Chiefs Article: Chiefs Most Likely Landing Spot for Foles - Page 11

RyFo18 · 02-11-2013, 11:03 PM

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

Quote:

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.

Sure-Oz · 02-12-2013, 04:04 PM

I've heard rumors it could take a 4th to get him...i'd be up for that probably

htismaqe · 02-12-2013, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

1) Andy Reid liked him enough to draft him in the third round, even though he had just committed to Vick with a 100 million dollars.

They gave Vick 100M because he was the STARTER. They took Foles as a DEVELOPMENTAL PROSPECT. The situation here isn't even remotely close to that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

2) he just turned 24 and has the tools.

MIGHT have the tools. Might.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

3) experience in the exact system we run and the skill set to run it.

......

Lets not act like Foles looked like trash....he played well for a rookie.

Funny how you want to say Foles isn't trash but by the same token think that:

1) The Eagles should dump him after his rookie season, thus making him "trash" by definition and
2) The Chiefs would bring him in to be a backup, thus making him "trash" by definition.

There's 2 distinct thought processes going on in this thread and they're not gelling.

Yes, Foles is a talent.

He's NOT COMING HERE for a 5th-round pick and he's NOT COMING HERE to compete with a rookie.

All of the things you said about him above are absolutely true. Which is why the idea of getting him AND Geno will NEVER come to fruition. Ever.

PGM · 02-12-2013, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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...

PGM · 02-12-2013, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Look, if they want to trade a 6th for Foles, I'm all for it. But we all know that's not a realistic scenario.

This isn't Madden.

EXACTLY. If he was worth a shit why would the Eagles give him away. It makes no sense at all.

Branden Albert's Huge Balls · 02-12-2013, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

He's NOT COMING HERE for a 5th-round pick and he's NOT COMING HERE to compete with a rookie.

Meh.

He could absolutely come here for #65 and be the backup.

I doubt anyone is going to give a higher pick for him, because he hasn't shown he's worth it at this point.

This isn't an Alex Smith "start me or die" situation.

htismaqe · 02-12-2013, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoWalrus

Meh.

He could absolutely come here for #65 and be the backup.

I doubt anyone is going to give a higher pick for him, because he hasn't shown he's worth it at this point.

This isn't an Alex Smith "start me or die" situation.

Which way do you want to get picked apart on this one?

If he hasn't shown he's worth it, why are we giving up picks for him?

Or if he IS worth it, why are the Eagles shipping him out?

Face it, no matter how you slice it, there are a DOZEN or more better options out there.

Messier · 02-12-2013, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Which way do you want to get picked apart on this one?

If he hasn't shown he's worth it, why are we giving up picks for him?

Or if he IS worth it, why are the Eagles shipping him out?

Face it, no matter how you slice it, there are a DOZEN or more better options out there.

Name them.

Foles and a Rookie is my favorite scenario. Don't want old Hasselbeck for one year, don't want QBs proven to be nothing but backups. Foles and a rookie would be two QBs with promise.

htismaqe · 02-12-2013, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Messier

Name them.

Foles and a Rookie is my favorite scenario. Don't want old Hasselbeck for one year, don't want QBs proven to be nothing but backups. Foles and a rookie would be two QBs with promise.

We don't need two QBs with promise.

We need 1 starter and 1 backup.

People are obsessed with hedging their bets.

PGM · 02-12-2013, 05:07 PM

I really don't see how anyone can think this guy is AWESOME whilst bash Geno.

htismaqe · 02-12-2013, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PGM

I really don't see how anyone can think this guy is AWESOME whilst bash Geno.

It's obvious nobody wants to commit.

Let's bring in 14 guys and let them battle it out!

PGM · 02-12-2013, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Messier

Name them.

Foles and a Rookie is my favorite scenario. Don't want old Hasselbeck for one year, don't want QBs proven to be nothing but backups. Foles and a rookie would be two QBs with promise.

Why would Philly deal him for less than a 3rd if he is this diamond in the rough? Anything more than that and they can F off. I'm not seeing a way this works.

tyler360 · 02-12-2013, 05:10 PM

That high 3rd is gonna be a pretty good starter. We really shouldn't be trading it for Foles

Messier · 02-12-2013, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

We don't need two QBs with promise.

We need 1 starter and 1 backup.

People are obsessed with hedging their bets.

Almost no one is all in on any rookie QB, and I can't blame them.

PGM · 02-12-2013, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Messier

Almost no one is all in on any rookie QB, and I can't blame them.

We draft one number one overall, you damn well bet they are all in.

PGM · 02-12-2013, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tyler360

That high 3rd is gonna be a pretty good starter. We really shouldn't be trading it for Foles

Another great point

02-12-2013, 05:10 PM	#162
tyler360 Starter Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Springfield Mo Casino cash: $36051	That high 3rd is gonna be a pretty good starter. We really shouldn't be trading it for Foles
Posts: 694

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode