let me guess you liked bobby hoying, aj feeley and kevin kolb too. :fp:
foles was great today. no bad decisions at all. need to beat a winless team and he did. good for him and the team. want to impress me lead a team to the playoffs. anyone can look good (see names above) every once in a while. better than average QBs can do it for full seasons. I stand by my comment that foles is a pretty average NFL QB.
Although it's a small sample size, he's the most accurate Eagles qb in history. Vick is exciting but Foles is accurate. I'll take accurate over losing any day.
let me guess you liked bobby hoying, aj feeley and kevin kolb too. :fp:
foles was great today. no bad decisions at all. need to beat a winless team and he did. good for him and the team. want to impress me lead a team to the playoffs. anyone can look good (see names above) every once in a while. better than average QBs can do it for full seasons. I stand by my comment that foles is a pretty average NFL QB.
:lolno:
8/28/98- Camden, NJ
10/31/09- Philly
5/21/10- NYC
9/2/12- Philly, PA
7/19/13- Wrigley
10/19/13- Brooklyn, NY
10/21/13- Philly, PA
10/22/13- Philly, PA
10/27/13- Baltimore, MD
Tres Mts.- 3/23/11- Philly
Eddie Vedder- 6/25/11- Philly
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,338
let me guess you liked bobby hoying, aj feeley and kevin kolb too. :fp:
foles was great today. no bad decisions at all. need to beat a winless team and he did. good for him and the team. want to impress me lead a team to the playoffs. anyone can look good (see names above) every once in a while. better than average QBs can do it for full seasons. I stand by my comment that foles is a pretty average NFL QB.
it figures you are one of those people comparing him to people like hoying and feeley. feeley? really? why not throw jeff kemp into the mix? hoying was absolute garbage. he had one good game against the bengals in 1997. feeley rode the wave of an amazing defense as they won 4 games against some really shitty teams while mcnabb was hurt in 2002.
the kolb comparison is the only one that might work, even though i was never a fan. poor guy just couldn't stay on the field to have any shot at realizing his potential. foles seems to have some good intangibles though and comes with a much better pedigree than any of those guys. you can talk about a winless team all you want, but tampa's defense is pretty good. they held brees and brady in check this year.
like i said before, i just don't like the combo of a rather weak arm with next to zero mobility. but his deep ball did look pretty good today. that 2nd td pass to djack was a thing of beauty. next week would be a big test for him...
and jammin--with all the rules changes that have been made over the last 10 years or so, most quarterback are more accurate in today's nfl than in year's past. this is the one sport where it's tough to compare different generations. montana's career completion % was 63% which is where foles is at so far this year.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,338
but i do agree that his ceiling is most likely that of an average starter in this league. perhaps above average. hope to god i'm wrong. but i also think he's a better qb than the feeley's and hoying's that has past through here over the years. time will tell. right now, nobody knows for sure.
I'll take a tall smart accurate Qb. Not saying Foles is the 2nd coming,but he's produced when given a chance. Def has zero pass rush at all. Dez is gonna murder us next week sadly.
Go Birds!!!!
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,338
I'll take a tall smart accurate Qb. Not saying Foles is the 2nd coming,but he's produced when given a chance. Def has zero pass rush at all. Dez is gonna murder us next week sadly.
what does it matter that he's tall? i don't understand why people keep talking about his height.
it figures you are one of those people comparing him to people like hoying and feeley. feeley? really? why not throw jeff kemp into the mix? hoying was absolute garbage. he had one good game against the bengals in 1997. feeley rode the wave of an amazing defense as they won 4 games against some really shitty teams while mcnabb was hurt in 2002.
the kolb comparison is the only one that might work, even though i was never a fan. poor guy just couldn't stay on the field to have any shot at realizing his potential. foles seems to have some good intangibles though and comes with a much better pedigree than any of those guys. you can talk about a winless team all you want, but tampa's defense is pretty good. they held brees and brady in check this year.
like i said before, i just don't like the combo of a rather weak arm with next to zero mobility. but his deep ball did look pretty good today. that 2nd td pass to djack was a thing of beauty. next week would be a big test for him...
and jammin--with all the rules changes that have been made over the last 10 years or so, most quarterback are more accurate in today's nfl than in year's past. this is the one sport where it's tough to compare different generations. montana's career completion % was 63% which is where foles is at so far this year.
aj feeley was in the league for 11 years. pretty good longevity for an average guy at best. does foles last 11 years?
agree foles' two long balls were things of beauty today.
wouldn't weak arm and no mobility lead you to label him as average in today's nfl? :?
i'm not trying to beat the guy down here just commenting on the already over the top talk about foles. if chip Kelly truly thought foles was the long term answer he would have been starting since day 1 this year.
but hey 1st place is good. it's exciting to have a big game next week. how much fun will it be to play and win that game the day before the two PJ shows?
I'll take a tall smart accurate Qb. Not saying Foles is the 2nd coming,but he's produced when given a chance. Def has zero pass rush at all. Dez is gonna murder us next week sadly.
what does it matter that he's tall? i don't understand why people keep talking about his height.
How many time do you see Vick get the ball batted? Foles see's over the line better and can make throws Vick can't. That pass last week to Celek was a great example.
it figures you are one of those people comparing him to people like hoying and feeley. feeley? really? why not throw jeff kemp into the mix? hoying was absolute garbage. he had one good game against the bengals in 1997. feeley rode the wave of an amazing defense as they won 4 games against some really shitty teams while mcnabb was hurt in 2002.
the kolb comparison is the only one that might work, even though i was never a fan. poor guy just couldn't stay on the field to have any shot at realizing his potential. foles seems to have some good intangibles though and comes with a much better pedigree than any of those guys. you can talk about a winless team all you want, but tampa's defense is pretty good. they held brees and brady in check this year.
like i said before, i just don't like the combo of a rather weak arm with next to zero mobility. but his deep ball did look pretty good today. that 2nd td pass to djack was a thing of beauty. next week would be a big test for him...
and jammin--with all the rules changes that have been made over the last 10 years or so, most quarterback are more accurate in today's nfl than in year's past. this is the one sport where it's tough to compare different generations. montana's career completion % was 63% which is where foles is at so far this year.
aj feeley was in the league for 11 years. pretty good longevity for an average guy at best. does foles last 11 years?
agree foles' two long balls were things of beauty today.
wouldn't weak arm and no mobility lead you to label him as average in today's nfl? :?
i'm not trying to beat the guy down here just commenting on the already over the top talk about foles. if chip Kelly truly thought foles was the long term answer he would have been starting since day 1 this year.
but hey 1st place is good. it's exciting to have a big game next week. how much fun will it be to play and win that game the day before the two PJ shows?
in 11 years aj feeley started 18 games. in 6 of his 11 year career, you seem to be trumpeting for some reason, he didn't even take one snap. as a football fan, i cannot sit by and let someone compare nick foles to aj feeley, especially if you think nick foles can be an average quarterback. aj feeley was not even close to average. he was a 2nd or 3rd string quarterback. he was a bad starter. those types of guys hang around. i don't know if you remember matt cavanaough, but he was cunningham's backup qb in the 80's. career backup. lasted 13 years. started 19 games. aj feeley is matt fucking cavanaugh.
weak arm/no mobility leads me to believe his ceiling is that of an average to above average starting qb, yes. i said that last night. my only point, is you are comparing him to slop like bobby hoying. he's much better than hoying and feeley. i've noticed too many fans toss those guys names around these last few weeks and it's such a poor comparison.
i never thought flacco was much more than an above average qb and look what he did last year--not that i think that will happen here. but people need to give him a chance. people also need to put things into perspective. he's not bobby hoying or aj feeley...he's also not "the most accurate qb in eagles history."
time will tell what nick foles is. we don't know yet.
I'll take a tall smart accurate Qb. Not saying Foles is the 2nd coming,but he's produced when given a chance. Def has zero pass rush at all. Dez is gonna murder us next week sadly.
what does it matter that he's tall? i don't understand why people keep talking about his height.
How many time do you see Vick get the ball batted? Foles see's over the line better and can make throws Vick can't. That pass last week to Celek was a great example.
drew brees is the same height as vick, probably shorter.
it's not about how tall you are, it's about finding your lanes. there have been hundreds (thousands?) of qb's taller than vick who sucked.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,338
People are going over the top on Foles because Vick is so God damn frustrating to watch.
TD's are TD's and FG's are FG's
It took me a while to come up with the above facts.
vick played very well in the first 2 weeks. then looked bad against 2 teams who are a combined 12-0. he struggled against the giants in the first half (though he did have 80 yards on the ground)....but who is to say he would not have played much better in the 2nd half with the kind of field position that our defense suddenly generated for foles?
foles has played much better than expected. i'm hoping he gets the start against dallas. gotta want this kid to be good. but the reality is, vick didn't really lose the job. he wasn't playing terribly at all.
there are people who will always hate vick and will always love the backup. but we just have to keep things in perspective. they're both pretty good qb's with much different skill sets. neither are probably the long term solution, but foles has the leg up on that because of his age.
People are going over the top on Foles because Vick is so God damn frustrating to watch.
TD's are TD's and FG's are FG's
It took me a while to come up with the above facts.
vick played very well in the first 2 weeks. then looked bad against 2 teams who are a combined 12-0. he struggled against the giants in the first half (though he did have 80 yards on the ground)....but who is to say he would not have played much better in the 2nd half with the kind of field position that our defense suddenly generated for foles?
foles has played much better than expected. i'm hoping he gets the start against dallas. gotta want this kid to be good. but the reality is, vick didn't really lose the job. he wasn't playing terribly at all.
there are people who will always hate vick and will always love the backup. but we just have to keep things in perspective. they're both pretty good qb's with much different skill sets. neither are probably the long term solution, but foles has the leg up on that because of his age.
Denver's D isn't that great and there were plays to be made vs. KC. He missed a lot of open receivers v. SD.
Alright, alright, alright!
Tom O. "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,338
People are going over the top on Foles because Vick is so God damn frustrating to watch.
TD's are TD's and FG's are FG's
It took me a while to come up with the above facts.
vick played very well in the first 2 weeks. then looked bad against 2 teams who are a combined 12-0. he struggled against the giants in the first half (though he did have 80 yards on the ground)....but who is to say he would not have played much better in the 2nd half with the kind of field position that our defense suddenly generated for foles?
foles has played much better than expected. i'm hoping he gets the start against dallas. gotta want this kid to be good. but the reality is, vick didn't really lose the job. he wasn't playing terribly at all.
there are people who will always hate vick and will always love the backup. but we just have to keep things in perspective. they're both pretty good qb's with much different skill sets. neither are probably the long term solution, but foles has the leg up on that because of his age.
Denver's D isn't that great and there were plays to be made vs. KC. He missed a lot of open receivers v. SD.
well, kind of. they were only down 8 at halftime in denver before the defense started leaking like a sieve. special teams also gave up 2 returns. it would be tough on any qb to battle back against that, against that kind of team with a lead. plus if celek didn't drop that ball at the goaline...
he completed 64% of his passes against sd for a 123% rating. hard to play much better than that. eagles would have won that game if the defense would have forced more than one punt. plus kelly's play calling was really bad towards the end. he still left the field with the lead. that one is not on vick at all.
Vick missed too many early throws v. SD. They should have put more points earlier in that game.
do expect perfection? the offense scored 30 points! you should win when you score 30! mccoy should have had double the amount of carries he got...especially when they got the lead late. that would have iced it. instead chip went all andy reid on us.
to complain about how he played in that game is really nit picky man. plenty of things to complain about. his performance in week 2 is not one of them, in my opinion.
Vick missed too many early throws v. SD. They should have put more points earlier in that game.
do expect perfection? the offense scored 30 points! you should win when you score 30! mccoy should have had double the amount of carries he got...especially when they got the lead late. that would have iced it. instead chip went all andy reid on us.
to complain about how he played in that game is really nit picky man. plenty of things to complain about. his performance in week 2 is not one of them, in my opinion.
I'm not saying he played bad. I like him but I also know he has his faults. I just feel that Vick leaves too many plays on the field that can and should be made. Foles has only beaten one team in his short career. I not saying he's the answer but he may be the better more efficient option at this point, especially if Vick isn't 100%. Vick isn't worth playing if he can't run.
Alright, alright, alright!
Tom O. "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
it figures you are one of those people comparing him to people like hoying and feeley. feeley? really? why not throw jeff kemp into the mix? hoying was absolute garbage. he had one good game against the bengals in 1997. feeley rode the wave of an amazing defense as they won 4 games against some really shitty teams while mcnabb was hurt in 2002.
the kolb comparison is the only one that might work, even though i was never a fan. poor guy just couldn't stay on the field to have any shot at realizing his potential. foles seems to have some good intangibles though and comes with a much better pedigree than any of those guys. you can talk about a winless team all you want, but tampa's defense is pretty good. they held brees and brady in check this year.
like i said before, i just don't like the combo of a rather weak arm with next to zero mobility. but his deep ball did look pretty good today. that 2nd td pass to djack was a thing of beauty. next week would be a big test for him...
and jammin--with all the rules changes that have been made over the last 10 years or so, most quarterback are more accurate in today's nfl than in year's past. this is the one sport where it's tough to compare different generations. montana's career completion % was 63% which is where foles is at so far this year.
aj feeley was in the league for 11 years. pretty good longevity for an average guy at best. does foles last 11 years?
agree foles' two long balls were things of beauty today.
wouldn't weak arm and no mobility lead you to label him as average in today's nfl? :?
i'm not trying to beat the guy down here just commenting on the already over the top talk about foles. if chip Kelly truly thought foles was the long term answer he would have been starting since day 1 this year.
but hey 1st place is good. it's exciting to have a big game next week. how much fun will it be to play and win that game the day before the two PJ shows?
in 11 years aj feeley started 18 games. in 6 of his 11 year career, you seem to be trumpeting for some reason, he didn't even take one snap. as a football fan, i cannot sit by and let someone compare nick foles to aj feeley, especially if you think nick foles can be an average quarterback. aj feeley was not even close to average. he was a 2nd or 3rd string quarterback. he was a bad starter. those types of guys hang around. i don't know if you remember matt cavanaough, but he was cunningham's backup qb in the 80's. career backup. lasted 13 years. started 19 games. aj feeley is matt fucking cavanaugh.
weak arm/no mobility leads me to believe his ceiling is that of an average to above average starting qb, yes. i said that last night. my only point, is you are comparing him to slop like bobby hoying. he's much better than hoying and feeley. i've noticed too many fans toss those guys names around these last few weeks and it's such a poor comparison.
i never thought flacco was much more than an above average qb and look what he did last year--not that i think that will happen here. but people need to give him a chance. people also need to put things into perspective. he's not bobby hoying or aj feeley...he's also not "the most accurate qb in eagles history."
time will tell what nick foles is. we don't know yet.
my mentioning of hoying, feeley and kolb had more to do with the fan reactions (see my comment that the one guy was probably a fan of those 3) to those players than talent. if you remember after about 2 games there were hoying jerseys around this town. then kolb. foles is better than feeley but not by a whole lot. and i'll always respect feeley for bagging heather mitts. gotta give him some credit for that
and joe flacco was the 18th pick in the draft and has way more talent than nick foles. I was a flacco fan before last year's run.
Vick missed too many early throws v. SD. They should have put more points earlier in that game.
do expect perfection? the offense scored 30 points! you should win when you score 30! mccoy should have had double the amount of carries he got...especially when they got the lead late. that would have iced it. instead chip went all andy reid on us.
to complain about how he played in that game is really nit picky man. plenty of things to complain about. his performance in week 2 is not one of them, in my opinion.
I'm not saying he played bad. I like him but I also know he has his faults. I just feel that Vick leaves too many plays on the field that can and should be made. Foles has only beaten one team in his short career. I not saying he's the answer but he may be the better more efficient option at this point, especially if Vick isn't 100%. Vick isn't worth playing if he can't run.
foles is a more accurate passer but defenses have to defend vick more. when vick is in the game defenses have to prepare for 3 big play guys in McCoy, Jackson and Vick. big plays win the nfl. vick is a bigger threat and thus better for this offense.
again if Chip Kelly thought Foles was the answer he would have never had vick back.
what does it matter that he's tall? i don't understand why people keep talking about his height.[/quote]
How many time do you see Vick get the ball batted? Foles see's over the line better and can make throws Vick can't. That pass last week to Celek was a great example.[/quote]
drew brees is the same height as vick, probably shorter.
it's not about how tall you are, it's about finding your lanes. there have been hundreds (thousands?) of qb's taller than vick who sucked.[/quote] Vick's side arm motion has him slinging the ball. When you sling the ball it comes out at a lower angle. So besides being short he throws the ball oddly as well. He was prob never shown the correct way to play. As all most coaches saw was how fast and explosive he was.
foles is a more accurate passer but defenses have to defend vick more. when vick is in the game defenses have to prepare for 3 big play guys in McCoy, Jackson and Vick. big plays win the nfl. vick is a bigger threat and thus better for this offense.
again if Chip Kelly thought Foles was the answer he would have never had vick back.
I know Vick is capable of big plays but he actually has to throw the ball more often to accomplish them rather than running. Big plays should mean more TD's but.......
Vick, 4.5 quarters as QB 4 TD passes
Foles, 1.5 quarters as QB 5 TD passes
Alright, alright, alright!
Tom O. "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,338
foles is a more accurate passer but defenses have to defend vick more. when vick is in the game defenses have to prepare for 3 big play guys in McCoy, Jackson and Vick. big plays win the nfl. vick is a bigger threat and thus better for this offense.
again if Chip Kelly thought Foles was the answer he would have never had vick back.
I know Vick is capable of big plays but he actually has to throw the ball more often to accomplish them rather than running. Big plays should mean more TD's but.......
Vick, 4.5 quarters as QB 4 TD passes
Foles, 1.5 quarters as QB 5 TD passes
what do you mean by this? 4.5 quarters as a qb for vick, 4 td's? 1.5 quarters for foles? :?
is 4.5 quarters a game and a half? i'm missing something here...
foles is a more accurate passer but defenses have to defend vick more. when vick is in the game defenses have to prepare for 3 big play guys in McCoy, Jackson and Vick. big plays win the nfl. vick is a bigger threat and thus better for this offense.
again if Chip Kelly thought Foles was the answer he would have never had vick back.
I know Vick is capable of big plays but he actually has to throw the ball more often to accomplish them rather than running. Big plays should mean more TD's but.......
Vick, 4.5 quarters as QB 4 TD passes
Foles, 1.5 quarters as QB 5 TD passes
what do you mean by this? 4.5 quarters as a qb for vick, 4 td's? 1.5 quarters for foles? :?
is 4.5 quarters a game and a half? i'm missing something here...
C'mon, you're supposed to read my mind. It's games not quarters. My bad. I'll stop drinking during work from now on.
Alright, alright, alright!
Tom O. "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
Here's more. I know it's a small sample size for Foles but points are points.
From Rueben Frank
More red-zone drives, more red-zone points, and the biggest statistical disparity between Michael Vick and Nick Foles grew even bigger on Sunday in Tampa.
Foles generated two touchdowns and a field goal in three trips inside the red zone Sunday, when the Eagles beat the Buccaneers 31-20 in Foles’ first start of the year and first ever under rookie head coach Chip Kelly.
The Eagles have now converted four of seven trips inside the red zone into touchdowns in about the equivalent of 1½ games with Foles at quarterback.
That’s 57 percent of red-zone trips that have resulted in touchdowns.
Before he got hurt, Vick put up touchdowns in five of 14 trips inside the 20.
That’s 36 percent.
Kelly hasn’t said who will start at quarterback once Vick is fully recovered from the hamstring pull he suffered last weekend against the Giants.
But in limited action so far, Foles’ red-zone numbers are dramatically better than Vick’s.
Foles has thrown just nine passes inside the red zone so far this year, but look at the production: 5 for 9 for 37 yards, with three touchdowns along with a rushing TD.
That’s a 105.1 passer rating.
Vick’s red-zone numbers: 5 for 19 for 38 yards, with one touchdown and no interceptions.
That’s a 57.1 passer rating.
Vick has two red-zone rushing TDs, and Foles has one. But Foles so far this season somehow has a higher rushing average inside the 20 (3.5) than Vick (3.0).
Since joining the Eagles in 2009, Vick has 57 red-zone carries, with a 4.1 average, 15 touchdowns and seven fumbles.
Foles is 6 for 23 rushing with two touchdowns, including a four-yarder Sunday. That’s a 3.8 average.
Bottom line is points.
And so far this year Foles is averaging 30 percent more points per red-zone drive than Vick.
Vick’s 14 red-zone drives have produced five touchdowns and seven field goals, or 56 points. That’s a touchdown 36 percent of the time and an average of 4.0 points per red-zone drive.
Foles’ six red-zone drives have produced four touchdowns -- just one fewer than Vick in fewer than half as many chances -- and two field goals, or 34 points. That’s a touchdown 67 percent of the time and an average of 5.7 points per red-zone drive.
Of 40 quarterbacks who’ve started at least one game this year, Foles ranks 10th in red-zone passer rating (105.1), and Vick ranks 35th (57.1).
In the same group, Foles is 15th in completion percentage and Vick is 38th.
One interesting difference between Vick and Foles in the red zone is DeSean Jackson’s involvement in the offense at the goal line the last couple weeks.
In past years, Jackson was rarely a factor close to the end zone.
Jackson has two career TDs of 15 yards or less from Vick -- a nine-yarder vs. the Colts in 2010 and a six-yarder against the Rams on opening day 2011.
But in 1½ games with Foles, he’s caught two more. They were his first touchdown catches inside the 15 in his last 30 games and only the fifth and sixth of his career.
Jackson has always been one of the NFL’s best deep threats. But the Eagles’ new-found red-zone efficiency has really expanded his game, and if he can continue to be a factor in the short game, it just makes the Eagles’ offense even more dangerous.
“I haven't looked at whatever they did with him in the past,” Kelly said. “He's a real good route runner, and he's a tough matchup down there.”
As for Foles, he’s always made red-zone efficiency and production a priority.
Even last year as a rookie, Foles was sound in the red zone, with four TDs, no interceptions and an 89.1 passer rating. Vick had nine TDs, two interceptions and a 75.8 rating in 2012.
Including fumbles and interceptions, Vick has six red-zone turnovers over the last two years. Foles has never turned the ball over inside the 20 via fumble or INT.
“It’s tremendously important to be sharp in the red zone,” Foles said. “You really want to get those points. You don’t want to come away with field goals.
“I think the big thing is preparation. You see what they’re going to do, and you have to take advantage of it. You’ve got to be on time, you’ve got to be sharp with your throws.
“Precision. Accuracy. And you can’t hold onto the ball too long, because that’s when bad things happen down there, because everything’s faster.
“So that all goes with preparation and everybody being on the same page and the line doing a great job blocking. They did (Sunday), and we were able to do great things in the red zone.”
Alright, alright, alright!
Tom O. "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
Here's more. I know it's a small sample size for Foles but points are points.
From Rueben Frank
More red-zone drives, more red-zone points, and the biggest statistical disparity between Michael Vick and Nick Foles grew even bigger on Sunday in Tampa.
Foles generated two touchdowns and a field goal in three trips inside the red zone Sunday, when the Eagles beat the Buccaneers 31-20 in Foles’ first start of the year and first ever under rookie head coach Chip Kelly.
The Eagles have now converted four of seven trips inside the red zone into touchdowns in about the equivalent of 1½ games with Foles at quarterback.
That’s 57 percent of red-zone trips that have resulted in touchdowns.
Before he got hurt, Vick put up touchdowns in five of 14 trips inside the 20.
That’s 36 percent.
Kelly hasn’t said who will start at quarterback once Vick is fully recovered from the hamstring pull he suffered last weekend against the Giants.
But in limited action so far, Foles’ red-zone numbers are dramatically better than Vick’s.
Foles has thrown just nine passes inside the red zone so far this year, but look at the production: 5 for 9 for 37 yards, with three touchdowns along with a rushing TD.
That’s a 105.1 passer rating.
Vick’s red-zone numbers: 5 for 19 for 38 yards, with one touchdown and no interceptions.
That’s a 57.1 passer rating.
Vick has two red-zone rushing TDs, and Foles has one. But Foles so far this season somehow has a higher rushing average inside the 20 (3.5) than Vick (3.0).
Since joining the Eagles in 2009, Vick has 57 red-zone carries, with a 4.1 average, 15 touchdowns and seven fumbles.
Foles is 6 for 23 rushing with two touchdowns, including a four-yarder Sunday. That’s a 3.8 average.
Bottom line is points.
And so far this year Foles is averaging 30 percent more points per red-zone drive than Vick.
Vick’s 14 red-zone drives have produced five touchdowns and seven field goals, or 56 points. That’s a touchdown 36 percent of the time and an average of 4.0 points per red-zone drive.
Foles’ six red-zone drives have produced four touchdowns -- just one fewer than Vick in fewer than half as many chances -- and two field goals, or 34 points. That’s a touchdown 67 percent of the time and an average of 5.7 points per red-zone drive.
Of 40 quarterbacks who’ve started at least one game this year, Foles ranks 10th in red-zone passer rating (105.1), and Vick ranks 35th (57.1).
In the same group, Foles is 15th in completion percentage and Vick is 38th.
One interesting difference between Vick and Foles in the red zone is DeSean Jackson’s involvement in the offense at the goal line the last couple weeks.
In past years, Jackson was rarely a factor close to the end zone.
Jackson has two career TDs of 15 yards or less from Vick -- a nine-yarder vs. the Colts in 2010 and a six-yarder against the Rams on opening day 2011.
But in 1½ games with Foles, he’s caught two more. They were his first touchdown catches inside the 15 in his last 30 games and only the fifth and sixth of his career.
Jackson has always been one of the NFL’s best deep threats. But the Eagles’ new-found red-zone efficiency has really expanded his game, and if he can continue to be a factor in the short game, it just makes the Eagles’ offense even more dangerous.
“I haven't looked at whatever they did with him in the past,” Kelly said. “He's a real good route runner, and he's a tough matchup down there.”
As for Foles, he’s always made red-zone efficiency and production a priority.
Even last year as a rookie, Foles was sound in the red zone, with four TDs, no interceptions and an 89.1 passer rating. Vick had nine TDs, two interceptions and a 75.8 rating in 2012.
Including fumbles and interceptions, Vick has six red-zone turnovers over the last two years. Foles has never turned the ball over inside the 20 via fumble or INT.
“It’s tremendously important to be sharp in the red zone,” Foles said. “You really want to get those points. You don’t want to come away with field goals.
“I think the big thing is preparation. You see what they’re going to do, and you have to take advantage of it. You’ve got to be on time, you’ve got to be sharp with your throws.
“Precision. Accuracy. And you can’t hold onto the ball too long, because that’s when bad things happen down there, because everything’s faster.
“So that all goes with preparation and everybody being on the same page and the line doing a great job blocking. They did (Sunday), and we were able to do great things in the red zone.”
i'm all for starting foles this week to see how he does in a big spot. i just want to temper the enthusiasm until we see it continue on a weekly basis. you're right, this is an incredibly small sample size.
that said, if he beats the cowboys this week, this town will go nuts for him.
i'm all for starting foles this week to see how he does in a big spot. i just want to temper the enthusiasm until we see it continue on a weekly basis. you're right, this is an incredibly small sample size.
that said, if he beats the cowboys this week, this town will go nuts for him.
I'm enthused for 2 reasons, winning and TDs over FGs. I don't care who the QB is if those keep happening.
Alright, alright, alright!
Tom O. "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
Comments
let me guess you liked bobby hoying, aj feeley and kevin kolb too. :fp:
foles was great today. no bad decisions at all. need to beat a winless team and he did. good for him and the team. want to impress me lead a team to the playoffs. anyone can look good (see names above) every once in a while. better than average QBs can do it for full seasons. I stand by my comment that foles is a pretty average NFL QB.
:lolno:
8/28/98- Camden, NJ
10/31/09- Philly
5/21/10- NYC
9/2/12- Philly, PA
7/19/13- Wrigley
10/19/13- Brooklyn, NY
10/21/13- Philly, PA
10/22/13- Philly, PA
10/27/13- Baltimore, MD
Tres Mts.- 3/23/11- Philly
Eddie Vedder- 6/25/11- Philly
it figures you are one of those people comparing him to people like hoying and feeley. feeley? really? why not throw jeff kemp into the mix?
the kolb comparison is the only one that might work, even though i was never a fan. poor guy just couldn't stay on the field to have any shot at realizing his potential. foles seems to have some good intangibles though and comes with a much better pedigree than any of those guys. you can talk about a winless team all you want, but tampa's defense is pretty good. they held brees and brady in check this year.
like i said before, i just don't like the combo of a rather weak arm with next to zero mobility. but his deep ball did look pretty good today. that 2nd td pass to djack was a thing of beauty. next week would be a big test for him...
and jammin--with all the rules changes that have been made over the last 10 years or so, most quarterback are more accurate in today's nfl than in year's past. this is the one sport where it's tough to compare different generations. montana's career completion % was 63% which is where foles is at so far this year.
what does it matter that he's tall? i don't understand why people keep talking about his height.
aj feeley was in the league for 11 years. pretty good longevity for an average guy at best. does foles last 11 years?
agree foles' two long balls were things of beauty today.
wouldn't weak arm and no mobility lead you to label him as average in today's nfl? :?
i'm not trying to beat the guy down here just commenting on the already over the top talk about foles. if chip Kelly truly thought foles was the long term answer he would have been starting since day 1 this year.
but hey 1st place is good. it's exciting to have a big game next week. how much fun will it be to play and win that game the day before the two PJ shows?
Foles, 1.5 quarters as QB 5 TD passes
New Orleans only put up 23 points v. TB
I just saw this as well, I guess it doesn't mean much if you not scoring TD's. Cough, cough, Vick, cough, cough
Eagles are 1st team in NFL history to net 425+ yards in each of their first 6 games. 1998 49ers, 2000 Rams, 2011 Saints did it 5 of 6 games.
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
in 11 years aj feeley started 18 games. in 6 of his 11 year career, you seem to be trumpeting for some reason, he didn't even take one snap. as a football fan, i cannot sit by and let someone compare nick foles to aj feeley, especially if you think nick foles can be an average quarterback. aj feeley was not even close to average. he was a 2nd or 3rd string quarterback. he was a bad starter. those types of guys hang around. i don't know if you remember matt cavanaough, but he was cunningham's backup qb in the 80's. career backup. lasted 13 years. started 19 games. aj feeley is matt fucking cavanaugh.
weak arm/no mobility leads me to believe his ceiling is that of an average to above average starting qb, yes. i said that last night. my only point, is you are comparing him to slop like bobby hoying. he's much better than hoying and feeley. i've noticed too many fans toss those guys names around these last few weeks and it's such a poor comparison.
i never thought flacco was much more than an above average qb and look what he did last year--not that i think that will happen here. but people need to give him a chance. people also need to put things into perspective. he's not bobby hoying or aj feeley...he's also not "the most accurate qb in eagles history."
time will tell what nick foles is. we don't know yet.
TD's are TD's and FG's are FG's
It took me a while to come up with the above facts.
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
drew brees is the same height as vick, probably shorter.
it's not about how tall you are, it's about finding your lanes. there have been hundreds (thousands?) of qb's taller than vick who sucked.
vick played very well in the first 2 weeks. then looked bad against 2 teams who are a combined 12-0. he struggled against the giants in the first half (though he did have 80 yards on the ground)....but who is to say he would not have played much better in the 2nd half with the kind of field position that our defense suddenly generated for foles?
foles has played much better than expected. i'm hoping he gets the start against dallas. gotta want this kid to be good. but the reality is, vick didn't really lose the job. he wasn't playing terribly at all.
there are people who will always hate vick and will always love the backup. but we just have to keep things in perspective. they're both pretty good qb's with much different skill sets. neither are probably the long term solution, but foles has the leg up on that because of his age.
Denver's D isn't that great and there were plays to be made vs. KC. He missed a lot of open receivers v. SD.
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
well, kind of. they were only down 8 at halftime in denver before the defense started leaking like a sieve. special teams also gave up 2 returns. it would be tough on any qb to battle back against that, against that kind of team with a lead. plus if celek didn't drop that ball at the goaline...
he completed 64% of his passes against sd for a 123% rating. hard to play much better than that. eagles would have won that game if the defense would have forced more than one punt. plus kelly's play calling was really bad towards the end. he still left the field with the lead. that one is not on vick at all.
they should be 4-2 at this point.
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
do expect perfection? the offense scored 30 points! you should win when you score 30! mccoy should have had double the amount of carries he got...especially when they got the lead late. that would have iced it. instead chip went all andy reid on us.
to complain about how he played in that game is really nit picky man. plenty of things to complain about. his performance in week 2 is not one of them, in my opinion.
I'm not saying he played bad. I like him but I also know he has his faults. I just feel that Vick leaves too many plays on the field that can and should be made. Foles has only beaten one team in his short career. I not saying he's the answer but he may be the better more efficient option at this point, especially if Vick isn't 100%. Vick isn't worth playing if he can't run.
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
my mentioning of hoying, feeley and kolb had more to do with the fan reactions (see my comment that the one guy was probably a fan of those 3) to those players than talent. if you remember after about 2 games there were hoying jerseys around this town. then kolb. foles is better than feeley but not by a whole lot. and i'll always respect feeley for bagging heather mitts. gotta give him some credit for that
and joe flacco was the 18th pick in the draft and has way more talent than nick foles. I was a flacco fan before last year's run.
foles is a more accurate passer but defenses have to defend vick more. when vick is in the game defenses have to prepare for 3 big play guys in McCoy, Jackson and Vick. big plays win the nfl. vick is a bigger threat and thus better for this offense.
again if Chip Kelly thought Foles was the answer he would have never had vick back.
How many time do you see Vick get the ball batted? Foles see's over the line better and can make throws Vick can't. That pass last week to Celek was a great example.[/quote]
drew brees is the same height as vick, probably shorter.
it's not about how tall you are, it's about finding your lanes. there have been hundreds (thousands?) of qb's taller than vick who sucked.[/quote]
Vick's side arm motion has him slinging the ball. When you sling the ball it comes out at a lower angle. So besides being short he throws the ball oddly as well. He was prob never shown the correct way to play. As all most coaches saw was how fast and explosive he was.
I know Vick is capable of big plays but he actually has to throw the ball more often to accomplish them rather than running. Big plays should mean more TD's but.......
Vick, 4.5 quarters as QB 4 TD passes
Foles, 1.5 quarters as QB 5 TD passes
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
what do you mean by this? 4.5 quarters as a qb for vick, 4 td's? 1.5 quarters for foles? :?
is 4.5 quarters a game and a half? i'm missing something here...
C'mon, you're supposed to read my mind. It's games not quarters. My bad. I'll stop drinking during work from now on.
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
From Rueben Frank
More red-zone drives, more red-zone points, and the biggest statistical disparity between Michael Vick and Nick Foles grew even bigger on Sunday in Tampa.
Foles generated two touchdowns and a field goal in three trips inside the red zone Sunday, when the Eagles beat the Buccaneers 31-20 in Foles’ first start of the year and first ever under rookie head coach Chip Kelly.
The Eagles have now converted four of seven trips inside the red zone into touchdowns in about the equivalent of 1½ games with Foles at quarterback.
That’s 57 percent of red-zone trips that have resulted in touchdowns.
Before he got hurt, Vick put up touchdowns in five of 14 trips inside the 20.
That’s 36 percent.
Kelly hasn’t said who will start at quarterback once Vick is fully recovered from the hamstring pull he suffered last weekend against the Giants.
But in limited action so far, Foles’ red-zone numbers are dramatically better than Vick’s.
Foles has thrown just nine passes inside the red zone so far this year, but look at the production: 5 for 9 for 37 yards, with three touchdowns along with a rushing TD.
That’s a 105.1 passer rating.
Vick’s red-zone numbers: 5 for 19 for 38 yards, with one touchdown and no interceptions.
That’s a 57.1 passer rating.
Vick has two red-zone rushing TDs, and Foles has one. But Foles so far this season somehow has a higher rushing average inside the 20 (3.5) than Vick (3.0).
Since joining the Eagles in 2009, Vick has 57 red-zone carries, with a 4.1 average, 15 touchdowns and seven fumbles.
Foles is 6 for 23 rushing with two touchdowns, including a four-yarder Sunday. That’s a 3.8 average.
Bottom line is points.
And so far this year Foles is averaging 30 percent more points per red-zone drive than Vick.
Vick’s 14 red-zone drives have produced five touchdowns and seven field goals, or 56 points. That’s a touchdown 36 percent of the time and an average of 4.0 points per red-zone drive.
Foles’ six red-zone drives have produced four touchdowns -- just one fewer than Vick in fewer than half as many chances -- and two field goals, or 34 points. That’s a touchdown 67 percent of the time and an average of 5.7 points per red-zone drive.
Of 40 quarterbacks who’ve started at least one game this year, Foles ranks 10th in red-zone passer rating (105.1), and Vick ranks 35th (57.1).
In the same group, Foles is 15th in completion percentage and Vick is 38th.
One interesting difference between Vick and Foles in the red zone is DeSean Jackson’s involvement in the offense at the goal line the last couple weeks.
In past years, Jackson was rarely a factor close to the end zone.
Jackson has two career TDs of 15 yards or less from Vick -- a nine-yarder vs. the Colts in 2010 and a six-yarder against the Rams on opening day 2011.
But in 1½ games with Foles, he’s caught two more. They were his first touchdown catches inside the 15 in his last 30 games and only the fifth and sixth of his career.
Jackson has always been one of the NFL’s best deep threats. But the Eagles’ new-found red-zone efficiency has really expanded his game, and if he can continue to be a factor in the short game, it just makes the Eagles’ offense even more dangerous.
“I haven't looked at whatever they did with him in the past,” Kelly said. “He's a real good route runner, and he's a tough matchup down there.”
As for Foles, he’s always made red-zone efficiency and production a priority.
Even last year as a rookie, Foles was sound in the red zone, with four TDs, no interceptions and an 89.1 passer rating. Vick had nine TDs, two interceptions and a 75.8 rating in 2012.
Including fumbles and interceptions, Vick has six red-zone turnovers over the last two years. Foles has never turned the ball over inside the 20 via fumble or INT.
“It’s tremendously important to be sharp in the red zone,” Foles said. “You really want to get those points. You don’t want to come away with field goals.
“I think the big thing is preparation. You see what they’re going to do, and you have to take advantage of it. You’ve got to be on time, you’ve got to be sharp with your throws.
“Precision. Accuracy. And you can’t hold onto the ball too long, because that’s when bad things happen down there, because everything’s faster.
“So that all goes with preparation and everybody being on the same page and the line doing a great job blocking. They did (Sunday), and we were able to do great things in the red zone.”
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
i'm all for starting foles this week to see how he does in a big spot. i just want to temper the enthusiasm until we see it continue on a weekly basis. you're right, this is an incredibly small sample size.
that said, if he beats the cowboys this week, this town will go nuts for him.
I'm enthused for 2 reasons, winning and TDs over FGs. I don't care who the QB is if those keep happening.
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer