How is Dak worth more than Nick Foles?

[OmerV]

The other 80%, 50% of it he wasn’t allowed to start, and 20% of his remaining 30% was under the QB career destroyer, Jeff Fisher.

Read this in Jon Gruden’s voice: “Percentile!? We should be talkin’ football, and instead you’re out here with Percentiles?”

So, for 80% of his career he was a standout QB that his team and coaches somehow overlooked or misused ….. I doubt that holds much water in a contract negotiation. Hell, even if it's true it wouldn't count for much in a contract negotiation. You don't get much real credit for years of what "could have been".

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

So, for 80% of his career he was a standout QB that his team and coaches somehow overlooked or misused ….. I doubt that holds much water in a contract negotiation. Hell, even if it's true it wouldn't count for much in a contract negotiation. You don't get much real credit for years of what "could have been".

Overlooked and misused? In 2013 he went... 8-1? 2014 he went 6-2. 2017 with playoffs he went 5-1. 2018 he went 5-2.

The ONLY other year he was a starter was his 1 in St. Louis. 4 out of 5 years he was winning at a premier rate. 80%

 

[OmerV]

Overlooked and misused? In 2013 he went... 8-1? 2014 he went 6-2. 2017 with playoffs he went 5-1. 2018 he went 5-2.

The ONLY other year he was a starter was his 1 in St. Louis. 4 out of 5 years he was winning at a premier rate. 80%

I said for 80% of his career. What you are talking about is the other 20%, most of which was 6 years ago, not in the present. I gave him credit for that, as well as for the 2017 playoffs.

And as for 2014, Foles only played half the season, and in that half season he had a poor completion %, poor TD/INT ratio and low QB rating.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

I said for 80% of his career. What you are talking about is the other 20%, most of which was 6 years ago, not in the present. I gave him credit for that, as well as for the 2017 playoffs.

And as for 2014, Foles only played half the season, and in that half season he had a poor completion %, poor TD/INT ratio and low QB rating.

And he went 6-2 with Chip Kelly that year. The only QB to make Chip successful in his 4 years as an NFL head coach.

 

[mcmvp]

He's had some stretches but so have guys like Ryan Fitzpatrick.

QB is about consistency and Foles isn't very good at being consistent because eventually he gets exposed.

To be real here, Fitz has never had a 27 TD / 2 INT stretch. That’s a season, not a stretch.

Foles struggled under Fisher...no shame there. DeFilippo did make him better. Foles used to have a bad habit of retreating backwards under pressure. His pocket awareness is way better now after spending time with DeFilppo

 

[OmerV]

And he went 6-2 with Chip Kelly that year. The only QB to make Chip successful in his 4 years as an NFL head coach.

So, it doesn't matter that he actually played poorly, he gets credit for the wins, and the team around him doesn't really count?

Mark Sanchez actually stepped in and played just as well after Foles got hurt, and we know how weak he was as an NFL QB. Sanchez lost a couple more games than Foles, but 3 of those losses were against teams that won 12 games or more, including the eventual Super Bowl runner up (Seattle), a team that got to the NFC Championship (GB), and a team that was a rats hair from getting to the NFC Championship (Dallas).

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

So, it doesn't matter that he actually played poorly, he gets credit for the win, and the team around him doesn't really count?

Mark Sanchez actually stepped in and played just as well after Foles got hurt, and we know how weak he was as an NFL QB. Sanchez lost a couple more games than Foles, but 3 of those losses were against teams that won 12 games or more, including the eventual Super Bowl runner up.

You mention Foles's stats being poor, but then you say Sanchez played just as well, which the stats do not show. And then you say record doesnt matter as much as stats, but then you bring up Sanchez's record.

What exactly is your argument?

 

[OmerV]

You mention Foles's stats being poor, but then you say Sanchez played just as well, which the stats do not show. And then you say record doesnt matter as much as stats, but then you bring up Sanchez's record.

What exactly is your argument?

lol - boy you are throwing a lot of smokescreens.

When I said Sanchez played just as well, I wasn't saying he played well compared to the rest of the QB's in the NFL, the reference was only to how he played relative to Foles. And I talked about stats and records because those are the points of comparison between the two. I'm sure you know all of this, but rather than stick with a reasonable discussion you chose a smokescreen.

And, on the stats front, Sanchez clearly did play as well as Foles, and it's blatantly false for you to claim otherwise. Sanchez had a better completion%, better QB rating, better yards per attempt and yards per catch, and threw 14 TD passes in 8 games to Foles 13 TD passes in 8 games. The only reason I even give Foles credit for playing as well as Sanchez is because he had 1 less INT, and averaged 1.7 ypg more than Sanchez, so it's pretty generous to say Foles even played as well as Sanchez.

And, on the record front, as I said, Sanchez lost 4 games to Foles 2, but 3 of those losses were to the 3 best teams in the NFC that year. And, as I mentioned, wins and losses aren't only about the QB anyway. The QB obviously is a key figure, but he alone doesn't determine wins and losses. Both Foles and Sanchez benefitted from a strong running game and strong receivers.

 

[blueblood70]

He's had some stretches but so have guys like Ryan Fitzpatrick.

QB is about consistency and Foles isn't very good at being consistent because eventually he gets exposed.

yes Case keenum as well..i mean is Dak that much better at 30+ then those guys, I say right now as it stands NO! Ravens winning games basically with 3 RBs lol unless their QB improves he isnt much of thrower..im not anti dak hater but im being honest , hes not that much better then these tier 2 3 guys seriously..hes not turning down 30 is making me think his ego and agent have a unrealistic view f who Dak is as player right now..above average sure but not great but for few moments , sound familiar ie Foles etc

 

[CATCH17]

yes Case keenum as well..i mean is Dak that much better at 30+ then those guys, I say right now as it stands NO! Ravens winning games basically with 3 RBs lol unless their QB improves he isnt much of thrower..im not anti dak hater but im being honest , hes not that much better then these tier 2 3 guys seriously..hes not turning down 30 is making me think his ego and agent have a unrealistic view f who Dak is as player right now..above average sure but not great but for few moments , sound familiar ie Foles etc

Oh I don't have an unrealistic view of Dak at all. He's in the 10-15 range of QB's at best. Tier 3 or 4.

 

[Bob-Lillys-War]

15 QBs made the NFL 100 .

Dak didn't .

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

lol - boy you are throwing a lot of smokescreens.

When I said Sanchez played just as well, I wasn't saying he played well compared to the rest of the QB's in the NFL, the reference was only to how he played relative to Foles. And I talked about stats and records because those are the points of comparison between the two. I'm sure you know all of this, but rather than stick with a reasonable discussion you chose a smokescreen.

And, on the stats front, Sanchez clearly did play as well as Foles, and it's blatantly false for you to claim otherwise. Sanchez had a better completion%, better QB rating, better yards per attempt and yards per catch, and threw 14 TD passes in 8 games to Foles 13 TD passes in 8 games. The only reason I even give Foles credit for playing as well as Sanchez is because he had 1 less INT, and averaged 1.7 ypg more than Sanchez, so it's pretty generous to say Foles even played as well as Sanchez.

And, on the record front, as I said, Sanchez lost 4 games to Foles 2, but 3 of those losses were to the 3 best teams in the NFC that year. And, as I mentioned, wins and losses aren't only about the QB anyway. The QB obviously is a key figure, but he alone doesn't determine wins and losses. Both Foles and Sanchez benefitted from a strong running game and strong receivers.

Foles was the reason they went 6-2 instead of Sanchez's 4-4. Foles beat winning teams, Sanchez lost to winning teams is what that anecdote amounts to. Foles had 3 game winning drives on 2 4th quarter comebacks. Mark Sanchez had none of those. If he was losing in the 4th, you already lost. Because your QB was Mark Sanchez. And you're saying that doesn't matter because of a TD stat? Really?

 

[OmerV]

Foles was the reason they went 6-2 instead of Sanchez's 4-4. Foles beat winning teams, Sanchez lost to winning teams is what that anecdote amounts to. Foles had 3 game winning drives on 2 4th quarter comebacks. Mark Sanchez had none of those. If he was losing in the 4th, you already lost. Because your QB was Mark Sanchez. And you're saying that doesn't matter because of a TD stat? Really?

I love how you have now abandoned the stats argument now that the stats were shown to you, and are now simply acting as if stats don't matter, and the team doesn't matter, and wins and losses are only attributable to the QB, no matter if he actually plays well or not.

In any case, you are stating your opinion, and your opinion about something that happened 5 years ago still doesn't do anything to improve Nick Foles value or negotiating position in the present.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

I love how you have now abandoned the stats argument now that the stats were shown to you, and are now simply acting as if stats don't matter, and the team doesn't matter, and wins and losses are only attributable to the QB, no matter if he actually plays well or not.

In any case, you are stating your opinion, and your opinion about something that happened 5 years ago still doesn't do anything to improve Nick Foles value or negotiating position in the present.

GW drives are a stat that matters. I abandoned nothing, that WAS my stat argument.

 

[sean10mm]

15 QBs made the NFL 100 .

Dak didn't .

I get not thinking Dak is elite, but the NFL 100 is just a popularity contest among the players themselves. It doesn't really prove anything about anybody either way. Joe Thomas basically talked about how it was a total joke, and he was a guy that always scored highly on it so it's not like he had a personal beef with it.

 

[OmerV]

GW drives are a stat that matters. I abandoned nothing, that WAS my stat argument.

Well, if GW drives are the only stat that matters, then you have just answered the question posed as the topic of the thread about why Dak would be worth more than Foles. Dak has 14 GW drives in 3 years, and Foles has 10 GW drives in 7 years.

You seem to have shot yourself in the foot on that one. lol

So, that leaves wins as your argument, and Dak comes out on top there as well (67% winning % compared to Foles 59%).

So, what's your argument again? lol. Seems that brings things right back to relying on Foles having a great season 6 years ago, and a great playoff run 2 years ago, which is what I said all along.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

exactly if they refused that IMO they are GONE.. they arent even worth it regardless of how you think YOU SEE it or how it works..MARKET is not set for players OUTSIDE THE TOP 10 AT THEOIR PSOTION, THAT IS RESERVED FOR ELITE TOP 5 PLAYERS AND IF THEY TURNED DOWN TOSE ALREADY HIGH OFFERS..

I say let them ride , better start drafting because Zeke is the ONLY ONE that deserves top pay, he earned it and will continue to earn it, the others have bloated egos on how they fall just because of postion market but once again MARKET set is for NOW ELITE top 5 players, if you are outside that and get a top 5 pay offer , what the flip is the issue? its player agent issue is what it is and Id rather use them all up then and restock NOW..

If you think Dak just because hes starting QB in this league is worth MARKET top pay ie over 30 with the big boys , you are mistaken..very delusional because all dak has done is been solid above average QB and Amari played 9 games with us and got 2nd chance here but still is so far from top 5 hes also delusional like you that are being brainwashed by the term MARKET.. no not all starters get top 5 market money and deserve to be new market setters just because some teams made that mistake already.. in my eyes you earn it on the field, not by postential and no way no how does dak and Amari deserve more then 30 and 17 SORRY its not how it works or all 32 starting qbs and all 2nd tier WRs outside the top 10 would get new market setting money and the Cap would be like the MLB and NBA and thats not how it works..

i dont care about +YOUR totem pole but if you cant see the facts and stats in front of you is this repeated over and over ZEKE has been #1 in all categories since 2016 except rushing tds and hes 2 has 2 rushing titles could have had 3 in row, is not a receiving threat, and is not injury prone plays nearly every down and is YOUNG 25 even for a RB ..

therefore hes the exception to the RB rule given you pay him NOW its why the blinded fans upset about 2yrs left and hes already paid enough and hes RB doesnt apply.. pay him now, thats 4 years at 14.7 and guarantee 3, he has every chance to play at the same level for 3-4 more years as he has now..So YES hes earned being a market setter regardless of Position and current contract terms ..If im running business my star employee performing at high level and arguable best in the entire corporation will be the highest paid give what he can offer for 3-4 years and basically earn the past and future money hes demanding..Im not paying my 2nd tier , very good employees MORE just because they look around other corporations who are paying more to their employees..

the issue is with Dak and Amari and hen those wake u and realize how rediculous it is that they would not accept the current offers at near 30 and 17 it means they have bloated unrealistic views of who they are right at the moment..i get it but i dont agree i realize we will be stuck choosing between Amari and Dak limited with FT rules and if both are not signed before march 2020 they are RFAs or FAs and then we might be in pickle but that cant be Zekes problem..

Sory you wont convince me that we have to sign Dak and Amari to their ridiculous demands as they want to be paid way more then they are actually worth..Id rather roll with Zeke plus them 2 for one full year and choose to let Amari Go and Keep Dak/Amari under brand new shiny contract if they earned it , if niether does let one walk FT the other and at least you only have to replace one..

Im done debating i have my opionion and thats where we are at, ive seen teams win SBs with great d great RB and average QBs , it can work either way..not buying into a great RB never wins SBs when ive seen it just because they didnt have the RT or the Money they were still great, i mean Rothelsburger wasnt the reason they won that first SB, it was Jerome Bettis, I saw Lagerette Blount on 2 SB teams?, Marshawn Lynch, Barber with the NYG, Sproles? didnt Fournette and great D cover up Bortles 2 yrs ago to get very close to a SB?...reality's , we are more like that team with Dak and Amari , set up with Zeke as the center piece, we are not NE with TB or the Saints, who got ronbbed ,but they have 2 really good Rbs both could be like zeke if they used them like Zeke but umm they have a HOF QB and a better coach but RB not important and not needed for SB appearences or wins is bad narrative.

the real statement is this,

Teams low ball really good to great RBs monetarily and use RBBC at times but they still have to have very productive Rb1 and some accents to make it work, TEAMSNEED GREAT RBS BUT ON THE CHEAP, NOT AVERAGE RBS TO WIN..Issues are QB sare taking some huge chunk most teams are forced to low ball RBs but they are not devalued as far as their importance on team, they are simply being used up and cut and Zekes putting his Elite FOOT down..hes not havig that happen to him, i dont blame him..

To be honest, I don't think any of them are the best in the NFL. However, this whole post is laid out as if you can just tell Dak and Cooper that they deserve less and so they should just accept that. Well, this is the real world hear and that's not gonna happen. Both QB and WR are way more important positions to the team and they are flat going to get the priority in this deal. You don't have to like it or even agree with it but at the end of the day, Zeke is third on this list, in terms of money and importance.

So Zeke can put his "Elite FOOT down" all day and half the night if he wishes but when this is all said and done, there isn't a damn thing he can do about it. He has zero leverage so he will either sign a deal for what the team has generously offered up early or he will sit out and cost himself even more money. It's his choice but those bills, they don't pay themselves and Zeke can not play football for anybody else. All of this is just a lot of smoke and mirrors, to be honest.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

Well, if GW drives are the only stat that matters, then you have just answered the question posed as the topic of the thread about why Dak would be worth more than Foles. Dak has 14 GW drives in 3 years, and Foles has 10 GW drives in 7 years.

You seem to have shot yourself in the foot on that one. lol

So, that leaves wins as your argument, and Dak comes out on top there as well (67% winning % compared to Foles 59%).

So, what's your argument again? lol. Seems that brings things right back to relying on Foles having a great season 6 years ago, and a great playoff run 2 years ago, which is what I said all along.

No one said it's the only stat that matters, you're using absolutism to attack my argument.

 

[OmerV]

No one said it's the only stat that matters, you're using absolutism to attack my argument.

So, stats matter when they work in your favor, but not when they work against you. Lol.

You’re the one that dismissed all the stats in Sanchez favor and said GW drives is what matters.

 

[Aerolithe_Lion]

So, stats matter when they work in your favor, but not when they work against you. Lol.

You’re the one that dismissed all the stats in Sanchez favor and said GW drives is what matters.

Stats always matter. Wins always matter. Game winning drives always matter. Everything matters, to attempt to remove something to argue something else as you have done removes context.

I never dismissed Sanchez’s stats. 0 GW drives or 4th quarter comebacks is a stat. Nick Foles going 6-2 while Sanchez went 4-4 is a stat. Sanchez taking 23 sacks in 8 games while Foles took only 9 in 8 games is a stat. It’s provable Foles brought his team back from the jaws of defeat multiple times while Sanchez folded.

You say Sanchez went 0-3 against winning teams? Well I say Nick went 2-1, and a fourth team SF, who had made 2 straight NFCCG before this, would have had a winning record had Foles not been one of their 8 losses.

The argument is Nick Foles has had many good years, from long ago to not so long ago. And no, this isn’t erased because Mark sanchez threw 14 tds that one time.