Article: Chiefs Most Likely Landing Spot for Foles

[RyFo18]

Now that Vick has re-signed with Philly, it makes sense that this stuff would start coming out given the Reid/Foles connection.

Chiefs a logical landing spot if Nick Foles is dealt

By Dan Hanzus
Around the League Writer
Published: Feb. 11, 2013 at 08:12 p.m. Updated: Feb. 12, 2013 at 12:06 a.m.

Chip Kelly said Monday it was his "hope" the Philadelphia Eagles will have both Michael Vick and Nick Foles on the roster come Week 1.

Kelly called it an "open competition" at quarterback and stressed that Foles was kept in the loop on the Eagles' thinking in restructuring Vick's deal. It certainly doesn't sound like the Eagles are about to ship Foles out of town.

That said, Kelly didn't rule out a possible trade. Around The League checked in with NFL.com's Daniel Jeremiah, who served as the Eagles' west coast scout from 2010-12. Jeremiah doesn't know the Eagles' internal thinking on the matter, but he pointed to the Kansas City Chiefs as a potential trade fit.

The logic is simple: Andy Reid took over as head coach of the Chiefs last month after 14 seasons in Philadelphia. His staff includes Doug Pederson, the former Eagles' quarterbacks coach who now serves as the Chiefs' offensive coordinator. Foles' skill-set is ideally suited for the West Coast offense, and he spent his rookie season learning the Reid playbook in Philadelphia.

"I know both Andy Reid and Doug Pederson were very high on Nick Foles and his future," Jeremiah said. "They were huge supporters through the entire process and believe in him greatly.

"I would think they would explore that opportunity if it presented itself."

Reid and Pederson love Foles' size and accuracy, two traits they covet at the position. And while we don't imagine the Eagles would bend over backwards to help Reid, it certainly helps that the divorce between coach and team was largely amicable. That Reid now operates in a different conference doesn't hurt, either.

Kelly said Monday that every NFL team needs two quarterbacks. There's logic to that, especially when Vick is one of them. But if Reid wanted Foles enough, the Eagles would have to at least listen.

Follow Dan Hanzus on Twitter @DanHanzus.

[OzarksChiefsFan]

Originally Posted by SNR

Nick Foles was an Air Raid QB with accuracy issues in college. He had absolutely no understanding of the timing and touch it requires to get that offense working correctly. He just shit crap out of his ass like Matt Cassel does when "everything was covered down field." I thought Foles was a shitty QB coming into the draft and I still think he's a shitty QB.

In the pros, behind a subpar offensive line, he put up putrid stats. Most of those 6 TDs came in garbage time action against teams like the Cowboys.

If we were meeting face-to-face, I would ask you to look me square in the eye and tell me Nick Foles could potentially be a good pro QB. And if you did that without laughing, I'D laugh at you for being a ****ing dumbass.

You clearly haven't watched tape on the guy. He threw for over 4k yards and 28 touchdowns in 2011 while completing almost 70% of his passes. If you had watched as much tape on Foles as I have you would know he is accurate and throws people open. He would have been drafted higher were it not for a poor showing at the Senior bowl. So I'd look you in the eye and tell you your full of @$%#.

[Mr. Pink]

speaking of Glennon. Did anyone see him in the All-star challenge at the end of Jan? He looked awful. Just awful

[SNR]

Originally Posted by Frosty

Dysert didn't look very accurate at the Senior Bowl and most scouting reports on him mention that he was a first-read, check down guy in college. I'm not that impressed.

I have been a fan of Foles since his first game at AZ (against my Beavers) and you hate him like he ran over your girlfriend and ****ed your dog (or maybe that's the other way around) so we probably aren't going to see this the same way.

Dysert's a developmental guy, for sure. Small school spread won't get you very far in the NFL if you're not able to learn and adapt. That's the huge question mark on the kid that nobody seems to knows about. I don't think scouts have done research on that the way they have for Geno Smith.

Arm (which includes release and accuracy) + how well the guy does under pressure are the two things that can get me to like any QB. I see those things from Dysert when I watch youtube game footage (never saw any of his games). I didn't see them from Lindley.

I think Foles has a Tebow arm when it comes to short/intermediate stuff. He DOES appear to have a bigger brain than Tebow, though. If he works through his short/mid-range game well enough, he could be a pretty good QB.

Again, though, that's like saying, "If this WR would just work on his route-running and getting separation from DBs, he'd be a FANTASTIC player." Let's see it happen first.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Frosty

I'm curious who we could get in the 3rd round this year that would compare? Just because Foles was a 3rd rounder last year in a very deep QB class doesn't mean he would be a 3rd rounder this year. I think Foles compares very favorably to Nassib and Glennon and those guys are considered late 1st, early 2nd guys.

Dysert.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by SNR

I think Zac Dysert is a far better prospect than Nick Foles is. And we can probably get Dysert in the 3rd if we really want him.

Beat me to it.

As a prospect, Dysert's ceiling is much higher.

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by SNR

Again, though, that's like saying, "If this WR would just work on his route-running and getting separation from DBs, he'd be a FANTASTIC player." Let's see it happen first.

Foles has a good arm and has nice touch and accuracy on the deep passes. I did watch a lot of him with the Eagles last year but can't say I focused on watching his short to intermediate game. He was playing with a lot of back ups, which may have affected his timing.

I agree on waiting to see what happens and am not in favor of using draft picks to get him (unless you could get him by swapping 2nds or something like that) as the Chiefs just have too many needs. In this draft, those 2nds and 3rds are going to be pretty important.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by SNR

Draft Geno.
Sign Hasselbeck.
Keep Stanzi.
Draft a guy in the 6th/7th round.

Order them as need be on the depth chart and cut the worst guy.

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Beat me to it.

As a prospect, Dysert's ceiling is much higher.

No one has anyway of knowing that.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by RunKC

Idk about you guys but I loved Foles when he came out last year. He was awesome at Arizona, but people didn't know it because his coach and team sucked ass.

Arizona was a top 10 passing team in college and Foles was very accurate. The guy has a rifle too.

Hell I liked him more than Wilson, Assweiler, Weeden and Tannehill.

If there is one guy who is comparable to Joe Flacco, it's this guy. He wasn't inconsistent in college and he isn't a pussy like Glennon.

Awesome?

He did very well in a system that was very QB-friendly. He's limited physically for a spread QB.

I'd say Flacco is a fair comparison, although I'm not sure his upside is Flacco NOW (Super Bowl winner and all).

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Frosty

No one has anyway of knowing that.

I think Dysert has considerably more room to grow.

Foles was a guy that seemed "maxed" coming out of college. He is what he is.

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Awesome?

He did very well in a system that was very QB-friendly. He's limited physically for a spread QB.

I'd say Flacco is a fair comparison, although I'm not sure his upside is Flacco NOW (Super Bowl winner and all).

I see Bledsoe more than Flacco.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Frosty

I see Bledsoe more than Flacco.

Foles is limited athletically but he's not THAT limited.

[htismaqe]

I do find it rather amazing that the same arguments being used to JUSTIFY trading picks for Foles are being used AGAINST drafting Geno Smith at #1 overall.

Apparently, being a highly-accurate QB in a 1-read offense is okay as long as you are somebody else's castoff...

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I think Dysert has considerably more room to grow.

Foles was a guy that seemed "maxed" coming out of college. He is what he is.

Foles was being talked about as a possible 1st round guy before he got hurt his Jr year (he got hurt when the team was 7-1 and ranked #16). Then he came back and played on a terrible team with no defense his Sr year. That dropped his stock. The questions about him coming out were if he could play under center and if he was a check down guy. I think he showed well on those concerns during his rookie year with the Eagles.

Dysert is being talked about as a quality back up.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Frosty

Dysert is being talked about as a quality back up.

As Foles should be.