Eagles Declined Nick Foles Trade for Browns 35th pick This Last Draft

DutchBird said:

It was the game against New York, but frankly I think the stats flattered him (4 TDs, no INT's, but only 237 yards). Frankly I do not think he looked that good that game. Most Eagles were confident in Foles after the Rams game, OK after the Giants (not good, but still four TD's), and seriously worried after the Raiders game), the question being whether the defense and the running game (and ST) were good enough to make up for Foles being mweeh (at best).

Click to expand...

You have to remember the ridiculous weather in that raiders game as well. He looked atrocious but so did Carr.

SU Nittany Tide said:

You have to remember the ridiculous weather in that raiders game as well. He looked atrocious but so did Carr.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't even call Carr good, heck I think Foles is probably better than Carr. But that's another can of worms.

PhoenixEagles1 said:

I don’t cause once Wentz gets his new contract you have to blow it all up and start over anyway. Wallace seemed like the perfect 1 year signing to me. He has a limited but important role. We do have a guy Mac Hollins who showed some promise last year by I think coach likes pure speed guys as his 2

Click to expand...

I don't necessarily;y agree but let's assume that's true. Wentz's new contract wouldn't impact them until 2021 assuming no tag. I think the Eagles obviously had a few vets to replace (Peters, etc) before then, but could have looked at it more as a long term attempt at a dynasty than going hard for it in a year or two, especially after actually winning a SB. I just think it is a poor strategy

DirtDirtDirt said:

Giants are winning the NFC East

Click to expand...

You need to put the pipe down.

jarntt said:

I don't necessarily;y agree but let's assume that's true. Wentz's new contract wouldn't impact them until 2021 assuming no tag. I think the Eagles obviously had a few vets to replace (Peters, etc) before then, but could have looked at it more as a long term attempt at a dynasty than going hard for it in a year or two, especially after actually winning a SB. I just think it is a poor strategy

Click to expand...

So it’s a poor strategy to draft a TE instead of a WR when we had a huge hole at TE and good receiving group? That’s what FA is about often... filling holes with short term deals until you can fix the hole. It seems like you’re saying the Eagles would have a chance at a dynasty if they went WR?

There is A Moose at 3rd said:

I wouldn't even call Carr good, heck I think Foles is probably better than Carr. But that's another can of worms.

Click to expand...

It was more a statement of how much the weather affected that game than me saying EVEN CARR DIDN'T LOOK GOOD!!!

SU Nittany Tide said:

It was more a statement of how much the weather affected that game than me saying EVEN CARR DIDN'T LOOK GOOD!!!

Click to expand...

It's not an excuse either way.

There is A Moose at 3rd said:

It's not an excuse either way.

Click to expand...

Umm ok. Very few QB's, if any, would have looked good in that wind.

PhoenixEagles1 said:

So it’s a poor strategy to draft a TE instead of a WR when we had a huge hole at TE and good receiving group? That’s what FA is about often... filling holes with short term deals until you can fix the hole. It seems like you’re saying the Eagles would have a chance at a dynasty if they went WR?

Click to expand...

No, that's not even close to what I said. And I'm not talking about one decision. I was referring to "going for it" now. Paying Foles a billion dollars instead of the #35 pick peanuts would be the biggest example.

As far as WR goes I don't know if they have a good receiving group but don't think it is a weakness by any means. I think they could use (but don't necessarily need) another good one to tell you the truth. I think they have one really good one and one inconsistent one that was good last year and if they liked the kid so much it's a head scratcher why they paid Wallace $4M a year to take snaps from him. As far as TE goes I don't think they have a huge hole that Goedert fills at all. I don't understand that comment. They have Ertz and they signed Rodgers. Their TE hole is a blocking TE. Neither is a very good blocker and they run the ball a lot and bring in a kid that looks like he will be real good but really wasn't asked to block that much in College. I think they had bigger needs than TE (LB). Now, I am a BPA guy so I am fine with them taking Goedert and like him my point was just that I personally think they would be better off with other players and I named Patterson the other day as an example (but that was at #35, wasn't he gone by the Goedert pick?) and was not making a comment other than I think he is a much better player than Goedert and I think a WR like Patterson would help them more.

jarntt said:

No, that's not even close to what I said. And I'm not talking about one decision. I was referring to "going for it" now. Paying Foles a billion dollars instead of the #35 pick peanuts would be the biggest example.

As far as WR goes I don't know if they have a good receiving group but don't think it is a weakness by any means. I think they could use (but don't necessarily need) another good one to tell you the truth. I think they have one really good one and one inconsistent one that was good last year and if they liked the kid so much it's a head scratcher why they paid Wallace $4M a year to take snaps from him. As far as TE goes I don't think they have a huge hole that Goedert fills at all. I don't understand that comment. They have Ertz and they signed Rodgers. Their TE hole is a blocking TE. Neither is a very good blocker and they run the ball a lot and bring in a kid that looks like he will be real good but really wasn't asked to block that much in College. I think they had bigger needs than TE (LB). Now, I am a BPA guy so I am fine with them taking Goedert and like him my point was just that I personally think they would be better off with other players and I named Patterson the other day as an example (but that was at #35, wasn't he gone by the Goedert pick?) and was not making a comment other than I think he is a much better player than Goedert and I think a WR like Patterson would help them more.

Click to expand...

OK, gotcha. I see your point and it makes sense. I’m cool with Wallace cause it’s really only one year and it seems to be a part of a system they run. We do need LBer too... dangerously thin there after losing 2 LBers in one day. I’m more worried about losing two of our top players in Graham DE and Peters LT. Those are the 2nd and 3rd most important positions on a team and hard to fill especially when you consider our DLine is getting old.

jarntt said:

No, that's not even close to what I said. And I'm not talking about one decision. I was referring to "going for it" now. Paying Foles a billion dollars instead of the #35 pick peanuts would be the biggest example.

As far as WR goes I don't know if they have a good receiving group but don't think it is a weakness by any means. I think they could use (but don't necessarily need) another good one to tell you the truth. I think they have one really good one and one inconsistent one that was good last year and if they liked the kid so much it's a head scratcher why they paid Wallace $4M a year to take snaps from him. As far as TE goes I don't think they have a huge hole that Goedert fills at all. I don't understand that comment. They have Ertz and they signed Rodgers. Their TE hole is a blocking TE. Neither is a very good blocker and they run the ball a lot and bring in a kid that looks like he will be real good but really wasn't asked to block that much in College. I think they had bigger needs than TE (LB). Now, I am a BPA guy so I am fine with them taking Goedert and like him my point was just that I personally think they would be better off with other players and I named Patterson the other day as an example (but that was at #35, wasn't he gone by the Goedert pick?) and was not making a comment other than I think he is a much better player than Goedert and I think a WR like Patterson would help them more.

Click to expand...

And I wanted to add I like the strike while you’re hot approach cause, again, we could be without a star LT and DE and the end of this season. I’d also love a back to back so I can read posts from Arlington guarenting how we crash and burn in 2019 and how we only won back to back because the stars were aligned from Manster. The posts from PDay and Handi saying Dak is better then Wentz too would be the cherry on top.

God forbid we not kiss Eagles ass or PE gets his panties in a fucking WAD.

Manster7588 said:

God forbid we not kiss Eagles ass or PE gets his panties in a fucking WAD.

Click to expand...

Nobody said anything about kissing anyone’s ass

jarntt said:

No, that's not even close to what I said. And I'm not talking about one decision. I was referring to "going for it" now. Paying Foles a billion dollars instead of the #35 pick peanuts would be the biggest example.

Click to expand...

To what extent they actually pay Foles 'billions' is debateable. Not sure, but what Foles' gets now might actually be less than they spent last year on the Foles and the remained (dead cap hit) of their previous back-up combined.

Second, in the aftermath of the Super Bowl they did reward a number of players for their exceptional performance, and Foles had to be included in this list. It seems to have had the effect (somewhat) to motivate players and other players to come over: a little less base pay, good chance of a championship, and the expectation that hard work will be rewarded.

As far as WR goes I don't know if they have a good receiving group but don't think it is a weakness by any means. I think they could use (but don't necessarily need) another good one to tell you the truth. I think they have one really good one and one inconsistent one that was good last year and if they liked the kid so much it's a head scratcher why they paid Wallace $4M a year to take snaps from him. As far as TE goes I don't think they have a huge hole that Goedert fills at all. I don't understand that comment. They have Ertz and they signed Rodgers. Their TE hole is a blocking TE. Neither is a very good blocker and they run the ball a lot and bring in a kid that looks like he will be real good but really wasn't asked to block that much in College. I think they had bigger needs than TE (LB).

Click to expand...

A number of points: the Eagles last season used a 'pick your poison' approach: field enough good weapons that if the opponent decides (or is able) to shut down one, you go to the other. Prime example was the Super Bowl, where they went Jeffery, when he was eventually shut down they moved on to Agholor/Smith, and having them shut down freeed up Ertz.

Fielding 5 nr 2's and 1b's receivers (WR and TE's combined) is probably more successful long term than fielding one or two nr 1 (non super star) receivers, and then being forced to play clear nr 3/4 and lower level WR's because of cap constraints.

Also, the Eagles fielded a lot of two TE sets last season (Burton / Ertz), Goedert is a logical replacement for Burton. Last season Burton played 26% of the snaps overall, and IIRC his snap count increased late in the season.Also, Ertz has had some injuries, and then Burton showed last season how important a capable replacement (similar skill set) is. So, yeah, a TE like Burton was a major need when looking at what the Eagles are doing on offense. Also, allegedly Goedert is a willing blocker, but lacking skill atm.

LB is less than a need than expected. Nominally the Eagles are a 4-3 team, but mostly they play 2 LB's (Hicks and Bradham), with a safety moving up. In 2016 Kendricks (the clear 3rd LB, and nr 2 OLB) played something under 27% of the snaps (Hicks and Bradham healthy). In the Super Bowl he played relatively little.

Drafting a LB here probably would have been more than a waste than drafting a TE.

Now, I am a BPA guy so I am fine with them taking Goedert and like him my point was just that I personally think they would be better off with other players and I named Patterson the other day as an example (but that was at #35, wasn't he gone by the Goedert pick?) and was not making a comment other than I think he is a much better player than Goedert and I think a WR like Patterson would help them more.

Click to expand...

Patterson would have been a waste, since he would have been ignored. The Eagles philosophy on offense is to distribute the ball around, and having enough quality options that the opponent cannot keep up, and something has to give. One of the reasons why - even though the Eagles had one of the best offenses in the league last season, the players on offense (other than Wentz and arguably Elliott) were useless or extremely risky to take (high variance) from a fantasy football perspective.

I agree with you that the biggest need (longer term) is getting a Jason Peters' replacement, but any OT clearly better than what they have now as projected replacement would never have been available at pick 32 or later, and frankly impossible to get. Frankly, of the biggest needs on the team during this draft (TE, LT, S, RB) the only one they could realistically fill early this (and be a clear improvement over what they already have on the team) would be TE.

PhoenixEagles1 said:

Nobody said anything about kissing anyone’s ass

Click to expand...

Truth is in your posts. We don't kiss Eagle Ass you get your panties all wadded up.

I stand by my statement the Eagles Over Achieved.

Manster7588 said:

Truth is in your posts. We don't kiss Eagle Ass you get your panties all wadded up.

I stand by my statement the Eagles Over Achieved.

Click to expand...

Went 13-3, MVP caliber play from the QB, top OLine, top DLine, shredded a top 3 D in the playoffs, took down a dynasty, great coaching, tons of star players on every level... BUT THEY OVER ACHIEVED.
You don’t have to kiss anyone’s ass. Just asking you to be objective. I’m very high on Dallas cause everybody knows their OLine is fantastic but many don’t see they have two star DLinemen too. Hate the Cowboys but I don’t make up nonsense cause I don’t like them. Eagles have very good RBs, star TE, good receivers, dominant OLine, dominant DLine, two very good LBers maybe the best Safety combo in the NFL, always have excellent ST and some pretty mediocre corners. I don’t see how a team with that much talent over achieved especially after being dominant from start to end. There’s a reason Vegas have them and NE with the two highest win totals again this year

PhoenixEagles1 said:

Went 13-3, MVP caliber play from the QB, top OLine, top DLine, shredded a top 3 D in the playoffs, took down a dynasty, great coaching, tons of star players on every level... BUT THEY OVER ACHIEVED.
You don’t have to kiss anyone’s ass. Just asking you to be objective. I’m very high on Dallas cause everybody knows their OLine is fantastic but many don’t see they have two star DLinemen too. Hate the Cowboys but I don’t make up nonsense cause I don’t like them. Eagles have very good RBs, star TE, good receivers, dominant OLine, dominant DLine, two very good LBers maybe the best Safety combo in the NFL, always have excellent ST and some pretty mediocre corners. I don’t see how a team with that much talent over achieved especially after being dominant from start to end. There’s a reason Vegas have them and NE with the two highest win totals again this year

Click to expand...

For you objective = kiss Eagles ass. If not you wouldn't be calling out all those how don't by name.

It's long been your MO long before the Eagles won squat.

PhoenixEagles1 said:

The posts from PDay and Handi saying Dak is better then Wentz too would be the cherry on top.

Click to expand...

LOL...What?
Was Dak better in 2016? YES
Was Wentz better in 2017? YES
Is Dak's stats through two seasons as good or better than Wentz? YES
now...one was the 2nd player taken while the other was a 4th round selection.
I remain just fine with Elliot and the 4th rounder over your guy.

Time will tell how this ends up but make no mistake, it's a pure homer view to have Wentz so much better when that hasn't shown itself thru two seasons

PDay8810 said:

LOL...What?
Was Dak better in 2016? YES
Was Wentz better in 2017? YES
Is Dak's stats through two seasons as good or better than Wentz? YES
now...one was the 2nd player taken while the other was a 4th round selection.
I remain just fine with Elliot and the 4th rounder over your guy.

Time will tell how this ends up but make no mistake, it's a pure homer view to have Wentz so much better when that hasn't shown itself thru two seasons

Click to expand...

Thats a pretty fair take Actually

DirtDirtDirt said:

Thats a pretty fair take Actually

Click to expand...

It would be until you realize Dak had pretty good stats the year before when his surrounding cast was functioning. The Dak negativity is presumptuous.

With that being said... Dallas didn't do much to rectify that situation.