB in the history of the league, foles cant run to get out of his way. With our trouble protecting the QB would you rather have a QB who could run or one who will sit there and take a sack. Blake is gone so the discussion is moot. So we have a QB now who we have to build the pieces around to make him average at best, when we could have done what baltimore and other teams have done and built around a running QB. Ill be glad when these idiots are gone and we have some personell who are attune to the current day NFL.
There are so many things wrong with this post.
1. How can you honestly watch Foles and Bortles throw and come away thinking Foles is only slightly better?
2. Bortles is no where near the runner Jackson is and Jackson running won't work for very long.
(04-08-2019, 10:11 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2019, 09:11 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I don't know why people are nitpicking this deal. Foles is a lot better than Bortles. That is obvious to anyone who has ever seen the two of them play. We gave him a contract befitting a non-elite-but-good free agent QB. We've been crying for years about needing a decent QB. Now we have one.
Foles is a clear upgrade. Not many people (except our lone Bortles apologist) can argue that.
My issue would be if they pass on a potential true franchise QB in this draft (and I think Haskins is the only one) for 3 years of Foles.
That's the rub... I'd prefer to find our guy in the draft, but our defense is ready now. No rookie QB has ever led a team to a SB, much less won one, and it might be at least a couple years for said QB to be ready to lead the team that far.
I figured we were screwed either way for the next couple of years, but at least Foles has shown the game isn't too big for him. Now he needs to show that his game can translate from one team to another and that he can provide consistent play over the course of a full season.
I remain hopeful, but not particularly excited.
(04-08-2019, 12:27 PM)scottyg Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2019, 10:11 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]Foles is a clear upgrade. Not many people (except our lone Bortles apologist) can argue that.
My issue would be if they pass on a potential true franchise QB in this draft (and I think Haskins is the only one) for 3 years of Foles.
That's the rub... I'd prefer to find our guy in the draft, but our defense is ready now. No rookie QB has ever led a team to a SB, much less won one, and it might be at least a couple years for said QB to be ready to lead the team that far.
I figured we were screwed either way for the next couple of years, but at least Foles has shown the game isn't too big for him. Now he needs to show that his game can translate from one team to another and that he can provide consistent play over the course of a full season.
I remain hopeful, but not particularly excited.
When you pigeon hole yourself into the "win now" mentality, you really limit your draft options.
If the Jags pass on Haskins and he turns out to be Ben Roethlisberger or a QB of that quality, the Jags will be kicking themselves just like they have been for a while. Passed on Mahomes, Watson, Haskins.....
(04-05-2019, 07:14 AM)JackCity Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-a...tions-2018
interesting read
This won't get much play here, but I do agree.
"Foles' career has been one for taking what opposing defenses give him, and he took that philosophy to a fault last season."
Actually that does kind of sound like an upgrade if I am being honest.
(04-08-2019, 12:55 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2019, 12:27 PM)scottyg Wrote: [ -> ]That's the rub... I'd prefer to find our guy in the draft, but our defense is ready now. No rookie QB has ever led a team to a SB, much less won one, and it might be at least a couple years for said QB to be ready to lead the team that far.
I figured we were screwed either way for the next couple of years, but at least Foles has shown the game isn't too big for him. Now he needs to show that his game can translate from one team to another and that he can provide consistent play over the course of a full season.
I remain hopeful, but not particularly excited.
When you pigeon hole yourself into the "win now" mentality, you really limit your draft options.
If the Jags pass on Haskins and he turns out to be Ben Roethlisberger or a QB of that quality, the Jags will be kicking themselves just like they have been for a while. Passed on Mahomes, Watson, Haskins.....
You always prop up Haskins, you can insert any QB name in there. He might not even be the top QB on our draft board or top 2. I could easily see them having Murray and Lock rated higher
(04-08-2019, 12:55 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2019, 12:27 PM)scottyg Wrote: [ -> ]That's the rub... I'd prefer to find our guy in the draft, but our defense is ready now. No rookie QB has ever led a team to a SB, much less won one, and it might be at least a couple years for said QB to be ready to lead the team that far.
I figured we were screwed either way for the next couple of years, but at least Foles has shown the game isn't too big for him. Now he needs to show that his game can translate from one team to another and that he can provide consistent play over the course of a full season.
I remain hopeful, but not particularly excited.
When you pigeon hole yourself into the "win now" mentality, you really limit your draft options.
If the Jags pass on Haskins and he turns out to be Ben Roethlisberger or a QB of that quality, the Jags will be kicking themselves just like they have been for a while. Passed on Mahomes, Watson, Haskins.....
If Lock is the top QB on their board should they take him at 7 if he's there?
(04-08-2019, 01:17 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2019, 12:55 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]When you pigeon hole yourself into the "win now" mentality, you really limit your draft options.
If the Jags pass on Haskins and he turns out to be Ben Roethlisberger or a QB of that quality, the Jags will be kicking themselves just like they have been for a while. Passed on Mahomes, Watson, Haskins.....
You always prop up Haskins, you can insert any QB name in there. He might not even be the top QB on our draft board or top 2. I could easily see them having Murray and Lock rated higher
(04-08-2019, 12:55 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ]When you pigeon hole yourself into the "win now" mentality, you really limit your draft options.
If the Jags pass on Haskins and he turns out to be Ben Roethlisberger or a QB of that quality, the Jags will be kicking themselves just like they have been for a while. Passed on Mahomes, Watson, Haskins.....
If Lock is the top QB on their board should they take him at 7 if he's there?
Yes... They should. He's not my top QB but if they feel he's a true franchise guy, please select him.
I only talk about Haskins because he's the only true franchise QB in this draft..... In my opinion. I wouldn't take Lock or Murray or Jones or Grier but that's just me. The really great teams are always thinking 2 steps ahead while the Jags almost always try to use a band aid to fix mistakes. Botch the Fowler pick? Hey let's go sign Campbell (that worked). Botched ARob leaving? Hey let's give Moncrief money! Botch Bortles? Hey let's give Foles some money! Fournette is sucking? Hey let's trade for Hyde!
Chiefs had a QB who led them to the playoffs but then drafted up to take Mahomes. Packers had Favre still playing at a high level but selected Rodgers. Eagles had just signed Bradford but traded up for Wentz. Seahawks gave a ton of money to Matt Flynn but took Wilson in the 3rd and let him compete.
To me, Foles is a band aid. The Jags will be looking for another QB in 3 years. Not because Foles plays poorly (I hope) but it's because they didn't truly address the QB position until it was too late.
(04-08-2019, 01:27 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2019, 01:17 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote: [ -> ]You always prop up Haskins, you can insert any QB name in there. He might not even be the top QB on our draft board or top 2. I could easily see them having Murray and Lock rated higher
If Lock is the top QB on their board should they take him at 7 if he's there?
Yes... They should. He's not my top QB but if they feel he's a true franchise guy, please select him.
I only talk about Haskins because he's the only true franchise QB in this draft..... In my opinion. I wouldn't take Lock or Murray or Jones or Grier but that's just me. The really great teams are always thinking 2 steps ahead while the Jags almost always try to use a band aid to fix mistakes. Botch the Fowler pick? Hey let's go sign Campbell (that worked). Botched ARob leaving? Hey let's give Moncrief money! Botch Bortles? Hey let's give Foles some money! Fournette is sucking? Hey let's trade for Hyde!
Chiefs had a QB who led them to the playoffs but then drafted up to take Mahomes. Packers had Favre still playing at a high level but selected Rodgers. Eagles had just signed Bradford but traded up for Wentz. Seahawks gave a ton of money to Matt Flynn but took Wilson in the 3rd and let him compete.
To me, Foles is a band aid. The Jags will be looking for another QB in 3 years. Not because Foles plays poorly (I hope) but it's because they didn't truly address the QB position until it was too late.
Yup. People are forgetting that Foles is a “bridge”. I say get Haskins, if we can.
(04-08-2019, 01:27 PM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (04-08-2019, 01:17 PM)flgatorsandjags Wrote: [ -> ]You always prop up Haskins, you can insert any QB name in there. He might not even be the top QB on our draft board or top 2. I could easily see them having Murray and Lock rated higher
If Lock is the top QB on their board should they take him at 7 if he's there?
Yes... They should. He's not my top QB but if they feel he's a true franchise guy, please select him.
I only talk about Haskins because he's the only true franchise QB in this draft..... In my opinion. I wouldn't take Lock or Murray or Jones or Grier but that's just me. The really great teams are always thinking 2 steps ahead while the Jags almost always try to use a band aid to fix mistakes. Botch the Fowler pick? Hey let's go sign Campbell (that worked). Botched ARob leaving? Hey let's give Moncrief money! Botch Bortles? Hey let's give Foles some money! Fournette is sucking? Hey let's trade for Hyde!
Chiefs had a QB who led them to the playoffs but then drafted up to take Mahomes. Packers had Favre still playing at a high level but selected Rodgers. Eagles had just signed Bradford but traded up for Wentz. Seahawks gave a ton of money to Matt Flynn but took Wilson in the 3rd and let him compete.
To me, Foles is a band aid. The Jags will be looking for another QB in 3 years. Not because Foles plays poorly (I hope) but it's because they didn't truly address the QB position until it was too late.
I agree with most of this. Foles being a band aid Is the only part we do not eye to eye about. I know this makes me sound like a homer but I am of the impression that Foles could turn out to be something much more than a band aid or a stop gap. People seem to be more butt hurt about the amount we payed him rather than what he has or hasn't done on the field and that is not something that can be swayed, you think we did or you don't. I know there are quite a few who disagree but I think that he could turn out to be our guy for quite a while. I don't think this means you do not take a qb if he is the best player on your board at your pick. I am with you that we shouldn't draft out of desperation because of a need because, like you said, it pigeon holes our selections and results in us missing out on talent more often than not. So if Haskins falls and our boards say he is the BAP, take him if no one is willing to trade up.
Every argument for and against the Foles acquisition has been brought up and discussed at length on this board so I'm not going to go into major detail as to why I am on board with this pick. I guess we are at the cross roads where people are either on board with the guy or not so I will just leave it at that.