I'm not sold on Foles as a franchise guy. That system is just so passer friendly and they have an abundance of offensive talent.
Lol Brady plays in a system, he's not a franchise quarterback? Walsh called Montana a system quarterback, he's not a franchise quarterback either? Let me ask this, are you sold that Tannehill is a franchise quarterback? If so then lol...
You're assuming I said he sucks. I never said that. I said I'm not sold, that implies a turn in any direction for him wouldn't surprise me. I know you're very down on Tannehill so I'm not even having that discussion. I believe every situation has context that helps define the outcome. If you belirve they have the same situation and equal footing....then LOL to you too.
IMO, Foles has better pocket presence too. There are plays where it looks like he is engulfed by rushers and certain to get sacked, and he makes a slight adjustment one way or the other and gets the pass off with accuracy. Foles was a very good All-District basketball player in high school and while not straight line fast, has some agility and short area quickness. He also has some of the biggest hands of any NFL QB. 10 5/8" across. Tannehill by comparison has a 9" hand measurement.
Ryan Tannehill is not a franchise quarterback...not yet at least. He's an inconsistent average quarterback at this point in time.
So no one is ever open for the Dolphins? Tannehill is always throwing into tight windows? Or does it look like Foles has bigger windows because he makes the right decisions on where to go with the ball?
With the absence of a "Too early to tell" option, I chose about the same. Eagles since Andy Reid and now with Chip Kelly have a system that is so friendly to passers. I tend to agree with those who say Tannehill would excel just as much if not more than Foles in that system with that talent.
For red zone target I would take cooper but as overall wr give me hartline. Jackson is no doubt shifter but Wallace is the fastest wr in the league and opens up the offence more.We would all love Wallace if we had a better offensive line and qb that can hit the deepball.
Tannehill def needs work on his pocket mobility but he improved a lot, even during the course if the season. If he continues to improve he will be OK there. Overall I agree with Raf. Different systems and different responsibilities. It's not really fair to compare them.
Hard to say. Probably too early to tell. But Nick Foles doesn't have Mike Sherman, Joe Philbin and Teflon Jeff weighing him down.
I agree, either way we will find out sooner than later. You can't really behind behind a system in the NFL. The talent is too evenly divided and the coaches are too smart. Kelly May have caught people off guard, like RG3 and CKap did last year but teams adjust very quickly. If Foles isn't the real deal he will get exposed.
I don't know, its possible but Foles put up numbers that were worthy of MVP talk, it isn't like he was OK on a great offensive team, he was great on a great offensive team. I don't know if there are any Qbs other than Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Brees that would have put up much better numbers. I do think Tannehill would have had a great season on that team no doubt about it but if he actually put up bigger numbers he would have been in the talk for league MVP and in the talk of being elite, like top 3. I don't know about that. Its interesting to think about though and I'm not saying you're crazy for thinking it.
I would too. And their TE's Ertz and Celek are strong too. Obviously their running game is lightyears ahead of ours. Lets face it, its hard to have this discussion because the talent on the offensive side for Philly is maybe the best in the entire league and ours is Hartline/Wallace and a bad oline and backup quality Rbs. Thanks Ireland, thanks. What it really shows is that the Eagles have a quality front office and draft well.....and we don't.
Come on eveyrone... lets be serious here, and lets be honest. Philly is more talented at every position in their offense when compared to ours. Just look at it... OL - Philly by a mile RB - Philly by a mile WR - Philly TE - Philly It's impossible to compare. It's insane to sit here as some have and say Tannehill wouldn't have put up better numbers with that unit over the one he actually worked with all year. You can't compare them, unless they played for the same system, with the same surrounding players. Any comparison's anyone is making, is based upon their own biased opinions of the situation, good or bad. This exercise is completely pointless.
If you review the game film of Philly and Miami games the difference is stark. Foles simply doesn't have to make the tough throws into small windows that RT does. He also rarely has to go through the progressions that RT does and make decisions. He's not going to the line and reading the defense like a Manning or Brady does. He's usually just throwing to his first read who is wide open. And these aren't b/c Philly WRs are beating coverage on their own. A very large percentage of the time the scheme just creates large openings.
GOOD QB have comp% over 37% in 20+ yards. Aaron Rodgers is a ridiculous 50% over 20 and Nick Foles is 43% over 20. Those are both superhuman numbers and most normal QB don't have that kind of accuracy deep. But less than 37% (according to SBNFL) is average and suggest the QB needs to work on a skill set to make him a more accurate passer. Ryan Tannehill has to get better in offseason, his completion % over 20 yards is 25%. But even after saying all that, a guy by the name of Tom Brady has been a historically bad at throwing the deep ball. But if you win 3 superbowls in 6 years, people seem to let things like deep ball accuracy go.
That's not true. Foles is excellent at reading the coverage at the line. That is his biggest strength because he is turtle slow and has no mobility. He has a quick release and is excellent at making reads. Do you even know the Eagles roster? Riley Cooper, Jason Avant, and Brent Celek are his options outside of Desean Jackson, those guys OTHER wr's won't be knocking on the PRO BOWL door anytime soon. In fact, Miami has an arguably similar offense, Mike Wallace and DeSean are similar speed threats, Hartline and Cooper are a wash, and Avant is not better than any WR on Miami, Charles Clay is probably more athletic and a good deal better than Brent Celek.
Don't a lot of young QBs improve from year 1 to year 2 as part of the natural maturation process? To say Foles would not have improved had he remained in Andy Reid's system is simple speculation.
RT has more problems than just his deep passes. He seems to struggle with dropping the ball inbetween defenders and into his receivers arms. His throws in a straight line are very good but his arc type throws need work.
I agree, now lets re-evaluate this conversation in three years. Carnell Cadillac Williams was a much better running back than Frank Gore was when he first came into the league. -One played on a playoff team and one played on a losing team with a rookie QB....O -ne the luxory of a competant passing offense and one did not.... NOW.... -One is out of the league while the other is on his way to a hall of fame career. -One has barely seen a playoff situation while the other has played in numerous championship games along with a super bowl. -One is still carrying the football and consistantly having 1,000 yard double digit TD seasons while the other is retired. Nick Foles has gotten off to a great start to his young career. He's got the best running back that I have seen since the days of Barry Sanders (this includes Tomlinson and Peterson) playing right next to him. A good running back is always a quarterbacks best friend..Just ask Christian Ponder who is awful, yet somehow managed to get his Vikings into the playoffs last year. You could argue that the receiving cores of both Philadelphia and Miami are about even, but that is about it. Philadelphia has got a much better offensive line and a much better running attack. Like others have also pointed out...they have a hell of a coaching staff or so it seems. Now Nick Foles is an impressive young quarterback, there is no doubt in my mind about that. However as I mentioned before Lesean MCcoy is truly a forced to be reckoned with in this league, and there isn't a valid argument that can override the assumption that McCoy just might have made Foles' job just a tad bit easier. I'm not making excuses for Ryan Tannehill...He crapped the bed the last two weeks of the season. He failed to take control of that offense and make plays happen (which is what a great QB does). He threw three picks in the second half of the most important game of his career. He has continued to remain unaware at times in the pocket thus creating disaster at crucial moments. He overthrows Mike Wallace at least once a game, and he stays put when he should be taking off for a first down sometimes. With all that said, Ryan Tannehill is still my guy going in to next season. He gets a third and final shot at this. As for the debate....I think Tannehill is more talented, with a bigger upside than Foles. Right now Foles throws the better deep ball, and Foles is working with a competant offense. I think year to year this debate is going to change and eventually sway in the favor of Ryan Tannehill. You can add Russell Wilson to this list as well, along with Andrew Luck. I think when all is said and done Andrew Luck and Ryan Tannehill are the best QB's from the 2012 draft with Wilson, Foles, and Weeden rounding out the top five.
I'm a supporter and defender of Wallace being on the Dolphins and what he brings to the offense, but I do not get why thinking Jackson is better would elicit a LOL. Wallace has averaged 62 catches, 994 yds and about 7 TDs per season and has a career avg per catch of 16.1 Jackson has averaged 59 catches, 1,019 yds, and about 5 TDs per season with a career per catch avg of 17.2 That is close enough that thinking either one is better would be a matter of personal preference and not laughable either way.
Foles put up big numbers in college too, without the best supporting cast in the conference, so his success shouldn't be a big surprise. In the Pac 12 when he was there though, it was all about Luck and Barkley. Foles was an afterthought.
I think it's laughable. Especially when someone's reason is that Wallace is a one trick pony. Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
Well the playoffs are about to start and I still cant believe we choked and are sitting home again.****ing sucks!
That and Jackson is a good return guy when they use him there as well. I don't get why saying either is better would get a lol either, they are very close in production.
It depends too on how tight those bales are packed. If they aren't really tight, the DT could just stick his knee in the side of the bale, pull on the twine and scatter hay all over the place. Then he'd have no trouble getting to the QB. If the bales are tightly packed like by a good International baler, the DL would probably need to sneak a cutter onto the field to cut those strings. It would be too slow trying to pry them apart with the knee to the side and pull move. Then again if the OL was 5 of those huge round bales, the DL could just roll them back into the QB and bury him that way.
Foles too over as starter in Week 6. From Week 9 on, Lane's performance improved immensely. This could have just been from his getting up to speed with the pro game though.
So if Tannehill had been on the Eagles, his QB rating would have been better than 119? Sorry man, that is a huge stretch.
The point of the forum would be to discuss things we can actually objectively compare. Think about it, we're talking about two different players, in two different systems, with two different coaches, two different philosophies, two different systems, two different rosters and surrounding talent. You can't draw a comparison between them because... well... theyre different. So anything were discussing here is hypothetical, and not realistic. It's just a bunch of biased opinions based on whether you want to say Tannehill is good, or bad. I mean... that's the intent here from the OP given his track record here in his brief time. Regardless of that though, you just simply cant realistically compare them.
The question for this thread should be, would you trade Tannehill for Foles if you could? I know I would make that trade and not even think twice about it. Unfortunately Kelly and the Eagles would never even consider trading Foles for Tannehill. In fact I think if teams could go back and redo the 2012 NFL draft today, Tannehill would be the fifth QB taken in the draft and not the third. I think now it would be: 1 Luck 2 Wilson 3 Foles 4 RG3 5 Tannehill
What your saying is then is we can't compare manning to brady or brees to Rodgers because they are all in different systems with different coaches and rosters.Wheres the fun in that?
That doesn't mean anything. If Tampa Bay drafted Luck and he had a bad season with them, and we were to redo the draft based on that, then we would put Luck below #5 pick? Pointless point. Besides if we want to draft based on the last 2 years RG3 wouldn't even be in the first 2 rounds.
