PDA

View Full Version : Nick Foles - The 2nd Best QB Prospect?


KCStud
09-29-2011, 10:04 PM
I've been watching the kid a lot recently and say what you want about Luck and Barkely, he's playing like the best QB (at least statistically) in the Pac-12 with considerably less talent than Luck and Barkely.

He's 129/183 with a 70.5% completion percentage, 1,447 passing yards, 10 TD's, 0 INT's.

That's impressive with the team he plays for. Almost every modern day elite NFL QB (save Bradford and Manning) came from a college that wasn't successful. He's learning a lot and doing well with the talent he's given.

What are your guys thoughts on him?

nepg
09-29-2011, 10:07 PM
I like Foles a lot. People hate him for some reason. He's not very mobile, but has everything else.

Brent
09-29-2011, 10:34 PM
Almost every modern day elite NFL QB (save Bradford and Manning) came from a college that wasn't successful.
I think you should re-consider this statement.

FUNBUNCHER
09-29-2011, 10:43 PM
Yeah, the top 10 QBs I think all had good seasons before they came out.

I need to read a pro scouting report on Foles, but if he's believed to have a strong arm during the predraft scouting process I think Foles could be one of the top 2 or 3 QBs taken.
At worst as of right now I think Foles is one of the top 5 QB prospects in this draft, (Luck/Griffin/Barkley/Foles/Jones).

Big Bird
09-29-2011, 10:44 PM
I think you should re-consider this statement.
Should he do that because Drew Brees won the Rose Bowl?

Or Tom Brady won the Citrus Bowl and Orange Bowl?

Or because Cal was ranked 4th in the nation under Aaron Rodgers and snubbed for the Rose Bowl?

KCStud
09-29-2011, 10:49 PM
I think you should re-consider this statement.

Why? When I said wasn't successful, I meant that at the time almost every one of these guys weren't going to BCS bowls and their teams weren't in the top 10 in college.
These are the general schools that the good/elite NFL QB's have come from.

Roethlisberger-Miami of Ohio
Rivers-NC State
Manning-Ole Miss
Brady-Michigan
Ryan-Boston College
Freeman-Kansas State
Schaub-Virginia
Brees-Purdue
Cutler-Vanderbilt
Romo-Eastern Illinois

FUNBUNCHER
09-29-2011, 10:52 PM
Why? When I said wasn't successful, I meant that at the time they were there they weren't going to BCS bowls and their teams weren't in the top 15 in college.
These are the general schools that the good/elite NFL QB's have come from.

Roethlisberger-Miami of Ohio
Rivers-NC State
Manning-Ole Miss
Brady-Michigan
Ryan-Boston College
Freeman-Kansas State
Schaub-Virginia
Brees-Purdue
Cutler-Vanderbilt
Romo-Eastern Illinois
Except for Cutler/Freeman and who knows about Romo, most of those guys won at least I think 8 games their final year in college.

Doesn't matter how great the programs are traditionally, it's how good were they when these guys were on campus??

Brent
09-29-2011, 11:06 PM
Roethlisberger-Miami of Ohio (13-1 his senior year)
Rivers-NC State (8-5 senior year, two losses to top 10 teams in overtime)
Manning-Ole Miss (10-3, won Cotton Bowl)
Brady-Michigan (won the Citrus Bowl and Orange Bowl his last two years)
Ryan-Boston College (11-3 as senior, 10-3 as JR, 9-3 as SOPH)
Freeman-Kansas State (5-7 as senior)
Schaub-Virginia (9-5 as JR, 8-5 as senior)
Brees-Purdue (won Rose Bowl, Davey O'Brien & Maxwell Award winner)
Cutler-Vanderbilt (5-6 as senior)
Romo-Eastern Illinois (8-4 as senior, Walter Payton award winner, i.e. D1AA heisman)

only Cutler and Freeman had weak senior season records, but both had great stats and most their games were close.

YAYareaRB
09-29-2011, 11:07 PM
i kinda remember miami ohio finishing at least top 10 in big ben's last season but i might be mistaken

YAYareaRB
09-29-2011, 11:08 PM
Roethlisberger-Miami of Ohio (13-1 his senior year)
Rivers-NC State (8-5 senior year, two losses to top 10 teams in overtime)
Manning-Ole Miss (10-3, won Cotton Bowl)
Brady-Michigan (won the Citrus Bowl and Orange Bowl his last two years)
Ryan-Boston College (11-3 as senior, 10-3 as JR, 9-3 as SOPH)
Freeman-Kansas State (5-7 as senior)
Schaub-Virginia (9-5 as JR, 8-5 as senior)
Brees-Purdue (won Rose Bowl, Davey O'Brien & Maxwell Award winner)
Cutler-Vanderbilt (5-6 as senior)
Romo-Eastern Illinois (8-4 as senior, Walter Payton award winner, i.e. D1AA heisman)

only Cutler and Freeman had weak senior season records, but both had great stats and most their games were close.

not to mention, Rivers leading them to 4 bowl games, winning 3 of them

ElectricEye
09-29-2011, 11:37 PM
Regardless of wins as a predictive stat for NFL success, I just don't see an NFL caliber quarterback in Foles. Disagree completely with the assessments about his arm strength in particular. Classic example of "Oh, he's tall...he must have a gun!" symptom we've seen with other guys before. He floats bases on a fairly consistent basis. His accuracy is completely overstated as well. His receivers consistently need to adjust to the ball when it's anywhere down the field and his ball placement on the short stuff is off as well. I've seen multiple games where watching him I think "Damn, he's really struggling out there" and then looked at the box score to see he's thrown for 400+ yards and completed a very high percentage of his passes. The past two Stanford games have been as ugly of a game I've seen for a quarterback that's supposed to be drafted in the first few rounds in the past few years. The box score doesn't reflect it perfectly, but boy did he struggle. Complete non-factor. Stanford has done pretty well for themselves defensively and are a pretty well coached group, but there's no clear athletic advantage for them over Arizona like some people are implying. Arizona actually has a decent group around him, even.

But yeah, that's not even getting into how bad his footwork is. Doesn't show the ability to evade the rush within the pocket and makes questionable decisions on a consistent basis when it's anything outside of a clean bubble screen.

I really, really think we're looking at a total mirage of box scores, size, and spread offenses here. You can totally forgive a guy playing in the type of system Foles does if they have the talent, but that goes both ways. For every Sam Bradford, there's a dozen Andre Woodson's. You've got to look closely at guys like this and discern what's actually going on.

KCStud
09-29-2011, 11:51 PM
Roethlisberger-Miami of Ohio (13-1 his senior year)
Rivers-NC State (8-5 senior year, two losses to top 10 teams in overtime)
Manning-Ole Miss (10-3, won Cotton Bowl)
Brady-Michigan (won the Citrus Bowl and Orange Bowl his last two years)
Ryan-Boston College (11-3 as senior, 10-3 as JR, 9-3 as SOPH)
Freeman-Kansas State (5-7 as senior)
Schaub-Virginia (9-5 as JR, 8-5 as senior)
Brees-Purdue (won Rose Bowl, Davey O'Brien & Maxwell Award winner)
Cutler-Vanderbilt (5-6 as senior)
Romo-Eastern Illinois (8-4 as senior, Walter Payton award winner, i.e. D1AA heisman)

only Cutler and Freeman had weak senior season records, but both had great stats and most their games were close.

Not dogging on their schools at all. It's all about what they did while they were there. Roethlisberger and Romo didn't play that many good teams in his conference.
All these guys didn't have great college teams around them like first round QB's (most recently) Matt Leinart, Vince Young, Jamarcus Russell, Rex Grossman and Tim Tebow. The elite QB's in the NFL today had a harder time in college which helped them in the NFL. They didn't have a boat load of talent everywhere. They got their jersey dirty and had the mental toughness.

This is generally brought up because I think Nick Foles will be a better QB in the NFL than Landry Jones and maybe Matt Barkely. Can you imagine the numbers he'd have if he was the QB for either of those teams right now?

kalbears13
09-30-2011, 01:21 AM
Well luckily we can watch Foles vs. Barkley tomorrow...

NotRickJames
09-30-2011, 02:02 AM
Never saw it with Foles. Really bad under pressure. Not a great arm.

FUNBUNCHER
09-30-2011, 06:52 AM
This is generally brought up because I think Nick Foles will be a better QB in the NFL than Landry Jones and maybe Matt Barkely. Can you imagine the numbers he'd have if he was the QB for either of those teams right now?

This is a good point. It's speculation, but it's not that far off IMO.
Foles is doing more with less than either Barkley/Jones.
BTW I'm totally guessing about Foles arm strength, but when I saw him play Stanford this year, I saw UA WRs dropping passes and Foles drilling the ball on occasion nearly effortlessly.

But he is a guy I could see really become a high riser before the draft, even more so if talent evaluators think he has legit tools.

Similar to how Gabbert was graded a 1st rounder because of his measurables.

BeerBaron
09-30-2011, 07:56 AM
Regardless of wins as a predictive stat for NFL success, I just don't see an NFL caliber quarterback in Foles. Disagree completely with the assessments about his arm strength in particular. Classic example of "Oh, he's tall...he must have a gun!" symptom we've seen with other guys before. He floats bases on a fairly consistent basis. His accuracy is completely overstated as well. His receivers consistently need to adjust to the ball when it's anywhere down the field and his ball placement on the short stuff is off as well. I've seen multiple games where watching him I think "Damn, he's really struggling out there" and then looked at the box score to see he's thrown for 400+ yards and completed a very high percentage of his passes. The past two Stanford games have been as ugly of a game I've seen for a quarterback that's supposed to be drafted in the first few rounds in the past few years. The box score doesn't reflect it perfectly, but boy did he struggle. Complete non-factor. Stanford has done pretty well for themselves defensively and are a pretty well coached group, but there's no clear athletic advantage for them over Arizona like some people are implying. Arizona actually has a decent group around him, even.

But yeah, that's not even getting into how bad his footwork is. Doesn't show the ability to evade the rush within the pocket and makes questionable decisions on a consistent basis when it's anything outside of a clean bubble screen.

I really, really think we're looking at a total mirage of box scores, size, and spread offenses here. You can totally forgive a guy playing in the type of system Foles does if they have the talent, but that goes both ways. For every Sam Bradford, there's a dozen Andre Woodson's. You've got to look closely at guys like this and discern what's actually going on.

EE wins many internet points. I see Foles having many of the same passing flaws as Blaine Gabbert, who I felt was a lesser version of Alex Smith.

No thanks on Foles. Especially in a year with Luck and Barkely who I think are going to be top 5, if not top 3 (depending on how the teams fall) draft picks who will have successful NFL careers.

mario
09-30-2011, 08:21 AM
You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to ElectricEye again.

Shane P. Hallam
09-30-2011, 08:41 AM
Regardless of wins as a predictive stat for NFL success, I just don't see an NFL caliber quarterback in Foles. Disagree completely with the assessments about his arm strength in particular. Classic example of "Oh, he's tall...he must have a gun!" symptom we've seen with other guys before. He floats bases on a fairly consistent basis. His accuracy is completely overstated as well. His receivers consistently need to adjust to the ball when it's anywhere down the field and his ball placement on the short stuff is off as well. I've seen multiple games where watching him I think "Damn, he's really struggling out there" and then looked at the box score to see he's thrown for 400+ yards and completed a very high percentage of his passes. The past two Stanford games have been as ugly of a game I've seen for a quarterback that's supposed to be drafted in the first few rounds in the past few years. The box score doesn't reflect it perfectly, but boy did he struggle. Complete non-factor. Stanford has done pretty well for themselves defensively and are a pretty well coached group, but there's no clear athletic advantage for them over Arizona like some people are implying. Arizona actually has a decent group around him, even.

But yeah, that's not even getting into how bad his footwork is. Doesn't show the ability to evade the rush within the pocket and makes questionable decisions on a consistent basis when it's anything outside of a clean bubble screen.

I really, really think we're looking at a total mirage of box scores, size, and spread offenses here. You can totally forgive a guy playing in the type of system Foles does if they have the talent, but that goes both ways. For every Sam Bradford, there's a dozen Andre Woodson's. You've got to look closely at guys like this and discern what's actually going on.

I'm with ElectricEye, I'm not seeing it with Foles. He's like Blaine Gabbert light (who I thought was overrated,) with poor pocket presence, less of an arm, floats balls, throws them too high, gets bailed out by WRs, and footwork is very messy.

Can be a successful NFL QB with coaching? Yes, I think so. Is he ready and will he ever be a stud? Nope.

FUNBUNCHER
09-30-2011, 09:23 AM
Gabbert didn't have the statistical production Foles will have at Arizona.
It's early in the eval process still.

I think people are downing him though at least this season so far. Again I'd like to see a breakdown of Foles' completion of passes longer than 15 yards and his 3rd down conversions.

If anything the last few drafts have shown, spread QBs are over-analyzed over their accuracy and a 'bad pass' isn't always something the QB did wrong.


These are all the snaps Foles took against OSU this season.
IMO when Foles gets into a rhythm he's difficult to defend. I just see more right in this clip than wrong, and every couple of series Foles makes a really nice read and throw.
Is he top 5?? I don't think so, but I could easily see him going in the 10-20 range.
K4PV1xf9lhU

Hurricanes25
09-30-2011, 12:27 PM
2nd best QB prospect? No way.

So Luck is #1 and these are all of the other guys I would rather draft then Foles....Barkely, RG3, Jones, Osweiler, Tannehill, Lindley and Cousins. (No particular order) And if Weeden wasn't so old, I would rather take him too. I'll respect you opinion on Foles but I just don't see it

Shane P. Hallam
09-30-2011, 12:59 PM
2nd best QB prospect? No way.

So Luck is #1 and these are all of the other guys I would rather draft then Foles....Barkely, RG3, Jones, Osweiler, Tannehill, Lindley and Cousins. (No particular order) And if Weeden wasn't so old, I would rather take him too. I'll respect you opinion on Foles but I just don't see it

Not sure I'm quite as low as you, haha. I'd take Barkley, Griffin, Jones, and probably Tannehill. Lindley/Foles pretty close for me. I like Osweiler, need to see more, but I like Foles consistency a bit more. That being said, I'll evaluate him more if he comes out.

Hurricanes25
09-30-2011, 01:08 PM
Yeah, I do have him pretty low haha. The more I see of Foles, the less I like him. The arm strength is less than adequate. He floats everything when throwing downfield and his footwork is horrible. The only thing I like about Foles is his accuracy. Not a fan at all.

YAYareaRB
09-30-2011, 01:08 PM
foles arm definitely leaves a lot to be desired.

but his placement on the fade route is awesome

FUNBUNCHER
09-30-2011, 01:33 PM
It's funny how two people can see the same prospect and see totally different arm strength.

I see a guy with a solid to strong arm, strong enough so that physically completing throws isn't a problem for him.

Others see a prospect with a sub-par NFL arm.
It's still early, all this will get sorted out later in the year and in the spring.

Caulibflower
09-30-2011, 02:30 PM
I'm with ElectricEye, I'm not seeing it with Foles. He's like Blaine Gabbert light (who I thought was overrated,) with poor pocket presence, less of an arm, floats balls, throws them too high, gets bailed out by WRs, and footwork is very messy.

Can be a successful NFL QB with coaching? Yes, I think so. Is he ready and will he ever be a stud? Nope.

Literally opened this thread just to throw out the Blaine Gabbert reference, but you beat me to it. Looks the part, has the stats, but he just doesn't impress with his pocket presence. Alright arm, nothing special. He's just a 6'5" or whatever, 230ish QB with a decent arm from a major conference. That's about it. I don't think he belongs in the first round. I liked Ryan Mallett better, and I thought the second/third was about the right place for him. I'd think about taking Foles if I was a decent team with an established QB, and could afford to use a 4th-rounder on a guy who looks like he might be able to start some games. Definitely don't look at him and see a franchise player.

EDIT: the above was just from what I remembered seeing last year. While watching Funbuncher's video against OSU, I'm still thinking Gabbert in the sense that his value's being inflated, but as a prospect comparison I'm seeing a guy pretty similar to Ryan Mallett; little smaller, and without the arm. In other words, a 4th-5th rounder in my book.

San Diego Chicken
09-30-2011, 02:56 PM
Not a bad prospect. He played pretty well against Oregon but his receivers had a ton of drops, especially Juron Criner. But he does come from an "air raid" style of offense and has poor mobility.

Frostbite43
09-30-2011, 03:05 PM
2nd best QB prospect? No way.

So Luck is #1 and these are all of the other guys I would rather draft then Foles....Barkely, RG3, Jones, Osweiler, Tannehill, Lindley and Cousins. (No particular order) And if Weeden wasn't so old, I would rather take him too. I'll respect you opinion on Foles but I just don't see it

Would you put Austin Davis in that list anywhere?

soybean
09-30-2011, 04:06 PM
why has no one brought up the point that half his touchdowns came against northern arizona?

He's simply not a winner.

mario
09-30-2011, 04:12 PM
Mallett has above pocket presence, much better than Gabbert's IMO. Sure, he hasn't the skill to make people miss in the pocket but moves and resets his feet fairly well for such a big guy. Foles is a statue after he's done with his dropback and his accuracy is overrated as well. Don't think his arm is that big of an issue as some of you, though...

YAYareaRB
09-30-2011, 06:23 PM
why has no one brought up the point that half his touchdowns came against northern arizona?

He's simply not a winner.

since its so early in the season.. couldn't you say:

"why has no one brought up the point that half his touchdowns came against _________?" (Enter horrible team)

about all but a handful of qbs in the nation right now?

rawdawg
09-30-2011, 07:15 PM
why has no one brought up the point that half his touchdowns came against northern arizona?

He's simply not a winner.

Have you seen the team around him? He has less talent around him than any of the top QBs in the FBS. He played to the level of his competition last year, with over 1200 yards combined vs. USC, Oregon and Oregon St. All losses, but all clearly superior in talent to Arizona. In 09, he did the same vs. Oregon, Stanford, and Oregon St. And he just had a big game vs. Oregon again. He has shown up in the big games, just has nothing to show for it.

ElectricEye
09-30-2011, 07:22 PM
Arizona is not talent deprived. I have no idea where you're getting that from. Do they have the horses to run with the top teams in the country? Absolutely not. But you can do far worse than the roster that they have. Foles is in a good position to put up statistics and he does. It just doesn't have any bearing on what he's capable of doing in the NFL.

rawdawg
10-01-2011, 07:41 AM
Arizona is not talent deprived. I have no idea where you're getting that from. Do they have the horses to run with the top teams in the country? Absolutely not. But you can do far worse than the roster that they have. Foles is in a good position to put up statistics and he does. It just doesn't have any bearing on what he's capable of doing in the NFL.

Never said they were talent deprived. But he has less offensive talent on his team than Luck, Barkely, Tannehill, Jones, Griffin, Weeden, and probably even Lindley.

SolidGold
10-01-2011, 09:04 AM
Arizona has the 119th out of 120th rushing attack in D-1 Football. Foles is their whole offense.

ATLDirtyBirds
10-01-2011, 10:19 AM
I don't like Foles at all. And I agree with what EE said last page.

bored of education
10-01-2011, 10:42 AM
The number 2 QB will be throwing against the Zona D and prove that he is 1b in the QB discussion today!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CashmoneyDrew
10-01-2011, 10:54 AM
I think I like Foles more than most around here but it's only to an extent. He's my 6th rated QB at this point so I wouldn't touch him before the middlish of the second round. Even then he'd probably need at least a year on the sidelines before I'd consider giving him a look as a #1.

49erNation85
10-01-2011, 06:56 PM
It goes Luck then K.Moore IMO the rest will follow.

Shane P. Hallam
10-01-2011, 07:01 PM
It goes Luck then K.Moore IMO the rest will follow.

Kellen Moore? Really man?

49erNation85
10-01-2011, 07:03 PM
Yes man really. Height on QB 's are overrated IMO.

Shane P. Hallam
10-01-2011, 07:09 PM
Yes man really. Height on QB 's are overrated IMO.

That isn't his only problem, but perhaps this is a better discussion for the other #2 QB thread.

FUNBUNCHER
10-01-2011, 07:35 PM
Yes man really. Height on QB 's are overrated IMO.

It's not 'overrated'. Height and the ability to see over the line downfield is very important for QBs, but being tall doesn't guarantee success. Neither does being under 6'2 mean a guy can't play QB in the NFL.

I know some SKins fans that are super-high on Moore and I just don't get it.

I think he's the second coming of Ty Detmer.
They see another Jeff Garcia/Drew Brees lite.

ElectricEye
10-01-2011, 07:41 PM
I can't believe we're playing this game with another quarterback like Moore again. I thought we were better than this.

CashmoneyDrew
10-01-2011, 08:00 PM
Well, this is what happens when there's no real way to keep middle schoolers off of the board.

49erNation85
10-01-2011, 08:05 PM
So besides he Height what would you possibly see him not being a first round draft pick?His is very accurate and has a solid arm strength not the best.I think if he gets into the senior bowl he could turn some heads.

Hurricanes25
10-01-2011, 08:06 PM
So besides he Height what would you possibly see him not being a first round draft pick?His is very accurate and has a solid arm strength not the best.I think if he gets into the senior bowl he could turn some heads.

His arm strength is terrible.

CashmoneyDrew
10-01-2011, 08:21 PM
His arm strength is bad. And his accuracy is inflated due to the system he's in. A lot like your boy Tim Tebow's was.

yo123
10-01-2011, 08:31 PM
Kellen Moore has Ken Dorsey-like arm strength. He's a non prospect.

Hurricanes25
10-01-2011, 08:33 PM
Moore has just enough arm strength to hold a clipboard for a couple of years.

bored of education
10-01-2011, 08:47 PM
Foles gained some points tonight in my book. He is not just a system guy, I like that they lined him up under center a lot.

FUNBUNCHER
10-01-2011, 09:08 PM
Foles gained some points tonight in my book. He is not just a system guy, I like that they lined him up under center a lot.

Damn I didn't see the game!!

Who looked better head to head?? Barkley or Foles?? I know the defensive talent isn't the same, but still I'm curious to hear what people thought.

Just checking the box score, it seems like Barkley threw for similar yardage on 13 fewer attempts.

Bulldogs
10-01-2011, 09:31 PM
Damn I didn't see the game!!

Who looked better head to head?? Barkley or Foles?? I know the defensive talent isn't the same, but still I'm curious to hear what people thought.

Just checking the box score, it seems like Barkley threw for similar yardage on 13 fewer attempts.

Matt Barkley looked phenominal.

Raiderz4Life
10-01-2011, 10:14 PM
Barkley is dreamy.

BuddyCHRIST
10-01-2011, 10:56 PM
I haven't seen much USC, but how good is Robert Woods? The numbers he's putting up are insane.

kalbears13
10-02-2011, 12:48 AM
I haven't seen much USC, but how good is Robert Woods? The numbers he's putting up are insane.

Robert Woods is a beast. He has great hands and speed, is elusive, knows how to get open and is a great runner after the catch. And he's only a sophomore!

Marqise Lee the true freshman is stepping into his own too.

kalbears13
10-02-2011, 12:58 AM
Damn I didn't see the game!!

Who looked better head to head?? Barkley or Foles?? I know the defensive talent isn't the same, but still I'm curious to hear what people thought.

Just checking the box score, it seems like Barkley threw for similar yardage on 13 fewer attempts.

Foles had a really poor first quarter and seemed like he was trying to force things deep when that's not his game. He didn't really show great accuracy downfield. Once he realized that he should stay with mid-short throws he did a lot better. I think he was just panicking after starting out behind 17-0. Foles looked like he did have a good supporting cast around him and USC couldn't stop the run. He might be able to fit in a WCO. I think he makes good decisions but his arm limits him (see both interceptions).

Barkley looked great, granted he wasn't even close to getting touched even once. I'm not sure if it was just him but the whole USC offense made it look like Arizona's D couldn't stop a nosebleed.

SickwithIt1010
10-02-2011, 01:48 AM
I haven't seen much USC, but how good is Robert Woods? The numbers he's putting up are insane.

Robert Woods isnt the typical USC receiver, hes a big time play maker who runs great routes and has explosive speed. Hes not your typical Mike Williams or Dwayne Jarrett type big/physical possession guy. Woods is the real deal. I think he will come out in the same mold as Steve Smith, but hes more explosive.

TACKLE
10-02-2011, 02:09 AM
Robert Woods isnt the typical USC receiver, hes a big time play maker who runs great routes and has explosive speed. Hes not your typical Mike Williams or Dwayne Jarrett type big/physical possession guy. Woods is the real deal. I think he will come out in the same mold as Steve Smith, but hes more explosive.

I see him as a bigger, more complete DeSean.

mario
10-02-2011, 06:36 AM
Foles gained some points tonight in my book. He is not just a system guy, I like that they lined him up under center a lot.
How isn't he a system guy? Every time he doubted 0.01% his 1st read he made a bad decision. That 2 throws picked by TJ McDonald were awful to watch.

FUNBUNCHER
10-02-2011, 07:06 AM
How isn't he a system guy? Every time he doubted 0.01% his 1st read he made a bad decision. That 2 throws picked by TJ McDonald were awful to watch.

I think by saying he's not a system guy, it's an observation that Foles has raw quarterbacking ability that isn't inflated because of his offensive scheme.

Babylon
10-02-2011, 10:36 AM
I haven't seen much USC, but how good is Robert Woods? The numbers he's putting up are insane.

He's been great. Not huge by any means and i wouldnt put him in the Desean Jackson as far as speed goes but he should be an excellant NFL WR. If he were coming out this year (not eligible) i'd argue they could have 3 top 10 picks on that offense.

SolidGold
10-02-2011, 11:46 AM
Foles belongs at the beginning of the 2nd tier of QB prospects
behind Luck, Jones, Barkley and Griffin. Through the first quarter of the season he has probably played better than any other senior QB prospect. I am sticking with my Josh Freeman comparison. I think Kansas St was something like 5-7 his last year there but that did not hurt his draft stock.

Babylon
10-02-2011, 11:53 AM
Foles belongs at the beginning of the 2nd tier of QB prospects
behind Luck, Jones, Barkley and Griffin. Through the first quarter of the season he has probably played better than any other senior QB prospect. I am sticking with my Josh Freeman comparison. I think Kansas St was something like 5-7 his last year there but that did not hurt his draft stock.

Agree on Foles being that top guy in the second tier. First tier for me is Barkely, Luck and Jones. Not ready to put Griffin in that top group either, not sure he'd come out and the caliber of defenses he's facing doesnt look like much.

Foles may surprise people at the next level but in head to heads with Luck and Barkely he's looked inferior to those two.

SolidGold
10-02-2011, 11:57 AM
I agree Babylon. Stanford and USC both have better o-lines and work to establish the run. Foles doesn't have that balance to work with. Stanford is so damn impressive with their running game, just watching them last night I came away so impressed. I love watching teams that dedicate themselves to the run game especially in this era of spread air it out offenses.

FUNBUNCHER
10-02-2011, 11:59 AM
I wish I had seen the Arizona/USC game, but did Foles look 'inferior' to Barkley, or did Barkley just look better??

I know it's a minor semantic difference, but it sounds like in the former description Barkley was playing on a level that Foles simply could not match IMO.
Whereas if Barkley simply looked better, it implies to me that Barkley was just the more efficient QB, not that Foles played poorly.

FUNBUNCHER
10-02-2011, 12:02 PM
Foles belongs at the beginning of the 2nd tier of QB prospects
behind Luck, Jones, Barkley and Griffin. Through the first quarter of the season he has probably played better than any other senior QB prospect. I am sticking with my Josh Freeman comparison. I think Kansas St was something like 5-7 his last year there but that did not hurt his draft stock.


How many QBs do you see going in the first round in 2012???

SolidGold
10-02-2011, 12:14 PM
How many QBs do you see going in the first round in 2012???

I don't know. I never thought four would of been drafted last year. I would set the over/under at 4 though. Jones, Luck and Barkley are locks. I view Foles as more of a 2nd rounder but if Ponder went in the first I can't really throw anything out of the equation.

kalbears13
10-03-2011, 01:57 AM
It wasn't that Foles looked bad, you could just tell he didn't have the arm. Any time he tried to go downfield it looked horrid. He did a great job with the shorter passes though, but you don't make it in the NFL doing that. Barkley looked great and made plenty of throws downfield. He did underthrow an open receiver downfield but he was scrambling and threw it off his back foot. But both defenses looked downright horrible so just because they were "playing against each other", doesn't mean it was a good way to judge the quarterbacks.

socentre44
10-03-2011, 07:37 PM
He's been great. Not huge by any means and i wouldnt put him in the Desean Jackson as far as speed goes but he should be an excellant NFL WR. If he were coming out this year (not eligible) i'd argue they could have 3 top 10 picks on that offense.

Lee has potential to be a top 10 pick someday too. SC TEs Grimble and Telfer are both interesting prospects as well.

I love Robert Woods. He doesn't take plays off and is not afraid to put in the effort to block. "I like being in the action and throwing a block" High character kid.

On passing plays, he's Reggie Wayne. On running plays, he's Hines Ward.

[End of Robert Woods love fest]

If guys like RG3 and Barkley come out, this year's QB class looks deep.

KCStud
10-22-2011, 04:27 AM
The reason Barkley looks better than Foles is because Barkley hardly ever gets sacked. He's only been sacked 4 times. Foles has been on the ground 14 times already.
Foles reminds me of Roethlisberger. Very similar prospects IMO.
And as I watch Barkley, I notice that he gets timid when he's pressured in the pocket and gets happy feet. Foles doesn't do that. Foles has poise.
I think Foles would have far superior numbers than Barkley if you put him in that offense.

Say what you want, but I think Foles goes in the first round somewhere and will become a good NFL QB in the future.

Shane P. Hallam
10-22-2011, 08:24 AM
The reason Barkley looks better than Foles is because Barkley hardly ever gets sacked. He's only been sacked 4 times. Foles has been on the ground 14 times already.
Foles reminds me of Roethlisberger. Very similar prospects IMO.
And as I watch Barkley, I notice that he gets timid when he's pressured in the pocket and gets happy feet. Foles doesn't do that. Foles has poise.
I think Foles would have far superior numbers than Barkley if you put him in that offense.

Two things:

1. Ben could move in and out of the pocket. Foles can't. Big difference. Likewise, the arm strength between the two is night and day.

2. The USC offense is more complicated than the Arizona offense, as pointed out earlier. Sacks aren't always on the O-line, but on the QB at times too. In Foles case, this is true. In Barkley's case, he doesn't see as much pressure but does get the ball out quicker.

nepg
10-22-2011, 10:05 AM
Yeah. Like I said with my first post in this thread... I like Foles a lot, but he's a statue. If you're a statue in the NFL, you better be really ******* good... Because there's really only a few statues left with Brady (who might have the best in-pocket footwork in the history of the NFL) and Manning. Flacco probably qualifies as well.

rawdawg
10-22-2011, 10:21 AM
Yeah. Like I said with my first post in this thread... I like Foles a lot, but he's a statue. If you're a statue in the NFL, you better be really ******* good... Because there's really only a few statues left with Brady (who might have the best in-pocket footwork in the history of the NFL) and Manning. Flacco probably qualifies as well.

Brady takes a backseat to Marino in in-pocket footwork. But yeah the immobility is a huge issue for Foles. He's going to need a pretty good OL to be successful, but you can say that about every QB in the NFL.

FUNBUNCHER
10-22-2011, 10:45 AM
I don't think Foles is a statue. He's coordinated and agile enough to roll out of the pocket but he's just slow or holds on to the ball too long. Athletically he reminds me of Matt Ryan.
His pocket presence is sketchy at times too, assuming he has better protection than is actually in front of him.