Jump to content
.Buzz

Updated: Jaguars sign Nick Foles

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

Unless that contract is basically a 1 year deal, I cant imagine drafting Haskins too. If we truly think we have a window at all to strike while the defense is hot then we cant spend most of our available cap space and also draft a QB in round 1

Yeah.  I'd think if it is Foles we're going with...depends exactly how a deal is structured, but it's probably more or less a last ditch attempt to do some winning while our defense is still together.  Which means...spending top picks and whatever cap space we have left, to put pieces in place to surround Foles and give him the best chance of not failing.

 

Honestly, as long as the number comes in reasonably, and we're not too badly married to Foles for a lot of years...i like it.  We're in a situation to at least try to make a run in the short-term.  Either it works out and we get to watch some playoffs, which would be sweet imo.  Or it goes about as badly as Foles with the Rams, and we're in place to draft one of those various 2020 QB prospects.

As long as we're investing our picks primarily in adding talent to the offense to help insulate Foles...it's the kind of stuff that'll carry over if/when we get a rookie in there in 1-3 years or so anyway.  Heck, even just adding another premium young defensive piece is still gonna be useful in helping our defense fall off less in a couple years for a future rookie to work with.

 

I still think a team in our situation ought to at least invest something in a "sit and develop" type QB prospect.  So we've at least got a jar on the shelf if things don't go great with Foles, or for when he's done and it's time to move on.  Heck, since it'd just be cap space we're using on our "starting QB" with Foles, and with an extra Day2 draft pick from the Fowler deal, we could probably even afford to spend one of those trio of picks on that kind of guy, if the right one is there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DuvalsKing said:

If they think signing Foles is the answer they are playing with fire I expect the defense to play even worse next than they played this past season I can't wait for 2020.

Is it really "playing with fire" though?

It's certainly possible it costs them their jobs.  If the defense does continue to decline more this year, and Foles sucks and the whole thing implodes...That basically just gets us a total housecleaning, and a new regime coming in with a good draft pick to spend on "their QB".

But trying to lean on a rookie QB draft pick, with one less 1st round caliber "weapon" to work with...that seems like really playing with fire to me.  That's pretty much guaranteed to cost them their jobs in a "win now" situation.  There's no way these guys have enough leash to "rebuild" again, if their last rebuild only netted us one playoff appearance and an immense quantity of losses.

The upside to at least trying this Foles thing...is that it might actually work.  If they can get just "decent" QB play out of him, giving us a "functional" offense unlike last year...i don't think it's unreasonable to believe that'd help the defense pretty immensely, by letting them get off the field occasionally.  Not to mention just in helping team morale overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, DuvalsKing said:

If they think signing Foles is the answer they are playing with fire I expect the defense to play even worse next than they played this past season I can't wait for 2020.

They must think that otherwise its foolish to sign him. Whether or not I/you believe he is the answer, it makes no sense to sign him and draft a QB in round 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

They must think that otherwise its foolish to sign him. Whether or not I/you believe he is the answer, it makes no sense to sign him and draft a QB in round 1

I think Foles is a solid option. But I really am unsure how I feel about not getting a QB of the future if they're there at 7. Think the Chiefs/Mahomes and Glennon/Trubisky route is the way to go here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

Guesses on the contract?

3 years, 51M, $40 guaranteed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

They must think that otherwise its foolish to sign him. Whether or not I/you believe he is the answer, it makes no sense to sign him and draft a QB in round 1

When did I say it made sense to sign Foles and draft a QB round 1? Of course that makes no sense for them to sign Foles and draft a QB round 1. All I’m saying is that If Lamar Jackson can get the Raven into the playoffs it’s possible for a rookie QB to get you to the playoffs. Lamar didn’t play with an immense amount of offensive talent either so we can’t even use that excuse that he had a stud wideout or TE for that matter. They had a solid run game and they didn’t turn the ball over. So it’s either you can or you can’t coach up a system in order to make a suitable offense. Furthermore it seems like you’re  telling your fan base that you don’t believe in your ability to scout, draft and coach up the QB position. But I guess I’d be gun shy too if I just took Bortles 4 yrs ago 3rd overall and told everyone from the mountain top that the city of Jacksonville can win a Super Bowl with Blake Bortles at the helm.

Edited by DuvalsKing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, DuvalsKing said:

When did I say it made sense to sign Foles and draft a QB round 1? Of course that makes no sense for them to sign Foles and draft a QB round 1. All I’m saying is that If Lamar Jackson can get the Raven into the playoffs it’s possible for a rookie QB to get you to the playoffs. Lamar didn’t play with an immense amount of offensive talent either so we can’t even use that excuse that he had a stud wideout or TE for that matter. They had a solid run game and they didn’t turn the ball over. So it’s either you can or you can’t coach up a system in order to make a suitable offense. Furthermore it seems like you’re  telling your fan base that you don’t believe in your ability to scout, draft and coach up the QB position. But I guess I’d be gun shy too if I just took Bortles 4 yrs ago 3rd overall and told everyone from the mountain top that the city of Jacksonville can win a Super Bowl with Blake Bortles at the helm.

Must not have been you but someone said signing Foles doesnt mean QB round 1 is out of the question 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

Must not have been you but someone said signing Foles doesnt mean QB round 1 is out of the question 

I said that.

No idea why it needs to be that way. Bears, Chiefs, etc. have drafted a QB high while having a veteran/paying a guy. I really doubt the Jaguars view Foles as a long term fixture at the position considering age and past play. He's solid but drafting a bunch of WR/TE isn't exactly likely to pay quick dividends either. They're going to be rookies too.

Obviously if Haskins costs a kings ransom they probably don't trade up and lose capital, but if he's there at 7 this draft is deep enough to wait for a TE and WR til Rd 2/3.

Edited by .Buzz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, .Buzz said:

I said that.

No idea why it needs to be that way. Bears, Chiefs, etc. have drafted a QB high while having a veteran/paying a guy. I really doubt the Jaguars view Foles as a long term fixture at the position considering age and past play. He's solid but drafting a bunch of WR/TE isn't exactly likely to pay quick dividends either. They're going to be rookies too.

Obviously if Haskins costs a kings ransom they probably don't trade up and lose capital, but if he's there at 7 this draft is deep enough to wait for a TE and WR til Rd 2/3.

I agree with you on a good portion of what you said but you know how the Jags are they view that if Foles did it for Philly he can pull it out for the Jags. Somebody remind me a time not named Peyton Manning where this has worked out.. I’ll wait. I have to look at this deal I’m hearing maybe a 3 yr deal similar to Bortles deal smdh. If it’s a 1 year deal and they draft no QB next year it’ll be even more exciting. I can’t wait for the Jags to pull this raggedy *** gloppy of a team out the garage next season. Get your popcorn ready.

Edited by DuvalsKing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, .Buzz said:

I said that.

No idea why it needs to be that way. Bears, Chiefs, etc. have drafted a QB high while having a veteran/paying a guy. I really doubt the Jaguars view Foles as a long term fixture at the position considering age and past play. He's solid but drafting a bunch of WR/TE isn't exactly likely to pay quick dividends either. They're going to be rookies too.

Obviously if Haskins costs a kings ransom they probably don't trade up and lose capital, but if he's there at 7 this draft is deep enough to wait for a TE and WR til Rd 2/3.

They were paying someone that was with them for at least a few years. KC knew they went as far as they could with Smith and come on, Cutler? Cutler was on his way out long before he left. 

Like I said before it depends on how the contract is structured. If we're pretty much locked in for 3-4 years without much of an out then there is no way we go QB so high but if there is basically an out after 1-2 years then sure why not? We might not have this chance the next 2 years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

They were paying someone that was with them for at least a few years. KC knew they went as far as they could with Smith and come on, Cutler? Cutler was on his way out long before he left. 

Like I said before it depends on how the contract is structured. If we're pretty much locked in for 3-4 years without much of an out then there is no way we go QB so high but if there is basically an out after 1-2 years then sure why not? We might not have this chance the next 2 years

Cutler?

They signed Glennon to a deal at near the same cap hit and drafted Trubisky the same year.

Foles isn't a miracle worker. He's a decent QB that you can win with if you have enough around him. Drafting a bunch of rookie WRs/TEs isn't going to make or break our year most likely. If Haskins is there, you take him because he could be a guy that leads you, not gets carried, places.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, .Buzz said:

Cutler?

They signed Glennon to a deal at near the same cap hit and drafted Trubisky the same year.

Foles isn't a miracle worker. He's a decent QB that you can win with if you have enough around him. Drafting a bunch of rookie WRs/TEs isn't going to make or break our year most likely. If Haskins is there, you take him because he could be a guy that leads you, not gets carried, places.

That Glennon contract was unbelievable just like the Bradford 1 yr deal too

My thing is if Haskins is that guy and we believe that. I personally think he could be, then why arent we just trading up for him? Give him the keys to the franchise, spend the Foles cap money on weapons?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, .Buzz said:

Cutler?

They signed Glennon to a deal at near the same cap hit and drafted Trubisky the same year.

Foles isn't a miracle worker. He's a decent QB that you can win with if you have enough around him. Drafting a bunch of rookie WRs/TEs isn't going to make or break our year most likely. If Haskins is there, you take him because he could be a guy that leads you, not gets carried, places.

How many QBs in the NFL is that honestly true of these days?  That's like, a small handful of the elite of the elite, HoF track QBs in their "prime" basically.  The rest all need some pretty significant weapons and protection, and a defense to lead a team anywhere.  There's obviously a range between a Foles and a Ryan/Rivers or what have you, but this idea that a rookie QB is going to come in and be Tom Brady without piling weapons on for him, i just don't buy it.  Some guys are obviously able to get more out of their surrounding cast than others as a "ceiling".  However, the vast majority in this parity-driven league are still pretty darn dependent on the quality of their surrounding cast to play up to their full potential.  Especially in the first few years.

Like...even the flavour of the year, GOAT in training, Patrick Mahomes...is playing with a really stout OLine they've invested a bundle in, the best TE in the league, and arguably the best WR-Weapon in Tyreek Hill, a gargantuan contract to get even more weapons in there with a guy like Sammy Watkins, and a solid running game with versatility.  He's completely surrounded by bigtime playmaking weapons whichever way he looks.  He's not being "carried"...but he's not doing anything close to what he accomplished if you swap him in with our sad sack offensive supporting cast from last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

That Glennon contract was unbelievable just like the Bradford 1 yr deal too

My thing is if Haskins is that guy and we believe that. I personally think he could be, then why arent we just trading up for him? Give him the keys to the franchise, spend the Foles cap money on weapons?

 

I'd say there are two pretty clear reasons:

1)Rookie QBs and the ups and downs they typically have.  Very few come straight in and dominate right out of the box.  Especially coming out as 1-year starters in a sheltering college offense.  Would you wager your job on a rookie QB in this class taking advantage of our defense before it implodes and taking you to the playoffs this year?

 

2)Spend the Foles money on what weapons exactly?  This year's FA receiver/TE/OLine market is bereft of top-end talent.  Lev Bell as a RB might genuinely be the best receiver on the FA market.  The TE group isn't any better.

 

 

I mean, i agree with what you're saying in general.  If you're going to draft a QB at 7, just draft them and go that direction.  But i think there are pretty clear reasons why someone might not want to go that route this year...especially if you're skating on as thin of ice as this regime currently appears to be.

Edited by Tugboat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×