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.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by Mr_Tomahawk

Pros:
Quick release
Good pocket presence
Good velocity
Good accuracy


Cons:
3/4 delivery.
Most completions were dumps to a back or a TE, with very few down field targets.
Mostly locked onto one receiver.
Painful interception.
Preseason game

[007]

Originally Posted by O.city

Mary Kay Cabot ‏@MaryKayCabot
#Eagles aren't shopping second-year QB Nick Foles and would want a 1st- or 2nd-round pick to even consider it, source told AP

1st or 2nd? For a third round prospect that really didn't do anything last year?

[bevischief]

No.

[mdchiefsfan]

Originally Posted by bevischief

No.

exactly

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Originally Posted by bevischief

No.

/Thread

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Frankie

Speaking of Geno smith, did anyone here watch "Last Resort" on ABC this year. Geno looks almost exactly like the guy who played Serrat in that show.

Uncanny resemblance, for sure.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by HotCarl

The Chinese government thinks you Genostrokers are a little over the top in your persecution of dissent.

We've endured attack after attack for months.

You can go **** yourself with a rusty fork.

YOU made us this way, dipshit.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Frankie

This is true.

No, it isn't.

You're better than that Frankie.

[htismaqe]

Where's RunKC? Paging RunKC.

Run, how many times have you been "attacked" since BlackBob was banned?

Exactly.

There are quite a few people here who lack ANY context of the lifecycle of the Geno discussion on this board. Was Left Nut attacked for saying something as a criticism of Geno early on? No. I have brought up negatives about Geno several times and I've NEVER been attacked.

The simple fact is that this all STARTED because anybody that said something POSITIVE about Geno got attacked. And now a couple of people want to turn that around and make it sound like the Geno fans are the instigators?

The simple fact is that the discussion got RIGHT BACK ON TRACK the instant BlackBob was banned and persisted that way for quite a while, right up until the point that Dane started his self-righteous rampage.

Seriously Dane, you're a hypocrite. Get over it or go the way of BlackBob.

[htismaqe]

This is one of the guys we've had to contend with for a good portion of the entire discussion about Geno.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=270055

Here's a couple of gems from that thread:

Originally Posted by Rugby Thompson

Clark's an evil guy, it's all a nice guy act for the camera.

he'll never be as evil as his pops but he's keeping the tradition going.

Originally Posted by Rugby Thompson

dorsey is way more arrogant then peeoli and reid's a fat backstabbing liar.

And this kind of stuff comes on the heels of people endlessly suggesting we should move Albert to guard and cut Dwayne Bowe because he drops passes and he's a Gangsta-wannabe thug.

Anybody that's been part of this discussion for more than the past 3 weeks knows what this is about and it's not even ABOUT GENO.

It's about having to endure the opinions of morons.

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Well, it's just so ri-Goddamn-diculous.



I don't recall any one person stating in 2009, let alone dozens of people, that if the Chiefs didn't select Sanchez, they were "done" with the team.

Yet in 2013, we have many claiming that if Smith isn't the pick, they're DONE. And not only that, Andy Reid and Dorsey are "already part of the problem" and stupid, too.

If people want to complain AFTER the draft, I'll get that completely. But eleven weeks before?

JFC.

Dane I think people are at that point BECAUSE of all the top eleven picks we have had and burnt on players that have gotten us no where.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Pasta Little Brioni]

We just want the best for the team and feel Geno is it. Why settle for drafting a position we don't need and snagging the 5th best QB when we can have the guy we feel is the best and a starting caliber player at a position of need in round 2. **** value.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

Dane I think people are at that point BECAUSE of all the top eleven picks we gave had and burnt in players that have gotten us no where.
Posted via Mobile Device

Precisely.

His argument is completely without context.

EDIT: Not to mention the fact that he says:

I don't recall any one person stating in 2009, let alone dozens of people, that if the Chiefs didn't select Sanchez, they were "done" with the team.

Yet in 2013, we have many claiming that if Smith isn't the pick, they're DONE. And not only that, Andy Reid and Dorsey are "already part of the problem" and stupid, too.

If people want to complain AFTER the draft, I'll get that completely. But eleven weeks before?

NOBODY has said Reid and Dorsey are part of the problem NOW. EVERYONE that has mentioned Reid and Dorsey has said IF THE CHIEFS DON'T DRAFT A QB, Reid and Dorsey are "part of the problem". That is essentially people complaining AFTER THE DRAFT, so where's the ****ing problem?

And yes, that's a rhetorical question.

[Pasta Little Brioni]

People forget just how big of a bloodbath the Sanchez arguments were. It was ridiculous here and it was all that was discussed for the most part for a long ass time. This is nothing compared to 09 and Dane is going all selective memory on us.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by gonefishin53

With the #4 pick, the Chiefs can take Chance Warmack. /

A ****ing guard at #4 overall?

WTF is wrong with you?