OT: Philadelphia Eagles (NFL): Where crazy happens.

Status
Not open for further replies.

TheSpectrum

Registered User
Oct 18, 2011
581
0
I actually like the Thurmond signing a lot. People are going to point to the Duck bias again but he can slot as the #2 CB and provide insurance to Boykin in the slot. This problably means they'll move on from Boykin after the season but you had to expect that with Boykin wanting to be a starter

The Matthews deal depends on the money. I would expect that they would not be giving him Gore money.

I just don't understand why they are set on spending in this position via FA. There is a legion on RB's in the draft that can fit this scheme. Maybe he is preparing a move up for one of the top WRs or a top OL.
 

Halladay

Registered User
Feb 27, 2009
65,163
7,846
H Town
I dont think Bradford is terrible, as he hasnt had good receivers around him. But he cant stay healthy and up to this point Foles has been the better NFL quarterback. Take into account that he makes about 20x more than Foles, the Eagles shouldnt be giving up a 2nd. In a qb starved league you dont think that Foles couldnt get you at least a 3rd round pick?
This trade tells me that either Chip hates/thinks Foles is terrible (which is funny considering he resigned Sanchez) or he really likes Bradford. For all of you who wanted Foles gone, have fun watching Sanchez again.
 

Protest

C`est La Vie
Mar 28, 2008
7,410
1,269
Deptford, NJ
I dont think Bradford is terrible, as he hasnt had good receivers around him. But he cant stay healthy and up to this point Foles has been the better NFL quarterback. Take into account that he makes about 20x more than Foles, the Eagles shouldnt be giving up a 2nd. In a qb starved league you dont think that Foles couldnt get you at least a 3rd round pick?
This trade tells me that either Chip hates/thinks Foles is terrible (which is funny considering he resigned Sanchez) or he really likes Bradford. For all of you who wanted Foles gone, have fun watching Sanchez again.

...or this isn't finished
 

JDinkalage Morgoone

U of South Flurrida
Oct 7, 2008
15,010
3
308 Negra Arroyo Ln.
The Mathews signing in a vacuum is fine with me. However, look at this:

Kiko Alonso - 0 GP
Walter Thurmond - 2 GP
Sam Bradford - 0 GP
Ryan Mathews - 6 GP

The best ability is durability? To say that the Eagles have a few question marks is an understatement. 8 games played between 4 guys they brought in to be starters. Who the hell knows how they'll play???
 

King Forsberg

16 21 28 44 68 88 93
Jul 26, 2010
6,192
59
Part of me thinks there's no way this all there is. It's very hard to think with Chip gaining all this power that this is the end of the road. Sam Bradford cannot be all there is. Chip has vision and I'm not sure where he fits in. If your going for all the Ducks, you have to get the King duck.

The other part of me thinks Chip is just in way over his head here. Losing Foles, McCoy, Maclin, and Jackson in a span of 2 yrs is just absurd. Trading for a QB that's been nothing special and completely injury prone is just outrageous.

But it's only the second day of the league season. Let's see where we are when it's training camp time.
 

TheSpectrum

Registered User
Oct 18, 2011
581
0
I dont think Bradford is terrible, as he hasnt had good receivers around him. But he cant stay healthy and up to this point Foles has been the better NFL quarterback. Take into account that he makes about 20x more than Foles, the Eagles shouldnt be giving up a 2nd. In a qb starved league you dont think that Foles couldnt get you at least a 3rd round pick?
This trade tells me that either Chip hates/thinks Foles is terrible (which is funny considering he resigned Sanchez) or he really likes Bradford. For all of you who wanted Foles gone, have fun watching Sanchez again.

I think what it also says is there were maybe other teams on Bradford and the Eagles had to sweeten the pot to get him.

There have been reports that Cleveland was also trying to pursue him.

I think if the compensation was reversed or if it was just a Foles-Bradford straight swap people would be a little more ok with it.

It all depends how this thing plays out. If Bradford returns to his rookie promise and blows up in this system while Foles continues to struggle along, one can make a case the Eagles actually stole him from St. Louis

That is a BIG if as we stand today.
 

JDinkalage Morgoone

U of South Flurrida
Oct 7, 2008
15,010
3
308 Negra Arroyo Ln.
I think what it also says is there were maybe other teams on Bradford and the Eagles had to sweeten the pot to get him.

There have been reports that Cleveland was also trying to pursue him.

I think if the compensation was reversed or if it was just a Foles-Bradford straight swap people would be a little more ok with it.

It all depends how this thing plays out. If Bradford returns to his rookie promise and blows up in this system while Foles continues to struggle along, one can make a case the Eagles actually stole him from St. Louis

That is a BIG if as we stand today.

If compensations were reversed, I'd be fine.

What I initially read is that they were swapping firsts AND the Eagles were getting a 2nd. That made more sense than this. I am not a huge Foles guy but I think Foles is more of a sure thing than Bradford, at 12! million dollars less?
 

DrinkFightFlyers

THE TORTURE NEVER STOPS
Sponsor
Sep 24, 2009
23,519
4,493
NJ
If compensations were reversed, I'd be fine.

What I initially read is that they were swapping firsts AND the Eagles were getting a 2nd. That made more sense than this. I am not a huge Foles guy but I think Foles is more of a sure thing than Bradford, at 12! million dollars less?

What's funny is that even when the deal was Bradford, 1st, 2nd for Foles, 1st, some sites were still saying the move was questionable for the Eagles and that the Rams won. Now it is just awful given what we know at this time. Granted, there is still a teeny, tiny, itty bitty, little, weeny shred of hope that there is something else going on, but it just looks bad from this vantage point. :cry:

Maybe we were all just so psyched for Mariota (or at least the prospect of something exciting, even if you weren't sold on Mariota) and it is just such a let down to have this be the big deal to which everything was leading. :cry::cry::cry:
 

Hiesenberg

Registered User
Jul 2, 2013
15,576
1,875
We can love Foles all we want, but the reality of the situation is that 99% of the teams didn't really like Foles.

And Lets face it, look at this track record:

2012-Trash (not really his fault)
2013-historical (didn't get the starting job and got hurt)
2014-Mediocre to bad (got hurt half way through)

I think we need to stop thinking Foles had some awesome value.
 

TheSpectrum

Registered User
Oct 18, 2011
581
0
If compensations were reversed, I'd be fine.

What I initially read is that they were swapping firsts AND the Eagles were getting a 2nd. That made more sense than this. I am not a huge Foles guy but I think Foles is more of a sure thing than Bradford, at 12! million dollars less?

As we stand today, I agree with that statement.

How I am approaching this move (for the sake of my sanity) is strictly from an upside perspective

I think Bradford physical talents + Chip's system + familiarity with Shurmur + better OLine + the expectation of an upgrade in the WR group via the draft > Foles + new O-cord + tough defenses in NFC West + lack of weapons compared to what he had in Philly

From a physical talent standpoint and assuming Bradford will be back healthy the Eagles are getting an upgrade at the position. He is more mobile (slightly) and has considerable zip on the ball compared to Foles. I think Chip values that and the decision making that Bradford brings (even with a terrible WR group he still kept a low TD/INT ratio)
 

Hiesenberg

Registered User
Jul 2, 2013
15,576
1,875
Its weird, I've seen people, again looking in a vacuum, that if both are health Bradford is a significant talent upgrade. But then I've seen people trash Bradford completely even if he was healthy.
 

TheSpectrum

Registered User
Oct 18, 2011
581
0
Again, maybe this is just me trying to talk myself into this Bradford move but I would urge some of you to take a look at some of the games he put together prior to his injury (specifically in 2012 and 2013).

He had some pretty big games against teams like San Fran, Seattle, Arizona (2013).

Prior to the ACL in 2013, he was on pace for 3,500 yards, 28 TDs and 8 INTs that year

I think we can all live with that in Chip's offense
 

Halladay

Registered User
Feb 27, 2009
65,163
7,846
H Town
Nothing Bradford has done on the field in the NFL to this point has shown he is better than Foles. zilch, nada, nil, zero.
 

YEM

Registered User
Mar 7, 2010
5,718
2,697
Nothing Bradford has done on the field in the NFL to this point has shown he is better than Foles. zilch, nada, nil, zero.
yep
imo his game is like eli manning's but without the clutchness & ability to win
 

Flyotes

Sorry Hinkie.
Apr 7, 2007
10,559
1,997
SJ
Possibilities:

Trade Bradford to move up.
Keeps Bradford for a year and tests him out. Meanwhile, drafts Hundley or Mariota (less likely).
 

PALE PWNR

Registered User
Jul 10, 2010
13,228
3,465
Sewell NJ
I really really tried to rationalize this as details were coming out. This makes 0 sense. We traded a proven player for broken potential and got shafted with picks. This is bad.
 

Hiesenberg

Registered User
Jul 2, 2013
15,576
1,875
I really really tried to rationalize this as details were coming out. This makes 0 sense. We traded a proven player for broken potential and got shafted with picks. This is bad.

Foles is not proven. Not by a long shot.

I'm not a Bradford fan and am pretty sure he doesn't make it. But Foles has not track record what so ever.
 

DrinkFightFlyers

THE TORTURE NEVER STOPS
Sponsor
Sep 24, 2009
23,519
4,493
NJ
Nothing Bradford has done on the field in the NFL to this point has shown he is better than Foles. zilch, nada, nil, zero.

I would disagree with this. Bradford is not some superstar, but stats don't tell the whole story (though he did win rookie of the year). In his two full seasons his two most productive WRs were Amendola and Brandon Gibson one year, and Gibson and Chris Givens another. Add that to a lack of any real options at TE, plus a pretty bad OL. Compare that Nick Foles in his roughly one and a half full seasons combined. He had a legitimate #1 WR at all times, plus arguably the best RB in the game, plus (at least his second year) a good OL, plus a good TE, plus other options at WR that aren't too shabby, plus running a high-flying offense, plus playing something like 80% of his games against non-playoff, cellar dweller teams.

I think Bradford has shown he is good QB, considering the teams he's played on. He was never going to put up good numbers with Danny Amendola as his only real weapon. Amendola is an awesome slot receiver...but that's about it. His WR corps in STL was only marginally better than what the Eagles have right now in Cooper/Mathews/Huff. At least here the Birds have Celek and Ertz at TE. That being said, with similarly poor weapons here...I don't really expect much unless some other changes are made to add to his disposal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad