So now what Nick 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.
dieterbrock

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
26,988
ROD Credit 2025
1,068
Sure, the sooner he's gone, the sooner we can forget some of the miserable play.
And of course getting a draft pick would have been sweet.
But now that the draft has come and gone, how long do we keep him around?
Part of me thinks the longer we keep him, the more his value drops as teams know he'll be released.
But on the other side, his value increases the longer we keep him "in case" another team loses a starter/quality backup to injury (seems it happens every year)
So to quote Jerry Seinfeld, "What's the deal"??
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveFan'51 and nighttrain
dieterbrock said:
But on the other side, his value increases the longer we keep him "in case" another team loses a starter/quality backup to injury (seems it happens every year)
Click to expand...

Yeah it seems letting him come to camp and look good is the best option. Reportedly there were 5 teams before the draft inquiring on what the Rams wanted for Foles. Like you said if any teams have an injury before the season, or are not happy with their backup QB play, then maybe they get a 7th rounder for him.........or better yet trade Foles and a 7th for someones 6th.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dieterbrock
Foles is a "free roll" until final cut downs.

He's not a problem until then. And even then only as a spent roster spot.

I think odds are quite high that some team will come a calling with an offer for a future draft pick before final cuts. And I think that the Rams will accept.

Won't be much though, so we shouldn't hold our breath, either way. Maybe a future 7th is all he'll fetch. Anything more would be a gift.

To say that Foles "didn't work out" for S&F would be a monumental understatement. Lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wolfecola and nighttrain
LACHAMP46 said:
Trade or keep him....Keenum & Foles are the same imo....I'd rather have Mannion as the backup....
Click to expand...

You believe that Keenum and Foles "are the same"? Why?

Why would you rather have Mannion as the backup? To me he's an unknown quantity. Some around here had the perception that the Rams liked Mannion and were grooming him to take over at QB this year or next. Then the draft happened. The only thing we really know is that the Rams had a year to evaluate Mannion after drafting him in the 3rd round. After doing so they gave up a boatload of draft picks and bet their future on another young QB.
 
There's a world of difference between Mannion and Goff as prospects. They may feel that Mannion will develop into a solid backup/acceptable starter, and that Goff could become a star for the Rams. All trading up meant is that they didn't think Mannion's best case was as good as Goff's.

Another reason to keep Mannion of course, is that he's cheap for the next few years - Keenum and Foles are either free agents (Keenum) or very expensive in 2017 (Foles).
 
  • 5Like
Reactions: BonifayRam, Dieter the Brock, Fatbot and 2 others
Akrasian said:
There's a world of difference between Mannion and Goff as prospects. They may feel that Mannion will develop into a solid backup/acceptable starter, and that Goff could become a star for the Rams. All trading up meant is that they didn't think Mannion's best case was as good as Goff's.

Another reason to keep Mannion of course, is that he's cheap for the next few years - Keenum and Foles are either free agents (Keenum) or very expensive in 2017 (Foles).
Click to expand...
ya nailed it amigo
train
 
  • Like
Reactions: LACHAMP46
Akrasian said:
There's a world of difference between Mannion and Goff as prospects. They may feel that Mannion will develop into a solid backup/acceptable starter, and that Goff could become a star for the Rams. All trading up meant is that they didn't think Mannion's best case was as good as Goff's.

Another reason to keep Mannion of course, is that he's cheap for the next few years - Keenum and Foles are either free agents (Keenum) or very expensive in 2017 (Foles).
Click to expand...

Wanting Mannion to be the backup QB to Goff only makes sense if you are confident he can actually PLAY competently this year. No evidence of that yet.
 
I think the whole Foles thing was the most disappointing part of the Snisher era. I still can't believe how much he fell off. I think he can still start in this league but not with the Rams, obviously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hey Man and dieterbrock
Ram Man said:
Wanting Mannion to be the backup QB to Goff only makes sense if you are confident he can actually PLAY competently this year. No evidence of that yet.
Click to expand...

Keenum is the backup this year - Mannion is likely to be the #2 in 2017 and 2018, after a bit more experience in the preseason, in practice and possibly in games
 
  • Like
Reactions: Limey and nighttrain
Akrasian said:
Keenum is the backup this year - Mannion is likely to be the #2 in 2017 and 2018, after a bit more experience in the preseason, in practice and possibly in games
Click to expand...

Sounds like you don't agree with LAChamp46's comment above either.
 
Legatron4 said:
I think the whole Foles thing was the most disappointing part of the Snisher era. I still can't believe how much he fell off. I think he can still start in this league but not with the Rams, obviously.
Click to expand...
Who would have thought after that Seattle game that his career would go the way it did
 
LACHAMP46 said:
Trade or keep him....Keenum & Foles are the same imo....I'd rather have Mannion as the backup....
Click to expand...

Wow, that's so not fair.

Keenum had almost 7 1st down completions per game to Foles' 1.5. Keenum threw more TDs per game and had 1 INT to Foles' 10. Keenum was sacked far less and had a passer rating of 87.7 to Foles' 69.

He recorded a Rams record near "perfect game" vs the Bucs obtaining a 158.0 passer rating by going 14-17 for 2 TD's & 234 YDs.

He also led the Rams to their first win in Seattle since 2004.

He's the only QB on the team that has proven he can win games and had a winning record last season despite a probable concussion. He would have been 5-1 if Zuerlein had made one of the two missed field goals against the Niners.

Mannion, who I'm hopeful for, has a handful of meaningless NFL game day snap.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hey Man and JackDRams
RamzFanz said:
Wow, that's so not fair.

Keenum had almost 7 1st down completions per game to Foles' 1.5. Keenum threw more TDs per game and had 1 INT to Foles' 10. Keenum was sacked far less and had a passer rating of 87.7 to Foles' 69.

He recorded a Rams record near "perfect game" vs the Bucs obtaining a 158.0 passer rating by going 14-17 for 2 TD's & 234 YDs.

He also led the Rams to their first win in Seattle since 2004.

He's the only QB on the team that has proven he can win games and had a winning record last season despite a probable concussion. He would have been 5-1 if Zuerlein had made one of the two missed field goals against the Niners.

Mannion, who I'm hopeful for, has a handful of meaningless NFL game day snap.
Click to expand...
If Goff has a career like Eli Manning, you or I could be back up QB and it wouldn't make a difference
 
  • Like
Reactions: LACHAMP46
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back