Example of Foles missing an easy TD and why we need Quick

[jrry32]

I think more than anything the throw is way late. Welker has the DB beat at his break and that is when Foles needed to throw it to get a first down there.

That's also true.

 

[jrry32]

I firmly disagree with that, at all times Welker is short of the sticks.

As for those saying that Foles was late, Welker could have turned right or left, he did not know which way until Welker made the cut, then Foles immediately threw it to him.

Even if you are right, It is the very first catch by Welker, it was bound to be some problem with being on the same page. It takes time to get the timing right, it takes time for the QB to get used to the speed of the receiver. That dogged Foles in the first half, when he had trouble getting on the same page with Welker. He missed 2 times in the first half on crossing routes when Welker was open, and that really made Foles look bad. It really added fuel to the whole Foles had to be yanked narrative He hit Welker perfect in stride in the second half on a crossing route over the middle. So he was getting better, getting a better feel for Welker's speed in games.

A speed cut like this one is drawn up to cut at 5 and roll to 7. Welker tried to roll to 7 but Foles's throw brought him back towards the LOS (which you can see in the last picture...instead of gaining depth, he's having to cut to adjust to the ball and come downhill).

As for him adjusting to Welker, that's a totally valid reason on the first throw. It was a spot route. Welker sat down just a bit sooner than Foles expected him to. Understandable. This route is not. Foles threw it short of the marker. It was an inaccurate throw. Foles should be throwing it to the first down...that's where the route is designed to end up at. Trust your WR to be where he's supposed to be.

Foles also missed Quick on a crossing route in the first drive, but again Quick was not there in the training camp, he was not there in the first games, he was given few snaps in the first games back, and very few crossing routes with Quick were called for Foles to get the timing right, being on the same page. That miss was in the first half first drive. In the second half, Foles did hit Quick with a strike right down the middle, which Quick took it for a big gain. So Foles was getting better at connecting with Quick over the middle.

That was inaccuracy. Foles had no business missing Quick on that route. He threw it high.

I feel that Foles getting the timing right with Welker and Quick over the middle would had really elevated the offense. One of the reasons I still support Foles. Rather than agreeing with those who say Foles was yanked too late, I definitely feel Foles was yanked too soon. I definitely saw that Foles was getting better at being on the same page with Quick and Welker over the middle, getting the timing right, getting their speed right.

He wasn't missing because of timing. He was throwing inaccurately.(for the most part) Foles did not get better in that game. His throws were consistently inaccurate.

People needed a scapegoat, so Foles was blamed for all the ills of the team. Right. Keenum is not the answer, there is a reason he went 0-8 with the Texans. Foles does have a higher ceiling, he proved in 2013, he proved again this season with 2 great games against the main rivals in the division, against 2 of the top 3 defenses in the league, SuperBowl contending defenses. He definitely has that in him. He was yanked before he could get the connection right with Welker and Quick over the middle, which would had really elevated the offense. Young QBs do have slumps, just this year Luck had many down games, Wilson had many down games, and they are regarded as franchise QBs.

He was yanked because the connection wasn't right with any player on this team. He's not the scapegoat. He's simply a goat.

I don't care about Foles's ceiling. He's playing like poopoo. The Rams made the right move. Fisher made the right move. It's like him benching Austin Davis last year. It's become obvious that Foles is getting worse and worse as the season goes on.

Luck and Wilson have earned the right to have down games. Foles hasn't. He had one great year (statistically). He surrounded that great year with three seasons of mediocre to poor film. At some point, you realize that's who he is.

Foles was yanked after a game in which the D crapped the bed, the run game was non-existent outside the first drive, many holding calls which put the offense in very bad situations, 3 drops on 3rd downs, 1 of them in the redzone, an opponent with a good pass defense which could focus on defending the pass all game long, the first game with Welker which was bound to lead to some problems between him and Foles being on the same page.

You want to talk about scapegoating? You're blaming a defense that has been in the top 5 all year instead of the QB that has kept our offense in the bottom 5 and is currently among the bottom 5 QBs.

It might be time to accept that one player isn't getting it done when you're blaming the other 21 for his woes.

 

[maximus]

A speed cut like this one is drawn up to cut at 5 and roll to 7. Welker tried to roll to 7 but Foles's throw brought him back towards the LOS (which you can see in the last picture...instead of gaining depth, he's having to cut to adjust to the ball and come downhill).

As for him adjusting to Welker, that's a totally valid reason on the first throw. It was a spot route. Welker sat down just a bit sooner than Foles expected him to. Understandable. This route is not. Foles threw it short of the marker. It was an inaccurate throw. Foles should be throwing it to the first down...that's where the route is designed to end up at. Trust your WR to be where he's supposed to be.

It goes back to getting a feel for Welker's speed in and out of his breaks. Welker had to come back because he was slow out of his break. If he has more speed going outside, he does not have to come back. I'm not blaming Welker, I said it was a problem of Foles getting the timing and the speed of Welker in and out of his break right.

That was inaccuracy. Foles had no business missing Quick on that route. He threw it high.

He wasn't missing because of timing. He was throwing inaccurately.(for the most part) Foles did not get better in that game. His throws were consistently inaccurate.

He was yanked because the connection wasn't right with any player on this team. He's not the scapegoat. He's simply a goat.

I don't care about Foles's ceiling. He's playing like poopoo. The Rams made the right move. Fisher made the right move. It's like him benching Austin Davis last year. It's become obvious that Foles is getting worse and worse as the season goes on.

How he did not get better, when he was missing Welker and Quick over the middle in the first half, and in the second half connected with them both perfect in stride over the middle which allowed them to rack up the YAC's? Both Welker and Quick missed the training camp, missed many games.

Luck and Wilson have earned the right to have down games. Foles hasn't. He had one great year (statistically). He surrounded that great year with three seasons of mediocre to poor film. At some point, you realize that's who he is.

Foles also had 2 great games against 2 of the 3 best defenses in the league this season. Threw a perfect deep ball to Kendricks against Pitt, a good thrown ball to Tavon against Vikings. Both dropped. Catch those, Rams are 6-3

You want to talk about scapegoating? You're blaming a defense that has been in the top 5 all year instead of the QB that has kept our offense in the bottom 5 and is currently among the bottom 5 QBs.

It might be time to accept that one player isn't getting it done when you're blaming the other 21 for his woes.

Look man, I love this defense, they played great before, but in this game they did not play like a top 5 defense, more like a bottom 5 defense. Allowing 24 points in a half to the Bears, are you kidding me? Is that what top 5 defenses do? San Diego defense sucks, and they did not allow the Bears 24 points in the whole previous game. Seahags SHUT THEM DOWN. Zero points whole game.

I'm not blaming everyone else, I present valid FACTS which impacted the offensive game. This offense is built to be run first, yet Gurley had no hole after the 1st drive. FACT. The Holding calls which put the offense in bad situations numerous times, not just 1 or 2 times, again a FACT. Those numerous holding calls erased a TD, turned a 14-7 game into a total different ball game at 10-24, and took Gurley out of the game. FACT. It allowed the Bears to focus on defending the pass all game after the first drive. That is HUGE. Gurley out of the game with only 12 touches, focus on the pass all game long. The Bears could not have dreamed of a better scenario.

The drops on 3rd downs are also FACT, one of them in the redzone. The drops have plagued this offense throughout the season, sure every team drops, but at different rates and in different situations, and the TEs are supposed to be the QBs best friend, his security blanket, not lead the league in drops and let him down when he puts the ball between their numbers.

The fact that Welker just arrived and it took a half for Foles to get the right timing and the feel for Welker's speed in and out of his breaks right, is also a FACT. And Foles was improving in that regard. Trouble connecting on crossing routes over the middle in the first half, hits him perfect in stride over the middle in the second half. The same with Quick. How is that not improving? Why not give him at least one more game to see if the improvement holds up?

 

[jrry32]

It goes back to getting a feel for Welker's speed in and out of his breaks. Welker had to come back because he was slow out of his break. If he has more speed going outside, he does not have to come back. I'm not blaming Welker, I said it was a problem of Foles getting the timing and the speed of Welker in and out of his break right.

Dude, this doesn't even make sense. If it was speed out of the break, Foles would have overthrown him. Welker had to come back to the ball because it was thrown short of the marker. The ball was short of the marker. That means that Foles did not throw to the first down marker. It has nothing to do with the WR. Foles did not throw the ball to the spot it was supposed to be at. If he had overthrown him, I'd buy the argument you're making. But underthrowing it is 100% on the QB. There is nothing with the route or the WR that would cause the QB to throw the ball short of where it was supposed to be. Unless Foles thought Welker was running the route short of the marker. In that case, Foles still made the mistake because he should be hitting his spots and trusting the WR to be where he's supposed to be.

How he did not get better, when he was missing Welker and Quick over the middle in the first half, and in the second half connected with them both perfect in stride over the middle which allowed them to rack up the YAC's? Both Welker and Quick missed the training camp, missed many games.

How did he not get better? Watch the second half of that game. It was a shit show. You're acting as if Foles was only missing passes to those two WRs.

Foles also had 2 great games against 2 of the 3 best defenses in the league this season. Threw a perfect deep ball to Kendricks against Pitt, a good thrown ball to Tavon against Vikings. Both dropped. Catch those, Rams are 6-3

I don't care what Foles did against Arizona and Seattle. Those games are long past. He's playing like crap now.

And yes, those two drops were killers. But we scored 6 points against Pittsburgh. We scored 18 points against the Vikings. You don't get to blame Tavon and Kendricks for those two losses when the offense led by Foles couldn't even surpass 20 points in either of those games. If we had lost 28-24 or 31-28 and Foles played a great game...I'd be in total agreement with you. But Foles played like crap in both of those games too. Maybe you forgot Foles chucking up an interception on the final drive against Pittsburgh or him not pulling the trigger on a wide open Britt on the first play of the Minnesota game. Without those two mistakes, we likely are 6-3 as well. But those are two plays. I don't judge a guy on two plays. Foles's body of work is bad.

Look man, I love this defense, they played great before, but in this game they did not play like a top 5 defense, more like a bottom 5 defense. Allowing 24 points in a half to the Bears, are you kidding me? Is that what top 5 defenses do? San Diego defense sucks, and they did not allow the Bears 24 points in the whole previous game. Seahags SHUT THEM DOWN. Zero points whole game.

No. Stop it. You don't get to complain at the defense for having a bad game. Our defense is 4th in defensive points per game allowed...COUNTING THE BEARS GAME. Where is our offense ranked? 31st in the NFL. SECOND TO LAST.

You don't get to blame other players for us losing to Pittsburgh when our offense scored 6 points (and our defense held them to 13) and then complain about the defense having a bad game.

They've held up their end of the bargain.

I'm not blaming everyone else, I present valid FACTS which impacted the offensive game. This offense is built to be run first, yet Gurley had no hole after the 1st drive. FACT. The Holding calls which put the offense in bad situations numerous times, not just 1 or 2 times, again a FACT. Those numerous holding calls erased a TD, turned a 14-7 game into a total different ball game at 10-24, and took Gurley out of the game. FACT. It allowed the Bears to focus on defending the pass all game after the first drive. That is HUGE. Gurley out of the game with only 12 touches, focus on the pass all game long. The Bears could not have dreamed of a better scenario.

No, you didn't. You played the blame game and pointed your finger at the 21 players on the field not named Nick Foles. The Rams are 5th in the NFL in rushing yards per game. The Rams are 4th in the NFL in DPPG allowed. Yet, you stand here pointing the finger at the defense and running game. The Rams are 4-5 because they have one of the worst starting QBs in the NFL.

The drops on 3rd downs are also FACT, one of them in the redzone. The drops have plagued this offense throughout the season, sure every team drops, but at different rates and in different situations, and the TEs are supposed to be the QBs best friend, his security blanket, not lead the league in drops and let him down when he puts the ball between their numbers.

Yep. Drops are a problem. No disagreement. But some of the drops aren't solely on the WRs/TEs. Like, for example, the ball that Tavon dropped that was almost a fumble. Bad play by Tavon. But also a bad play by Foles. He threw the ball high, made Tavon extend for it, and that allowed the DB to punch it out before he could protect the ball. If Foles had put that ball in the strike zone, Tavon can protect it sooner and gets hit with the ball in stride allowing him to make something happen after the catch. Foles very rarely hits our WRs or TEs in stride. They almost always have to adjust for the ball.

The fact that Welker just arrived and it took a half for Foles to get the right timing and the feel for Welker's speed in and out of his breaks right, is also a FACT. And Foles was improving in that regard. Trouble connecting on crossing routes over the middle in the first half, hits him perfect in stride over the middle in the second half. The same with Quick. How is that not improving? Why not give him at least one more game to see if the improvement holds up?

I think you need to go check on the definitions of "fact" and "opinion." I'm really not trying to be a dick here but you keep calling your interpretations of what happened "facts" when they're opinions.

Why not give him one more game? He's had 9. And he's currently the second worst QB in the NFL statistically.(ahead of only a broken down Peyton Manning) Why would we give him one more game? He's had plenty of chances. I was ready to pull the plug after the Minnesota game. He got one more week and stunk the joint up.

And Foles hitting a wide open Welker on a drag route doesn't make me think he's improving. It makes me think he's capable of making throws that high school QBs can make.

 

[Schmitzer]

I know Welker was brought in to help on third down but watch Brian Quick come under the middle with nobody covering him, Unfortunately Foles locks on Welker the entire route. Had he looked at the coverage or looked to his right at all this is an easy 6. This is happening far to often with Nick. I want to believe in him but these are the plays he continues to miss every game.

With him locked in like that, why is the throw so bad? Wes had to dive for it. "Great catch" said the announcer - should have said, bad throw. Sure, should have hit Quick, but a bad throw there and he's diving for it too. There is more to passing than completion %.

 

[Schmitzer]

It's a route over the middle. Foles doesn't make throws to the short middle of the field, apparently.

He does on 3rd and 20. Complete for 12.

 

[LACHAMP46]

I still support Foles. Rather than agreeing with those who say Foles was yanked too late, I definitely feel Foles was yanked too soon.

My, you are persistent.....

Why not give him at least one more game to see if the improvement holds up?

Because they believe they can still save the season (playoffs), the TEAM will start to doubt the leaders (Fish) if Foles plays ANOTHER terrible game and any coach worth his salt, wouldn't trust his career on how our QB has played for 5 or 6 straight games. I couldn't care less how much "chemistry" he has or hasn't developed at this date.....Dudes been here months...and still missing passes...easy passes...
Like many have tried to point out, he's under-performed...It's time to move on....but I feel your pain, I was a Sam Bradford guy....DX too...

 

[maximus]

Dude, this doesn't even make sense. If it was speed out of the break, Foles would have overthrown him. Welker had to come back to the ball because it was thrown short of the marker. The ball was short of the marker. That means that Foles did not throw to the first down marker. It has nothing to do with the WR. Foles did not throw the ball to the spot it was supposed to be at. If he had overthrown him, I'd buy the argument you're making. But underthrowing it is 100% on the QB. There is nothing with the route or the WR that would cause the QB to throw the ball short of where it was supposed to be. Unless Foles thought Welker was running the route short of the marker. In that case, Foles still made the mistake because he should be hitting his spots and trusting the WR to be where he's supposed to be.

This does not make sense. Overthrow him? Foles though that Welker would start running hard to the outside once he made his cut, but Welker slowed down. That is what doomed the play, that is why Welker had to undercut the trajectory of the ball(which made him come back to the ball). If Welker had kept running to the outside after his cut, instead of slowing down, the ball would not had been short of the marker. It was simply a miscommunication, which was to be expected considering that Welker just arrived. That is why I was saying about the speed out of the break, Welker slowed down, Foles though he would keep running hard to the outside.

How did he not get better? Watch the second half of that game. It was a crap show. You're acting as if Foles was only missing passes to those two WRs.

He did get better over the middle to Quick and Welker.

I don't care what Foles did against Arizona and Seattle. Those games are long past. He's playing like crap now.

Those games showed that Foles could play at a high level in St Louis. Against 2 top 3 defenses in the league. And the main rivals for the division.

And yes, those two drops were killers. But we scored 6 points against Pittsburgh. We scored 18 points against the Vikings. You don't get to blame Tavon and Kendricks for those two losses when the offense led by Foles couldn't even surpass 20 points in either of those games. If we had lost 28-24 or 31-28 and Foles played a great game...I'd be in total agreement with you. But Foles played like crap in both of those games too. Maybe you forgot Foles chucking up an interception on the final drive against Pittsburgh or him not pulling the trigger on a wide open Britt on the first play of the Minnesota game. Without those two mistakes, we likely are 6-3 as well. But those are two plays. I don't judge a guy on two plays. Foles's body of work is bad.

Why should not the WRs not be blamed when they drop well thrown balls? Which had won both games if caught.

There are plenty of slugfests in the NFL, not all of them are high scoring over 25 by both teams. You're really reaching now. Foles played well enough to get the win in both games, had his receivers not dropped 2 well thrown balls.

Pitt game, the offense led by Foles would had scored at least 13 and got the win, if Kendricks holds onto a deep ball that hits him right between the numbers, not any other QB could had thrown it better. A perfect deep ball.

He missed Britt in the first play vs Vikings? He made up for it a few plays later, when he hit a bomb downfield to the same Britt with good coverage by the CB. That set up the TD. Only 18? Franchise QB Derek Carr scored only 14 against the Vikings. Only 18? If Legatron does not miss a makeable FG, it's 21. If Tavon does not drop that ball, it's another 3 at least, if not 7. Foles played well enough to get the win, if Legatron does miss or Tavon caught that ball. The Vikings have a very good defense, it's not like they suck on D.

No. Stop it. You don't get to complain at the defense for having a bad game. Our defense is 4th in defensive points per game allowed...COUNTING THE BEARS GAME. Where is our offense ranked? 31st in the NFL. SECOND TO LAST.

You don't get to blame other players for us losing to Pittsburgh when our offense scored 6 points (and our defense held them to 13) and then complain about the defense having a bad game.

They've held up their end of the bargain.

The D had a bad game. And that is a FACT. It would not have been that bad, but the problem was magnified by the numerous holding calls which put the offense in very bad situations. The D having a bad game, plus the numerous holding calls, took Gurley out of the game and made the offense 1 dimensional, the Bears focused on stopping the pass all game long after the 1st drive.

No, you didn't. You played the blame game and pointed your finger at the 21 players on the field not named Nick Foles. The Rams are 5th in the NFL in rushing yards per game. The Rams are 4th in the NFL in DPPG allowed. Yet, you stand here pointing the finger at the defense and running game.

The running game has struggled in both the Vikings and the Bears game. And that is another FACT. On an offense which is built to be run-first, ball-control. Funny how you don't want the Arizona and Seattle games mentioned, but you do bring other games when you talk about the running game and the D.

The Rams are 4-5 because they have one of the worst starting QBs in the NFL
.

The Rams are not 6-3 because 2 receivers dropped a well thrown deep ball by Foles.

Yep. Drops are a problem. No disagreement. But some of the drops aren't solely on the WRs/TEs. Like, for example, the ball that Tavon dropped that was almost a fumble. Bad play by Tavon. But also a bad play by Foles. He threw the ball high, made Tavon extend for it, and that allowed the DB to punch it out before he could protect the ball. If Foles had put that ball in the strike zone, Tavon can protect it sooner and gets hit with the ball in stride allowing him to make something happen after the catch. Foles very rarely hits our WRs or TEs in stride. They almost always have to adjust for the ball.
.

Adjusting to the ball is done numerous times in every game by receivers. That is why they get paid millions. The ball hits both their hands, they better not drop it. You act like the other QBs throw perfect balls the vast majority of the time. That is simply not true. Rams TEs lead the league in drops, and TEs are supposed to be the QBs best friend, his security blanket.

I think you need to go check on the definitions of "fact" and "opinion." I'm really not trying to be a dick here but you keep calling your interpretations of what happened "facts" when they're opinions.

Why not give him one more game? He's had 9. And he's currently the second worst QB in the NFL statistically.(ahead of only a broken down Peyton Manning) Why would we give him one more game? He's had plenty of chances. I was ready to pull the plug after the Minnesota game. He got one more week and stunk the joint up.

And Foles hitting a wide open Welker on a drag route doesn't make me think he's improving. It makes me think he's capable of making throws that high school QBs can make.

Statistically the game in GB really screwed his statistics. The game where he got a heavy beating right from the start, then he started missing throws and throwing picks. The least experienced OL in the league nearly killed him in the first quarter of that game.


View: https://twitter.com/zachkruse2/status/653264124273557504







Statistically Foles has been one of the most pressured and hit QBs, but also one of the least sacked. Obviously he threw the ball away many times, which helped the OL stats but hurt his own stats. The numerous drops also hurt his stats.

Really? Pull him after the Vikings game? Where he played well enough to get the win against a very good defense if Legatron makes that makeable FG or Tavon holds onto the deep ball.

Yes, he stunk it up, in a game where the D also stunk it up, the OL also stunk it up with numerous holding calls, which erased a TD and 2 3rd down conversions, in a game where the running game was non-existent after the 1st drive, thus allowing the Bears to focus on stopping the pass, in a game where receivers dropped the ball again, 3 times on 3rd down, In a game where he missed Welker several times in the first half because he did not had a feel for Welker's speed and tendencies, because he did not had time to build a connection with him, this being Welker's first game. All that, but Foles got all the blame. The easy scapegoat.

 

[Memento]

@maximus if you say "That is a FACT!" one more time, I'm going to scream - and you don't want to hear me scream. The one thing I hated about RamStalk was the constant use of "FACT!" in order to invalidate the opinions of others and claim theirs as the "superior" opinion. Opinions are assholes. Everyone's got one. Every single one of them smell like shit.

I don't know why you want to defend Foles. As many, many people have shown you via stills, etc., Foles has missed wide open targets and made rookie mistakes for fate knows how long. There's a reason why Chip Kelly wanted to dump him as soon as possible, even giving up a second round pick to us to make it happen. Fortunately, we'll have our quarterback of the future with the way we're playing, and his name won't be Nick Foles. Capiche?

 

[HometownBoy]

Our O-line had one of it's best games last Sunday, with two players grading high on PFF, the pressure was minimized and yet Foles was still missing throws, even if you argue that the guy is Bulgerized, that still means we should bench him. We got guys like Keenum so if anything were to happen we could have somebody who could reasonably fill in, whether Foles was injured or otherwise didn't pan out.

Which is exactly what happened.

 

[junkman]

The play REALLY should have gone to Cook. That's the answer to the question WWBD (where B=Brady).

The Bears were in a nickle package with 1 deep safety, the Rams went 5 wide, empty backfield which forced a mismatch, but gave Foles little time in the case of a blitz. Cook was being covered by a LB, that's the mismatch which Foles should have known from the pre-snap read.

Everyone was going left (including Foles eyes), so the D naturally shifted that way. By happenstance or design, Cook (the mismatch) was running a deep out to the RIGHT in the endzone, the only guy going to the right. By design, this point of this play was to isolate Cook! No way a LB keeps up with Cook on that route. If Foles had confidence in his OL and confidence in Cook, that's where the play should have gone.

Welker was a hot route in case of a blitz. And that was the option our inaccurate / jittery QB took.

Alternative, if Foles had a bit more mobility, the same would have applied. Look the D to the left, bide some time with your feet and presence and find your super-athletic super-reliable (cough cough) TE for a TD.

The problems? Foles didn't trust his OL to give him the time he needed. Or he didn't trust Cook. Or he didn't trust his own mobility, even with the Bears only sending 4 and a well formed pocket.

 

[jrry32]

This does not make sense. Overthrow him? Foles though that Welker would start running hard to the outside once he made his cut, but Welker slowed down. That is what doomed the play, that is why Welker had to undercut the trajectory of the ball(which made him come back to the ball). If Welker had kept running to the outside after his cut, instead of slowing down, the ball would not had been short of the marker. It was simply a miscommunication, which was to be expected considering that Welker just arrived. That is why I was saying about the speed out of the break, Welker slowed down, Foles though he would keep running hard to the outside.

The ball was on a downward trajectory when Welker caught it short of the marker. There was no undercutting the trajectory. It was thrown short of the marker. That's not even debatable. If he ran the route to the marker, the ball would have been in the dirt and wide.

Why should not the WRs not be blamed when they drop well thrown balls? Which had won both games if caught.

There are plenty of slugfests in the NFL, not all of them are high scoring over 25 by both teams. You're really reaching now. Foles played well enough to get the win in both games, had his receivers not dropped 2 well thrown balls.

The mental gymnastics you're doing right now are amazing. It'll be a cold day in hell when I accept that a QB played well enough to win in a game where the offense scored 6 points.

Why should the WRs not be blamed for the drops? They should be. What they shouldn't be blamed for is the loss when the ineffective QB contributed more to the loss than they did.

Pitt game, the offense led by Foles would had scored at least 13 and got the win, if Kendricks holds onto a deep ball that hits him right between the numbers, not any other QB could had thrown it better. A perfect deep ball.

Yep. Led the offense to 13 points if woulda coulda shoulda...that's something to be proud of.

He missed Britt in the first play vs Vikings? He made up for it a few plays later, when he hit a bomb downfield to the same Britt with good coverage by the CB. That set up the TD. Only 18? Franchise QB Derek Carr scored only 14 against the Vikings. Only 18? If Legatron does not miss a makeable FG, it's 21. If Tavon does not drop that ball, it's another 3 at least, if not 7. Foles played well enough to get the win, if Legatron does miss or Tavon caught that ball. The Vikings have a very good defense, it's not like they suck on D.

Now Zuerlein is getting dragged into this. Let's ignore the fact that he bailed Foles's ass out with a 60+ yard FG and a 50+ yard FG.

Yep...only 18.

And if Foles doesn't miss Britt deep or throw a number of inaccurate passes in that game, we win going away. So Tavon and Zuerlein made two mistakes combined while making a ton of plays for this team. Foles made multiple mistakes while giving us a poor performance.

The running game has struggled in both the Vikings and the Bears game. And that is another FACT. On an offense which is built to be run-first, ball-control. Funny how you don't want the Arizona and Seattle games mentioned, but you do bring other games when you talk about the running game and the D.

LOL.

The running game put up 160 yards against Minnesota. That's not struggling. So no, it's not a fact. It's your opinion. And not an accurate one.

We didn't get a chance to establish the run against the Bears...because Foles couldn't hit the broadside of a barn.

Funny how I don't want the Arizona and Seattle games mentioned? Because I don't give a shit about what Foles did back then. He's not playing well now. Picking out 2 isolated games after 9 starts is a god awful argument. Those games are already accounted for in his statistics which are the second worst in the league among starting QBs. So if he played so well in those games, he must have been god awful in the other 7. 7 games > 2 games.

The Rams are not 6-3 because 2 receivers dropped a well thrown deep ball by Foles.

The Rams are not 6-3 or 7-2 because the team lacks even an average QB.

You want to harp on 2 drops...how about all of the passes Foles has missed? How about the games where the defense, running game, and Austin have bailed him out?

Without Austin, we lose to Seattle...and Nick Foles's fumble TD plays a big role in that loss. Without Gurley, we lose to Arizona. Without the defense, Gurley, and Austin, we lose to Cleveland and San Francisco.

The fact that the Rams are not 6-3 has much more to do with Nick Foles than it does Austin and Kendricks.

Statistically the game in GB really screwed his statistics. The game where he got a heavy beating right from the start, then he started missing throws and throwing picks. The least experienced OL in the league nearly killed him in the first quarter of that game.


View: https://twitter.com/zachkruse2/status/653264124273557504







Statistically Foles has been one of the most pressured and hit QBs, but also one of the least sacked. Obviously he threw the ball away many times, which helped the OL stats but hurt his own stats. The numerous drops also hurt his stats.

So just to get this straight...rather than Foles being at fault for his poor play and the Rams underachieving, it's the defense, running game, OL, and WRs/TEs that are at fault? So...everyone that isn't Foles. I think you forgot to add Cignetti, Williams, Fisher, Snead...and maybe a few others that are also at fault rather than Foles.

Because Foles can't be held accountable for his poor performance.

Really? Pull him after the Vikings game? Where he played well enough to get the win against a very good defense if Legatron makes that makeable FG or Tavon holds onto the deep ball.

Foles's stats against Minnesota:
18/33
168 yards
5.1 YPA
0 TDs
0 Ints
68.8 QB Rating

That's not playing well enough to win. The only part of that stat-line that isn't dreadful is the 0 INTs. He didn't turn it over. That's about the only thing he did well that day.

On the other hand, Tavon had 8 rushes for 66 yards and Zuerlein hit 4 FGs including a 60+ yard FG and a 50+ yard FG while missing one just short of 50 yards...outside in windy conditions.

Tavon and Zuerlein played well enough to win. Foles did not.

All that, but Foles got all the blame. The easy scapegoat.

Nope. Foles is getting the blame because he's played like crap since the Arizona game and has held this team back which cost them the Minnesota and Green Bay games. And then put up another huge stinker against a very beatable Chicago team. Enough is enough.

 

[maximus]

The ball was on a downward trajectory when Welker caught it short of the marker. There was no undercutting the trajectory. It was thrown short of the marker. That's not even debatable. If he ran the route to the marker, the ball would have been in the dirt and wide.

That is simply not true.

Nowhere near to being close to the dirt. Nowhere near. Welker is 1 yard short of the sticks, even falling down the ball was above his shoulders.

What happened was the Welker was one step behind the throw. That is why he undercut it. If Welker was a step in front, it hits him right between the numbers, with Welker being in a great position to break an arm tackle and get the TD.

Foles did not had chemistry with Welker, he did not had a feel for Welker's speed out of his break. Which is understandable, knowing that Welker has just arrived in St Louis It made sense for Foles to put it where he put it, because in the reverse situation, if Welker is faster and Foles thinks he is slower, the throw ends up behind Welker for an easy pick six.

The mental gymnastics you're doing right now are amazing. It'll be a cold day in hell when I accept that a QB played well enough to win in a game where the offense scored 6 points.

Why should the WRs not be blamed for the drops? They should be. What they shouldn't be blamed for is the loss when the ineffective QB contributed more to the loss than they did.

Yep. Led the offense to 13 points if woulda coulda shoulda...that's something to be proud of.

Not woulda coulda shoulda. Just Kendricks catching a perfect deep ball from Foles which hit him right in his chest between the numbers. 13 points would have been enough to win the game. There are slugfests in the NFL, just to let you know. Just this past week, Houston beat the Bengals 10-6, the Bucs beat Dallas 10-6.

Now Zuerlein is getting dragged into this. Let's ignore the fact that he bailed Foles's ass out with a 60+ yard FG and a 50+ yard FG.

Yep...only 18.

And if Foles doesn't miss Britt deep or throw a number of inaccurate passes in that game, we win going away. So Tavon and Zuerlein made two mistakes combined while making a ton of plays for this team. Foles made multiple mistakes while giving us a poor performance.

Missed Britt deep? You do realize Fisher was afraid of the strong wind, that he did not even kick the extra point? What makes you think Foles was also afraid of the strong wing in the first play of the game, the strong wind could had easily slowed down the ball, allowing the trailing CB to catch, for a pick 6 maybe, seeing that the play was in Rams part of the field.

Only 18, against a very good Vikings defense, which limited franchise QB Derek Carr to even less 14 points. The same Derek Carr who in the previous home game put up 34 points against a good Jets defense. That Vikings D is a very good defense, the main reason why they have only 2 losses on the season.

LOL.

The running game put up 160 yards against Minnesota. That's not struggling. So no, it's not a fact. It's your opinion. And not an accurate one.

We didn't get a chance to establish the run against the Bears...because Foles couldn't hit the broadside of a barn.

Funny how I don't want the Arizona and Seattle games mentioned? Because I don't give a crap about what Foles did back then. He's not playing well now. Picking out 2 isolated games after 9 starts is a god awful argument. Those games are already accounted for in his statistics which are the second worst in the league among starting QBs. So if he played so well in those games, he must have been god awful in the other 7. 7 games > 2 games.

The game in GB really screwed his statistics. The game where he was nearly killed in the first half, then he started throwing picks left and right.
That GB game is the only game in Foles' NFL career in which he has thrown more than 2 picks. The only one. It is very clear that the bad beating he took in the beginning of that game Marc Burgered and David Carred him for the rest of that game, which ended with 4 picks and 11 rating, which have really destroyed his statistics.

The Rams are not 6-3 or 7-2 because the team lacks even an average QB.

You want to harp on 2 drops...how about all of the passes Foles has missed? How about the games where the defense, running game, and Austin have bailed him out?

Without Austin, we lose to Seattle...and Nick Foles's fumble TD plays a big role in that loss. Without Gurley, we lose to Arizona. Without the defense, Gurley, and Austin, we lose to Cleveland and San Francisco.

The fact that the Rams are not 6-3 has much more to do with Nick Foles than it does Austin and Kendricks.

And yet, if Austin and Kendricks catch 2 well thrown deep passes from Foles, the Rams are 6-3.

So just to get this straight...rather than Foles being at fault for his poor play and the Rams underachieving, it's the defense, running game, OL, and WRs/TEs that are at fault? So...everyone that isn't Foles. I think you forgot to add Cignetti, Williams, Fisher, Snead...and maybe a few others that are also at fault rather than Foles.
Because Foles can't be held accountable for his poor performance.

In the Bears game, the D did crap the bed, the OL did crap the bed with numerous penalties with put the offense in bad positions, the WRs did drop the ball. It was not just Foles that is for sure. Yet only Foles got all the blame.

Foles's stats against Minnesota:
18/33
168 yards
5.1 YPA
0 TDs
0 Ints
68.8 QB Rating

That's not playing well enough to win. The only part of that stat-line that isn't dreadful is the 0 INTs. He didn't turn it over. That's about the only thing he did well that day.

On the other hand, Tavon had 8 rushes for 66 yards and Zuerlein hit 4 FGs including a 60+ yard FG and a 50+ yard FG while missing one just short of 50 yards...outside in windy conditions.

Tavon and Zuerlein played well enough to win. Foles did not.

I guess you forgot to mention the 2 well thrown deep balls from Foles, 1 led to the TD, the other 1 should had led to a TD as well, if Tavon held onto a well thrown deep ball. That would definitely been more than enough to get the win.

Nope. Foles is getting the blame because he's played like crap since the Arizona game and has held this team back which cost them the Minnesota and Green Bay games. And then put up another huge stinker against a very beatable Chicago team. Enough is enough.

Cost the GB game? When he got nearly killed in the first half? Wow. The hate is really strong in this one. The only game since he's been in the league he's thrown more than 2 picks, the bad beating he took without a doubt shellshocked him, leading to 4 picks, 11 rating which have destroyed his stats.

Cost the Minn game? If Tavon helds onto a good deep thrown ball from Foles, that is more than enough to win. If the OL does not allow pressure in Foles' face 1 sec after the snap on that intentional ground play, the Rams kick a FG after that play and win the game.

 

[Memento]

@maximus seriously, man, stop trying to defend Foles. There's a lot of reasons why he's been benched, and it should've been a lot sooner.

 

[maximus]

And then put up another huge stinker against a very beatable Chicago team. Enough is enough.

The D did put up a huge stinker against a very beatable Chicago offense, the same offense which the Seahags SHUT DOWN during the whole game.

The OL did put a huge stinker, with 3 holding calls and one blindside block, which helped kill 4 drives while Chicago was taking a 2 TD advantage.

The running game was non-existant outside the 1st drive, apart from a fumble, which killed another drive.

Let's see the huge stinker put up by Foles

2nd drive 3rd down

Welker about to make his cut, Foles loads up the throw

Foles about the release the ball. Welker made his cut and looks like he will run along the yellow line. A moment later Foles releases the ball, so he cannot change the direction of the ball in this moment.

Foles had released the ball, unfortunately Welker stops.

Where Foles put the ball. Dead center between the 2 defenders. If Welker had kept running after his cut, the ball would have been right on him. Unfortunately Welker stopped right after his cut, while Foles thought he would keep running.

Lack of chemistry between Foles and Welker doomed this play. It was exactly the same with the other 3rd down throws to Welker. On 2 other 3rd down throws to Welker, Foles did not had a good feel for Welker's speed coming out of his cut. One of those makes the object of this thread, I already analyzed in the post above.

The 2 were not on the same page, no surprise considering that Welker had just arrived. Welker was getting open, so can't fault Foles for looking for him. 3 drives were killed in the first half because of the lack of chemistry between Foles and Welker, and those misses played in big part in why Foles looked bad.

 

[maximus]

Drive 1 was the TD.
Drives 2 was stopped because of Foles to Welker misconnection.
Drive 3 had a TD nullified by a holding penalty. Stopped after the Foles to Welker misconnection which makes the object of this thread. FG
Drive 4 was killed by the RB fumble.

Drive 5 Another holding penalty erases a 10 yard gain. 1st down a 2 yard run

2nd down

• 2nd and 18 at STL 12
  (14:24 - 2nd) (Shotgun) N.Foles pass incomplete deep left to B.Marquez [C.Jones]

So the snap starts at 14:24

1 sec after the snap, big pressure up the middle, Foles has to get rid of it fast. Bears rushed 4 dropped 7 in coverage. 5 OLs block 3 guys, while they parted like the Red Sea to allow instant pressure up the middle on the QB. Foles looked at Marquez, who was running a route to the 1st down, he is the guy in picture at the top, so he still had to run 9 more yards while Foles had to get rid of it fast. Incomplete.

3rd down.

• 3rd and 18 at STL 12
  (14:19 - 2nd) (Shotgun) N.Foles pass incomplete short right to B.Cunningham [W.Sutton]

So the snap starts at 14:19

1 sec after the snap, pressure is coming. Bears rushed 4, dropped 7 into coverage

2 sec after the snap, Foles is on the run, chased hard by 2 Bears defenders. Rams had 6 guys blocking 4 rushers, yet 2 sec after the snap 2 rushers were free to run hard after Foles, who has to get rid of it. Incomplete. Punt.

 

[maximus]

Drive 6
Comes after the Bears scored a TD to go up 17-10

Another holding penalty for good measure.
Rams get to 3rd and 9.

• 3rd and 9 at STL 21
  (6:08 - 2nd) (Shotgun) N.Foles pass incomplete short left to K.Britt (K.Fuller)

Foles looks for Britt

Britt makes the cut

Turns around

With the CB next to him, the ball goes right through his hands. That is why I said it was a drop. Because it was. The ball was definitely catchable. Low, but catchable.

When looking at the last 2 pics, the CB did a better job than Britt at coming back for the ball. I guess this is why Benoit said this



This was an example of a Bears CB running a route for a Rams WR

The ball went through Britt's hands. Drop. Punt.

 

[Orchid]

The ball went through Britt's hands. Drop. Punt.

Wrong... The question is why was the ball there on the break. Foles has been late forever, allowing Dbs to close.

 

[maximus]

Wrong...

Wrong. The ball went right through his hands. That is a drop.

The question is why was the ball there on the break. Foles has been late forever, allowing Dbs to close.

It was 3rd and long, because of the holding penalty. Foles did not know the exact moment Britt would make his cut. Benoit told the truth when he said the CBs of the Bears ran the route for the WRs. This was a prime example of that.