Rams reportedly interested in Foles

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

iced

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
6,620
Interesting take. I think highly of Cooper (who won't be there at 10 anyway), but not that highly..

Conversely I don't think that highly of the OL talent either (or what's most likely going to be available with Bears, Falcons, Giants all picking right before us)

And the drop off from Cooper/White I think is too great for whats available at #20
 

Dodgersrf

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Mar 17, 2014
Messages
11,350
Name
Scott
Getting Foles and keeping Bradford would make me much more comfortable if we drafted Hundley.
This would make it an almost certainty that Hundley wouldn't have to start at all next year.
Bradford / Foles / Hundley. All the while costing less than 18 mill against the cap. (If Foles cap hit is indeed as low as I've read)
Could be far less if we can get Bradford to work a deal.
 

theramsruleUK

Pro Bowler
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
1,079
Because pegging yourself into a position for need is how BPA players fall. I don't think anyone would take back the Aaron Donald pick - and that's my point. There's a big drop off in talent between the two, and I think we'd be better served getting a talented player like White and grabbing another lineman in the 2nd or 3rd.



Quick is the only one I could say might be a solution to the problem - *might* .. he started off with a blast then absolutely tore the crap out of his shoulder - worst case scenario if he doesn't heal, we have another studly type of receiver in the making to take his place. Best case scenario, we have 2 stud's out wide that can be difference makers.

Britt? Occasional deep threat with some pretty inconsistent hands. Do you see him claiming that #1 spot? Cause I sure don't.

There isn't anyone in the receiver corps that has shown me they're a potential answer like a Nuke Hopkins, Antonio Brown, Julio Jones, ODB, etc.

And until we have a receiver that breaks 1,000 yards, I don't see how there's anyway you can even joke about the position being fixed. The o-line helps keep the QB upright; the great receivers help the ball get out of the QB's hands quicker.

What is this obsession with 1000 yards and a true number one receiver? Seahawks got to two superbowls with UDFA's at WR and a strong defence and running game.
Give me OL anyday
 

Dodgersrf

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Mar 17, 2014
Messages
11,350
Name
Scott
What is this obsession with 1000 yards and a true number one receiver? Seahawks got to two superbowls with UDFA's at WR and a strong defence and running game.
Give me OL anyday
Neither Superbowl team had big name WRs this year.
The best wr in football the past few years has never even gone to a Superbowl.

It would be nice to have Bruce and Holt back though.
 

HometownBoy

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
3,527
Name
Aaron
What is this obsession with 1000 yards and a true number one receiver? Seahawks got to two superbowls with UDFA's at WR and a strong defence and running game.
Give me OL anyday
I don't know, I can't even name the last Superbowl winner who had a number 1 receiver by definition. All the teams are mostly like what we have, a handful of guys who can hit 700+ and get TDs, Britt did it, Cook nearly did it, and Quick and Bailey were definitely on their way. This was with a relative nobody and a career back up throwing to them. I don't understand why people doubt their ability to perform with a real QB throwing to them. People get so locked in on this Randy Moss type that they'd rather we keep drafting WRs every year trying to attain it while ignoring our other holes than just going with the talent we have already.
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,941
Guess so are "coverage sacks" then

Do coverage sacks happen to teams with great WRs? Coverage sacks are generally more due to scheme than they are WR talent.

Unless you have completely incompetent WRs, the quickness with which the QB gets rid of the ball will depend on your scheme being run, the specific play called, and, obviously, the guy under center.

What great WRs offer is a larger margin for error on pass attempts. Because they either gain more separation in their routes or they're able to consistently win contested catches.
 

Ramsey

Starter
Joined
Jul 14, 2013
Messages
610
Name
Ramsey
Getting Foles into the Building would be huge.

One thing not mentioned by anyone is that Sam may not be ready to go in OTAs. So having a true #1 QB to start the off-season would be huge (as opposed to Hill or Davis or Keenum or some other backup) for the offense under the new OC. Plus, more reps for new guy.

Foles was lights out for the Eagles in 2013 and one throw he can make is hitting a guy in stride.

The competition would be great and knowing that we could still go to the playoffs if Sam went down presuming Foles didn't win the job is actually exciting.

I figure they upped the offer to swap firsts and get Foles. For the Eagles, moving from 10 to 6 won't cost NEARLY as much and may be more palatable to the Jets as well.

The benefit for the Rams is getting the best available QB for a trade down where they will almost certainly get one of their targeted OL and that QB may help them win now. It should cost them picks per se nor quality of pick as several OL are likely rated about the same in that range.

I'm in your corner on this one Mack... Foles throws for more YPA then Bradford, and that's huge, in my opinion.
Can the YPA difference be attributed to offensive system? I think Yes and No.

Yes...Chip Kelly offense vs Shotty...Enuf said...

No... I've observed that Foles tends to hit his receivers moving up field more than Bradford ...And Foles doesn't throw to the check off and throw to the safety valve receiver as often as Bradford. I think Foles led the NFL in YPA in 2013...
 

mr.stlouis

Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,454
Name
Main Hook
One probably won't want to sit on the bench to be behind the other forever. With the revolving door that is NFL QBs, one of them will pee pee off before it's all said and done.

Extend them both. Foles is a top notch back up and always will be. Both are injury prone so it all works out. If it came down to one or the other, you keep Bradford. That's too easy.
 

wmc540

Pro Bowler
Joined
Aug 24, 2014
Messages
1,029
If they are trading for Nick Foles to be the starter, Bradford will be cut. I don't see this scenario where you keep both unless you are trading for him to be the back up.
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
34,845
Name
Stu
So does Foles get a pass for his 2014 #s? Everyone wants to assume that the 2013 Foles is the real Foles. I would contend from what I watched in both seasons that the 2014 Foles is the real deal. By the accounts I read, he was able to start again before the end of the season last year but Sanchez was outplaying him. Hell - an argument could be made that Austin Davis outplayed Foles last year. Foles is a mediocre 2nd string QB in my opinion. Not the answer I'm looking for.
 

iced

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
6,620
What is this obsession with 1000 yards and a true number one receiver? Seahawks got to two superbowls with UDFA's at WR and a strong defence and running game.
Give me OL anyday

Seahawks won the championship when they had 2 receivers who both got near 900-1000 yards - in fact their 2 receives had more yardage than our top 3 combined

let's not down play russel wilson's impact on extending the play either

edit: and actually, seahawks had one of the worst o-lines too....
 

iced

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
6,620
Do coverage sacks happen to teams with great WRs? Coverage sacks are generally more due to scheme than they are WR talent.

Unless you have completely incompetent WRs, the quickness with which the QB gets rid of the ball will depend on your scheme being run, the specific play called, and, obviously, the guy under center.

What great WRs offer is a larger margin for error on pass attempts. Because they either gain more separation in their routes or they're able to consistently win contested catches.

and time and time again we've seen bradford get beat to hell because we don't have a competent go to receiver
 

jjab360

Legend
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
6,744
So does Foles get a pass for his 2014 #s? Everyone wants to assume that the 2013 Foles is the real Foles. I would contend from what I watched in both seasons that the 2014 Foles is the real deal. By the accounts I read, he was able to start again before the end of the season last year but Sanchez was outplaying him. Hell - an argument could be made that Austin Davis outplayed Foles last year. Foles is a mediocre 2nd string QB in my opinion. Not the answer I'm looking for.
2014 Foles was playing hurt, his line was in shambles, and his running game was nonexistent. 2013 Foles was healthy, O-line was one of the best in the league, and he had a great running game. Reality Foles is probably somewhere in the middle and I'd take that.
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
24,053
Josh McCown threw 13 TDs to 1 Int and had a 66% CMP, 8.2 YPA, and a 109.0 QB Rating. Didn't make me believe he was a good QB.

Just saying that stats don't always accurately reflect play.

That all said, I'd have given up more than a mid round pick for 2013 Foles(would have been willing to give up a 2nd). Although, I still didn't believe he was anywhere near as good as his numbers.
I've seen posters be enamored with Bradford 14-4 Td/int and barely 90 qb rating so you never know what will impress. That said 27-2 ratio is a different universe
 

lockdnram21

Legend
Joined
Apr 21, 2013
Messages
5,348
1) We had more talent on the D-line last year, yet Aaron Donald was the pick. BPA all the way
2) "We have WRs" is extremely debatable - and I sure as hell don't think there's one the roster that is/could be an upgrade over White or cooper..WR is still a lacking position on this team - and seeing as how we can't even get one to crack a 1000 yards in 7 or 8 years, I hardly believe the position is set.
Our problem this past season wasn't wr. It was qb and line. With better QB play Britt would have been over 1000. Also no way either makes it to 10 so you wouldn't be passing them up. Also I don't see rams making receiver a big priority.
 

Memphis Ram

Legend
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
7,352
If they are trading for Nick Foles to be the starter, Bradford will be cut. I don't see this scenario where you keep both unless you are trading for him to be the back up.

If it happens, the compensation required will tell us the story.
 

12intheBox

Legend
Joined
Sep 12, 2013
Messages
10,146
Name
Wil Fay
Gore pulling out on the Eagles means we can just do Zac Stacy for Nick Foles straight up and leave draft pics out of it, right?