Rob's House Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 It's funny how we hate our own players yet make excuses for others. Bradford has a 6.29 ypa. Captain Checkdown has a 6.5 ypa. Bradford has a QB rating of 79.3 for his career. EJ, who has played 14 games, has a 78.5. In "breakout" season, Bradford has a QBR of 48. He beat bad teams and put up numbers in garbage time. http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/13197/sam-bradford I think Bradford is a very average NFL Qb who is hyped up more because of his draft status. Given his injury history and probable price tag, he is a giant risk. And again, teams don't trade guys they can believe be a franchise QB. Is that true? Has EJ really played 14 games?
John from Riverside Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 I think we need to take a flier on one of these young veteran QB's and hope for the best........ There frankly is just not a top 5 QB gonna fall into our lap this year
Deranged Rhino Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 So here we are back to square one: you really think that Manuel will ever achieve the level of play that Foles has displayed the last couple years? I will bet you anything he doesn't. I think if Manuel ever plays up to the potential of his skill set (which is impressive from any objective measurable perspective), he's a far better QB than Foles. The likelihood of that happening though is probably slim at this point. Even so, I just don't think Foles will match his numbers from '13 again in his career, especially if it's outside of Kelly's system, I think he's shown his ceiling already. But I understand that you disagree there. It's possible I'm completely wrong. He is very young and I'm not much of a physic.
GunnerBill Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 I am not a massive Foles fan either and think Bradfird is the better option. Foles play in 2014 was pretty terrible for the most part before injury. I think when his career ends that 2013 year will be the outlier in his stats. Regardless, I would be happy at the right cost for the Bill to take a shot at either. The Foles to the Rams thing..... could this be a way of Chip stocking his picks to get up for Mariota? Would St Louis give up a 1st for Foles? If they would then you would think Chip could package #10 and #20 to try and move up.... but given that there are two QB needy teams at #1 and #2 and there are only two guys generally seen in this draft as potential franchise guys would those two picks and a later ound pick get Philly there? Or would they need to give up next year's first as well? And what if the best St Louis will give up is a 2nd.... Would this year's 1st, two 2nds, next year's 1st and 3rd get the job done? It is certainly intruiging. I am starting to believe Kelly wants to find a way to land Mariota, maybe the Bills could be the beneficiary of whichever one of Foles or Bradford shakes loose?
maddenboy Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 If, as you point out, "there are two QB needy teams at #1 and #2," then maybe Foles to anywhere is just smoke. Smoke designed to raise Foles' value. Because Kelly has to trade Foles (or Sanchize) + stuff to either the team at #1 or the team at #2.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 I really dont think the eagles get rid of him. They may kick the tires but unless they get a first i doubt they move him And this, folks, is the bottom line. Every team in the league needs a great QB and a good, servicable backup. Even if the Iggles have plans to go out and draft someone they think has potential of greatness ( and that's a big "if", Kelly may covet Mariota but he'd have to give up a bundle to get him), they will need to keep a proven good QB as a backup. Release Foles and sign Sanchez? Why would they unless his shoulder recovery isn't going well? Foles is signed, and he's cheap. Why not keep him unless you are offered something really really juicy in exchange - a potential game changing player like Dareus, say.
YoloinOhio Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 I think he just got hurt again tooBut I was told we have the black Jake Locker already. This would be the ebony and ivory of QBs.
Rob's House Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 (edited) Has anyone considered that Mariota might not be the first pick? He's got question marks. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Leonard Williams went first overall. Is that true? Has EJ really played 14 games?Can anyone confirm this?But I was told we have the black Jake Locker already. This would be the ebony and ivory of QBs. We could call our QB situation "The Two Jakes." Edited January 27, 2015 by Rob's House
Dorkington Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 EJ's technically played 15 games. 14 games where he started at QB, and one game where he took the team to victory formation, so didn't acquire any stats.
RealityCheck Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 I think that that any QB the Bills get, you will have a dog with fleas. The question will be this, what does this player do well that our team lacks most?What needs to be coached up, that is most easily mitigated by success in the run game? From that perspective, and I can't believe I am saying this, but I think Sanchez is the ideal stop-gap until the Bills find someone better. Sanchez has healthy knees, some mobility, and is accurate. His incompletions and picks are more a function of what is going on between the ears, not so much technical inaccuracy. If he is supported by the run game and gets protection on PA, he is pretty effective. Of course, if he is forced into passing a lot or the run game is mitigated, he tends to then fall into the hands of the opponents secondary, as he has much to still learn when it comes to defense. He is a dog with fleas, but I think he could provide short term wins. I think that Sanchez also represents a decent archetype for EJ to compete against in the Summer. I still can't believe I just typed this...
Rob's House Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 EJ's technically played 15 games. 14 games where he started at QB, and one game where he took the team to victory formation, so didn't acquire any stats. Thanks. I was just curious because I'd never heard he'd played 14 games. It's news to me.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 I think that that any QB the Bills get, you will have a dog with fleas. The question will be this, what does this player do well that our team lacks most?What needs to be coached up, that is most easily mitigated by success in the run game? From that perspective, and I can't believe I am saying this, but I think Sanchez is the ideal stop-gap until the Bills find someone better. Sanchez has healthy knees, some mobility, and is accurate. His incompletions and picks are more a function of what is going on between the ears, not so much technical inaccuracy. If he is supported by the run game and gets protection on PA, he is pretty effective. Of course, if he is forced into passing a lot or the run game is mitigated, he tends to then fall into the hands of the opponents secondary, as he has much to still learn when it comes to defense. He is a dog with fleas, but I think he could provide short term wins. I think that Sanchez also represents a decent archetype for EJ to compete against in the Summer. I still can't believe I just typed this... This is almost exactly how I feel about Hoyer. Some will point out arm strength, but if you look at Sammy's most successful plays at Clemson they were screens and quick slants where Sammy got it quick in space and did the rest himself.
RealityCheck Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 This is almost exactly how I feel about Hoyer. Some will point out arm strength, but if you look at Sammy's most successful plays at Clemson they were screens and quick slants where Sammy got it quick in space and did the rest himself. The problem with that is you can't coach up the deep ball if the guy doesn't have the arm. You need deep ball ability or you get the Fitz affect. Defenses just put 8 in the box, creep up week after week, until they clog the screen game and the running game, and leave you only with the harder to make deeper throws. Why consciously chose to lose games in such a manner. Weak arms are for 3rd stringers.
C.Biscuit97 Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 This is almost exactly how I feel about Hoyer. Some will point out arm strength, but if you look at Sammy's most successful plays at Clemson they were screens and quick slants where Sammy got it quick in space and did the rest himself. Yet, Marrone and Hackett never called those plays for Watkins. So dumb.
thebandit27 Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 Yet, Marrone and Hackett never called those plays for Watkins. So dumb. No, they'd rather call a quick screen to Chris Hogan and have Watkins block...and people wonder why he didn't produce more than he did.
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 No, they'd rather call a quick screen to Chris Hogan and have Watkins block...and people wonder why he didn't produce more than he did. I always thought Sammy reminded me of a Running Back who can play WR. Even his size, 6-1, 210 lbs fits the profile. He has to be a nightmare to tackle on a bubble screen by DBs who are being blocked. It was one of the great mysteries of last seasons playcalling fiasco. My guess is when he hurt his ribs early on they didn't want to use it and lost track of it. Inexcusable.
eball Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 I always thought Sammy reminded me of a Running Back who can play WR. Even his size, 6-1, 210 lbs fits the profile. He has to be a nightmare to tackle on a bubble screen by DBs who are being blocked. It was one of the great mysteries of last seasons playcalling fiasco. My guess is when he hurt his ribs early on they didn't want to use it and lost track of it. Inexcusable. ...Marrone felt a need to teach him a lesson in the next preseason game.
GunnerBill Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 Release Foles and sign Sanchez? Why would they unless his shoulder recovery isn't going well? Foles is signed, and he's cheap. Why not keep him unless you are offered something really really juicy in exchange - a potential game changing player like Dareus, say. Because if they want to get up for Mariota they need ammunition. Sanchez is a UFA and has no value beyond a late round pick even if you try and sign him and trade him. If you can get someone to part with a 1st or (more likely) a 2nd for Foles then you can use that in your bundle to get up the board.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 The problem with that is you can't coach up the deep ball if the guy doesn't have the arm. You need deep ball ability or you get the Fitz affect. Defenses just put 8 in the box, creep up week after week, until they clog the screen game and the running game, and leave you only with the harder to make deeper throws. Why consciously chose to lose games in such a manner. Weak arms are for 3rd stringers. I get what you're saying, and I don't disagree necessarily. I just feel like this Free Agent pool offers guys who can throw the deep ball OR guys who are consistent on short and intermediate routes, and with our biggest weapon being capable of making plays after the catch I'm leaning towards the latter personally. Either way I'm excited to see how our new ownership takes on their first offseason, and it looks to be an exciting one.
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 ...Marrone felt a need to teach him a lesson in the next preseason game. LOL. Yeah what a jerk he ended up being.
Recommended Posts