Trying to finally dig yourself out of this hole I see.  When most people comment an opinion they usually you the word "think" or "I feel"  instead of stating something like it's a fact or you have a source.  Once again you just being a bit delusional in your own little world again

If I said "DK Metcalf is the best WR in the draft" , is that an opinion?

It's an opinion that is "stated as fact." 

This is a semantics issue regarding the fashion in which an opinion is presented. It's commonplace around here for some folks to state their opinions as if they were facts, while others are more clear of their intentions. 

No big deal...  now moving on with the Foles thread, please?

---

If I said "DK Metcalf is the best WR in the draft" , is that an opinion?

It's an opinion that is "stated as fact." 

This is a semantics issue regarding the fashion in which an opinion is presented. It's commonplace around here for some folks to state their opinions as if they were facts, while others are more clear of their intentions. 

No big deal...  now moving on with the Foles thread, please?

Generally there's no need to say "I think" or "I feel" when it's already implied that it's your opinion and not from some other source. 

Granted I'd imagine flgators already knew that but he's a bit salty over prior conversations

---

It's an opinion that is "stated as fact." 

This is a semantics issue regarding the fashion in which an opinion is presented. It's commonplace around here for some folks to state their opinions as if they were facts, while others are more clear of their intentions. 

No big deal...  now moving on with the Foles thread, please?

Generally there's no need to say "I think" or "I feel" when it's already implied that it's your opinion and not from some other source. 

Granted I'd imagine flgators already knew that but he's a bit salty over prior conversations

I'm aware of these things. 

Here's an article on Nick Foles shrinking market:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20...ick-foles/

---

Generally there's no need to say "I think" or "I feel" when it's already implied that it's your opinion and not from some other source. 

Granted I'd imagine flgators already knew that but he's a bit salty over prior conversations

I'm aware of these things. 

Here's an article on Nick Foles shrinking market:

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20...ick-foles/

Article doesn't makes sense. No one should pay Foles an avg salary of $25 million/year. For all the positives of Foles, he has never played more than 14 games in a season (regular + postseason). Neither season he began as the starter fell short of expectations, 2014 with Eagles and 2015 with Rams.

By buying FA, Foles is banking that he can get > $22 million guaranteed in his next contract. If he fights the franchise tag, that means he believes he can get > $25 million guaranteed.

The Jags should force the issue that the guaranteed $$ though should be split over a few years, and off something in the range of:

2019 - $15 mil., fully guaranteed + $5 mil. in incentives, say starting 16 games ($2 mil.), playoff berth ($1 mil.), and $500,000 per playoff win.
2010 - $18 million, only $10 million guaranteed + whatever incentives Foles want.
2011 - $22 million, non-guaranteed.

For the Jags it limits the contract only $25 million guaranteed, though over 2 years. There is an free out after 2 years. There is also an emergency out after 1 year, but that probably means the Jags' tanked, have a decent pick for the 2020 QB draft class, and will have to start rebuilding anyways.

For Foles, it allows him to nearly double, and perhaps exceed all his prior earnings, ~$30-33 million. He is also still only 30 yo. This gives him 2 seasons to prove he can be a true franchise QB, and then cash on a longer term, giant contract when he still has a few years left.

---

If the Eagles are foolish enough to tag Foles he should sign that offer immediately forcing their hand and crippling the Eagles cap.  The Eagles are not bringing Foles back at $25 million.  The Eagles intent to trade him for picks violates the CBA as previously stated.

Who else besides Miami is potentially competing with Jax for Foles?

---

"I'm not mad, I'm proud of you. You took your first pinch like a man and you learn two great things in your life. Look at me, never rat on your friends and always keep your mouth shut." - Jimmy Conway

If the Eagles are foolish enough to tag Foles he should sign that offer immediately forcing their hand and crippling the Eagles cap.  The Eagles are not bringing Foles back at $25 million.  The Eagles intent to trade him for picks violates the CBA as previously stated.

Who else besides Miami is potentially competing with Jax for Foles?

I've seen the Giants mentioned if they decide to part ways with Eli. Other than that, it's likely just between Miami and Jax.

---

If the Eagles are foolish enough to tag Foles he should sign that offer immediately forcing their hand and crippling the Eagles cap.  The Eagles are not bringing Foles back at $25 million.  The Eagles intent to trade him for picks violates the CBA as previously stated.

Who else besides Miami is potentially competing with Jax for Foles?

I've seen the Giants mentioned if they decide to part ways with Eli. Other than that, it's likely just between Miami and Jax.

I could see the Redskins as well

---

I've seen the Giants mentioned if they decide to part ways with Eli. Other than that, it's likely just between Miami and Jax.

I could see the Redskins as well

This is the best reason for the Eagles to attempt the tag and trade approach. Keeping Foles out of their own division.

---

I could see the Redskins as well

This is the best reason for the Eagles to attempt the tag and trade approach. Keeping Foles out of their own division.

Tag to trade violates the CBA. Foles could say if he gets tagged he doesn't want to be traded and the Eagles wouldn't be able to afford it, from what I've heard it sounds like Foles doesn't want to be tagged and traded being it would hurt his new team with a draft pick or picks

---

This is the best reason for the Eagles to attempt the tag and trade approach. Keeping Foles out of their own division.

Tag to trade violates the CBA. Foles could say if he gets tagged he doesn't want to be traded and the Eagles wouldn't be able to afford it, from what I've heard it sounds like Foles doesn't want to be tagged and traded being it would hurt his new team with a draft pick or picks

Yeah, it's a bit of a gray area.  Everything I'm reading is saying there is no way to know if he'd win or not by citing the CBA to fight a tag/trade.  He'd have to file a grievance and potentially go to court over it. 

Whether it works or not, it may be worth the effort for the eagles if they respect Foles enough to want him out of their division.

---

The Eagles are only tagging Foles if he's already agreed with it and they have both agreed on a for him to go through. Only way that process can really work

---

I've seen the Giants mentioned if they decide to part ways with Eli. Other than that, it's likely just between Miami and Jax.

I could see the Redskins as well

Redskins cannot afford him. Have Smith on books for $20 million.

---

It's already pretty dumb and shady that a team is allowed to tag a player who they negotiated a player option with, and then they're going to openly skirt the tag and trade violation too. Good to see ethics alive and well.

---

It's already pretty dumb and shady that a team is allowed to tag a player who they negotiated a player option with, and then they're going to openly skirt the tag and trade violation too. Good to see ethics alive and well.

Exactly, it wouldn't be hard to fight with Foles and I do t think they will try it

---

.

---

 Good to see ethics alive and well.

Ethics?  In professional sports?

---

When you get into the endzone, act like you've been there before.

The more I read or film I see about Haskins or Murray , the more I think Foles has to be the play. He is by far the safest bet for the next 2-3 years.

It will take the Jaguars being super bold to pull and not severe limit the ability to get other pieces, but that is what they should try.

Yes, getting a "franchise" 10 year QB is a great, but none of these 3 are sure bets for that. Plus even having that QB is not enough to win it all. You still need the other pieces that the Jags have on defense. They need to maximize the next 3 years.

---

https://www.sportingnews.com/au/nfl/vide...ha3zm023us

---

The more I read or film I see about Haskins or Murray , the more I think Foles has to be the play. He is by far the safest bet for the next 2-3 years.

It will take the Jaguars being super bold to pull and not severe limit the ability to get other pieces, but that is what they should try.

Yes, getting a "franchise" 10 year QB is a great, but none of these 3 are sure bets for that. Plus even having that QB is not enough to win it all. You still need the other pieces that the Jags have on defense. They need to maximize the next 3 years.

What they need is to have a franchise QB for once in the history of this organization.

I think Haskins has that ability. Consistent winning comes from great QB play. Sure you may have a down year (7-9) but you’ll also have plenty of 10-12 win seasons. I’d only want Foles if he was around 12-15 million a year. No way would I spend 20-25 million on him. Even if we got Foles at 15 million, I’d stil draft Haskins because he’s the future.

---

The more I read or film I see about Haskins or Murray , the more I think Foles has to be the play. He is by far the safest bet for the next 2-3 years.

It will take the Jaguars being super bold to pull and not severe limit the ability to get other pieces, but that is what they should try.

Yes, getting a "franchise" 10 year QB is a great, but none of these 3 are sure bets for that. Plus even having that QB is not enough to win it all. You still need the other pieces that the Jags have on defense. They need to maximize the next 3 years.

What they need is to have a franchise QB for once in the history of this organization.

I think Haskins has that ability. Consistent winning comes from great QB play. Sure you may have a down year (7-9) but you’ll also have plenty of 10-12 win seasons. I’d only want Foles if he was around 12-15 million a year. No way would I spend 20-25 million on him. Even if we got Foles at 15 million, I’d stil draft Haskins because he’s the future.

I'd totally understand that plan that if most the draftniks considered Haskins or Murray as super top level prospect. But most don't. Murray could be great, but has some big red flags and risks. Haskins has some very good qualities, but most are putting on the level of a better Trubisky.

Not to mention with that plan, the window to win those 10-12 games won't be until 2020/2021 at the earliest, most likely that means this Front Office/Coaching staff is gone by then and Yannick/Ramsey will be past their primes or long gone too.

I also don't think Foles will cost $25 million a year. I just don't see the market for it. Denver was the Jags main competition, but they took Flacco. Unless the Giants move on from Manning, no one else would make any big play for him.

---