QB controversy.Who should start?

[northeastphillyguy]

Assuming that Kelly can add 2 plus 2 and get the right result, Foles should be the starter against Dallas. However, I would like to hear from others about this subject. Should it be Foles and why? Should it be Vick and why? Who gives us the best chance to win?

 

[mall3013]

Foles will get the start. The Cowboys are banged up a bit, but I believe D Ware is good to go, not sure on the status of DeMarco Murray. The are thin on their running game. Losing Murray is pretty big. I expect huge numbers by both Foles and Homo. I don't want any part of Vick on the field. This game has fumbles written all over it w Vick running for his life.

 

[soulxflare]

It should be Foles because, as all of the stats prove, he operates the offense more efficiently.

 

[northeastphillyguy]

What about those who say that vick fits Kellys scheme better? I don't agree, if that was the case,why so many field goals in place of touchdowns?

 

[mall3013]

IMO if Kelly is such the mastermind innovative genius then he should be able to take any QB and plug him into his system. Vick has lost a lot of his athleticism due to injuries. Furthermore, his QB IQ is horrible. To this day he fails to read defenses, he relies on his legs way to often, and he holds onto the ball to long. To me that tells me he's not able to read coverages. I know Foles has a small sample size, but from what I know this far in fewer games than Vick, he is much better in the red zone, he's quicker at releasing the football than Vick, he also can check down and set the audible when he recognizes the blitz. Sorry, but this is the kind of QB that should fit Chip's bill. Chip can make this work.

 

[jvett77]

We should go with the hot hand. As has already been stated, Foles runs the offense more efficiently as was shown in Sunday's performance. Foles is a very good drop back QB and the more he plays the more accurate his long passes will become. Foles allows you to score in a hurry with his long heaves. The offense is not consistent with Vick. An older running QB is a bad idea. Vick must be the backup. He can be used in certain situations to confuse a defense. Beat Dallas!

 

[soulxflare]

Agree with mall and jvett .... when Vick is your QB, you essentially cut the football field in half. He looks for his first read, and, if that guy is covered, Vick either runs or forces a throw into solid (or even double) coverage.

If you watched Foles against TB, you could see him going through all of his reads, and getting rid of the ball if nothing was there.

 

[mcnabb7542]

It should be Foles because, as all of the stats prove, he operates the offense more efficiently.

 

[unblowupable5]

IMO if Kelly is such the mastermind innovative genius then he should be able to take any QB and plug him into his system. Vick has lost a lot of his athleticism due to injuries. Furthermore, his QB IQ is horrible. To this day he fails to read defenses, he relies on his legs way to often, and he holds onto the ball to long. To me that tells me he's not able to read coverages. I know Foles has a small sample size, but from what I know this far in fewer games than Vick, he is much better in the red zone, he's quicker at releasing the football than Vick, he also can check down and set the audible when he recognizes the blitz. Sorry, but this is the kind of QB that should fit Chip's bill. Chip can make this work.

^ This. I don't dislike Vick- I've just got Vick-fatigue at this point. He's not going to be our QB next year. There is nothing to be gained from starting him the rest of this season. With Foles, we can eliminate the what-if going forward. To my eye, the offense runs more efficiently, and he's leading the team to 4th quarter points. Let's see what we've got. If he's the guy, that's a high draft pick we can spend somewhere other than QB next year. If he's not, we find out once and for all and don't have to look back.

 

[northeastphillyguy]

I did not think ahead until I read unblowupable5s post. Foles could be the future starting QB for next season and beyond. If he has a good year,we can aim our draft picks to fill other needs. Plus,Vick can move on to another team next season. That being said, I can hardly wait for the Dallas game, it should be a close contest!

 

[snookdad]

Vick should always be you guys's starting QB when healthy. As think you guys may have won yesterday had Vick played. He makes mistakes, but he adds a dimension to the Eagles offense that is almost impossible to stop. Vick hasn't been yall problem this year....the defense has.

 

[soulxflare]

Vick should always be you guys's starting QB when healthy. As think you guys may have won yesterday had Vick played. He makes mistakes, but he adds a dimension to the Eagles offense that is almost impossible to stop. Vick hasn't been yall problem this year....the defense has.

Really? Because, even counting yesterday's abysmal game, Foles has more TDs than Vick ..... in half the playing time.

 

[ugafan6612]

If Vick is 100% then Vick...if not then Foles

 

[PhillyBoston781]

Really? Because, even counting yesterday's abysmal game, Foles has more TDs than Vick ..... in half the playing time.

If only he could play 0-6 teams all year....

 

[soulxflare]

If only he could play 0-6 teams all year....

Yawn .... this intellectually dishonest argument again?

Tampa's D was ranked #8 overall, and #1 in the red zone -- and Foles did just fine against them. They were only 0-6 because they have literally zero offense.

 

[PhillyBoston781]

Yawn .... this intellectually dishonest argument again?

Tampa's D was ranked #8 overall, and #1 in the red zone -- and Foles did just fine against them. They were only 0-6 because they have literally zero offense.

It's a fact. They have yet to win a game.

Losing wears on a team. Especially when they jettison their starting QB for a rookie and essentially waive the white flag for the season, removing any incentive to play hard. (Similar to, say, sitting Vick and starting Foles because "we should see what we have since Vick will never win a Superbowl.") It's hardly surprising they've let up 31 points every game since then.

 

[soulxflare]

It's a fact. They have yet to win a game.

Losing wears on a team. Especially when they jettison their starting QB for a rookie and essentially waive the white flag for the season, removing any incentive to play hard. (Similar to, say, sitting Vick and starting Foles because "we should see what we have since Vick will never win a Superbowl.") It's hardly surprising they've let up 31 points every game since then.

It's also a fact that their defense was among the best in the league when we played them. All I'm saying is you cannot dismiss a team simply based on their record.

 

[PhillyBoston781]

It's also a fact that their defense was among the best in the league when we played them. All I'm saying is you cannot dismiss a team simply based on their record.

Fair point. You're right. There's plenty of teams with inflated good records and deflated bad records based upon a few bad/good bounces. Heck, superbowls have been decided that way.

Still, being completely winless says SOMETHING. Ditching your QB and going with Mike Glennon tells your team and defense what you expect out of them this year, and it's not "let's do whatever we can to try to win."

Looks like we're going to get another game to watch Foles this weekend, too. I got my fingers crossed he makes me look like an idiot. It'd be really nice to go into next year's draft without needing a QB.

And, yes, no matter what Foles does on Sunday against a mediocre/bad Raiders team or thereafter, I will continue to be the lone ass hole on this board who defends Vick as a decent QB, which I'm sure surprises everyone. But if/once Foles actually proves that he's better, I'll happily stop arguing Vick should be the starter when healthy. For some sick reason, I feel obligated to counter balance the mob's push to give Foles every excuse possible in the meantime.

 

[soulxflare]

Fair point. You're right. There's plenty of teams with inflated good records and deflated bad records based upon a few bad/good bounces. Heck, superbowls have been decided that way.

Still, being completely winless says SOMETHING. Ditching your QB and going with Mike Glennon tells your team and defense what you expect out of them this year, and it's not "let's do whatever we can to try to win."

Looks like we're going to get another game to watch Foles this weekend, too. I got my fingers crossed he makes me look like an idiot. It'd be really nice to go into next year's draft without needing a QB.

And, yes, no matter what Foles does on Sunday against a mediocre/bad Raiders team or thereafter, I will continue to be the lone ass hole on this board who defends Vick as a decent QB, which I'm sure surprises everyone. But if/once Foles actually proves that he's better, I'll happily stop arguing Vick should be the starter when healthy. For some sick reason, I feel obligated to counter balance the mob's push to give Foles every excuse possible in the meantime.

lol ..... are you sure you want to tie your ship to that anchor?

 

[mcnabb7542]

So I believe now we can answer the question as to why Matt Barkley was still available in the 4th round!