DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Your 2018 Starting QB is ...

I don't think we are running his system any longer.


I am not trying to promote dysfunction. Dysfunction happens when people don't stay in their lanes. I am trying to promote fewer car wrecks.

No, I'm saying you saying it over and over equates to an annoying, irrelevant buzzing sound. And since you ask, I'm not saying it couldn't happen, I'm saying it won't happen. IMHO.

We'll see!

Asked on one of the Superbowl shows if he would play for the Browns and he said he'd love to come back home to the midwest where he is from. Just sayin!

I would not give up drafting a QB at #1 for anything except signing Kirk Cousins. I'm fine with Mason, Darnold, or Rosen at #1 if we can't sign Cousins. No I don't care if people agree with me on Mason.

Of Jay Cutler continuing to play football. Not since:
Just the many reports of the comments he made December 2017,

He would like to continue playing football, (He's looking to continue to play football, because he loves the game)
if he could start. and He could not see moving again to be a backup.

Maybe you don't realize it but in your previous posts you seems to be advocate the scouts not listening to the coaches....you even said the GM should tell the HC to shut up. That is the definition of dysfunction.


Of course. But i'm talking about something very specific not 'vision' in a general sense. They need to share the same vision of how to build a team.

What do you mean by they should have input but not say? What is the difference between the two as you see it?

First I said what I would do. I'd tell my 1-31 coach to shut up and not tell me who to draft.

The difference between input and say is with input, you can voice your opinion to a degree on individual players, tell me what positions that you as a coach want or need, but you aren't going to tell me who we need, or more on point, who I should draft. You are going to get who I draft and your job is to coach the team to wins. Concentrate on that Mr. Coach.


I would be very fair and upfront with Hue. I'd tell him tomorrow that if he doesn't win 2 of the first 5 games, he won't be a coach for the Browns come game 6. If he doesn't win 2 of the next 5 games, he won't be head coach for game 11. I expect improvement, so he needs to win 3 of the last 6 games.

Those are the benchmarks.

I don't consider that unreasonable.

That, my friend, is dysfunction.

That tone is the exact wrong attitude to take from a team building perspective.

Why would you start off by creating an adversarial situation with your HC?

It's also how GM's get fired.

The HC tells the owner...I asked the GM to keep McCown and Travis Benjamin and he told me to shut up. His personnel office refuses to listen to the coaching staffs request for certain scheme specific players. The GM and his staff are impossible to work and it's hurting my coaching staffs ability to win games.

Oh....now I see. This conversation is about your dislike for Hue more then it's actually about the proper dynamic between a coaching staff and personnel dept.

I'd take Foles if available!

Foles was a QB I wanted to draft back in the day ...

Nick Foles 2018.

Could there be a more extreme high and low of winning a Superbowl and then going to an 0-16 team?

Probably not.

But I don't necessarily think he'll be traded as Wentz is coming off a serious injury. Unless Philly gets an offer they just can't refuse, I'd try and keep Foles.

In a perfect world, sure, but that's not how the NFL, or life, works.

There will not be a truly unanimous decision on any selection. Sharing the same vision is wonderful until there are fundamental differences in which players best fit the vision.

This is especially true in the example you stated in which there can be a hypothetical disagreement on which quarterback should be selected. That's something that will undoubtedly happen, especially in a class with a lot of options.

For example, the Browns just brought in Scot McCloughan. We know from his months of unemployment pre-draft that he's a huge fan of Baker Mayfield. That doesn't mean Mayfield is the selection. Dorsey, Jackson, Wolf, Highsmith and the other various figureheads may feel differently. When that happens, a solution needs to be sought.

It's great to say the onus is on everyone to hold hands and come to a collective decision, but it's a wet dream. In such instances, I want the front office to make the decision. It has to be a rational one aligned with the system and required traits, but the front office is paid to do a job.

This is especially true in our situation. I would feel differently with someone like Bill Belichick, who is essentially the Patriots GM, but there are few NFL head coaches who should truly wield power in the draft room. They need to trust the front office to do their job.

I do agree the coaches should have a say on who remains on the roster. Probably a bigger say then the GM. That is starting to get in to the coaching lane....who plays and who doesn't play. I don't want Dorsey saying who should start or start drawing up plays we should run.


I know we talk about a shared vision. I agree. We need a shared vision on how things should be run. I hope we can have that but it seems to me the odds are pretty slim. It's a whole lot easier for a GM to stand up for his coach when he hired the coach. It might work, but there really isn't any loyalty between Dorsey and Hue.

I am sure they will work together....I hope it works.

Now on to the topic, I hope both Dorsey and Hue get the QB they want. It's not about who you or I want. Up until around 10PM las night, Foles hasn't been given much love around here.

You start off by disagreeing but nothing in your post actually disagrees with what I said.

AJ Mc

The way his contract is structured is if he's on the Eagles roster 23 days before the start of the 2019 league year the remaining 3 years of his contract are voided. They have to trade him before 2019 or he's a FA with no compensation going to the Eagles.

Since they have to trade him eventually and his value will never be higher than it is right now. For Sale signs should be going up soon. They can bring in someone else to backup Wentz. Buy low, sell high.

The bidders have to figure out are they bidding on the Foles of the playoffs or Foles the previous six years. Could this be Osweiler to Houston round 2? #folesgold.

I see people mentioning Foles her so I’ll put this here....

Guess Gisele was right Brady can’t throw and CATCH, sorry it that’s too soon.

I agree w/ed's take and think some others are making it too complicated. We do have a lot of experienced voices to help make decisions and I believe all will have a say.

However, Dorsey is in charge and he will make the final decision. McCloughan is a consultant, not the GM. He is one voice.

I do think where ed and I differ from those w/peen's point of view is that Dorsey will work with Hue and the rest of the staff as opposed to telling him and others to "shut-up" and working in a vacuum.

Yeah, I heard that on the radio on the way to work. But that doesn't mean they have to trade him now or even before FA starts. They can do what the Pats did with JG or what any team could do with a player just before the dealine. AND if they do trade him that clause that effects the Eagles in 2019 won't effect the new team, right? He'd be on the hook for the remainder of the deal. At least that's how it was explained this morning by the sports hosts.

I didn't see anything written about a clause eliminating the void clause but I suppose it could be in there. Typically if the player is under contract, unless you reach a new deal with the player his contract stays active and you assume it as is. I would imagine his agent is going to want a new deal as well, everyone is going to try and cash in on his playoff run that can.

Here is what I was referring to:

https://www.si.com/extra-mustard/2017/03/17/nick-foles-eagles-contract-void

The way it was explained on the radio is that the opt out is on for being on the Eagles' roster. Not any other team's. I'm not sure if it was explained accurately or not.

After last nights superbowl performance by Foles, who wants him?

That kid looked pretty good. Didn't get rattled at all.

Can we get him? Will they let him go? Contract status?

Foles would be a QB that fits where the Browns are perfectly.

Foles looked good and bad this season stepping in for Wentz ... I'll be honest and say I'd be very nervous hanging our QB hopes on Foles. I'd take Cousins, Keenum and Sam Bradford ahead of him and I'd also need to draft a QB at #1 if we signed him.

Not for me it isn't. Pretty funny, Dean.

The OP asked who our choice for 2018 QB would be, no mention of beyond 2018. Based on what I saw in the post season, my choice is Foles or Keenum. I also like McGown.

I assume that the Browns are going to draft their choice of QB with one of their first 2 picks. The only situation I see them not drafting a QB at the top is if they sign Cousins. They need to add a vet; I don't want the choice of starting QB to be between anyone we have now or a rookie. What I saw in Foles in the playoffs sold me on him as good option. I still believe the Browns long term answer is their best choice from this year's draft.

I'm not saying he's our long term future but what a hell of a stop gap. Better than Kizer I think.

Of course it could be said that Foles looked a lot like Kizer did as a rookie so who knows. Can Kizer be what foles was last night? No question that he has the physical tools.

Maybe in the last regime. I could see Minnesota making a trade for him. Foles's next four years are very team friendly for a Super Bowl MVP. It's about 6 million per season. That's a great thing to trade a first for. You could re-sign your own talent with that extra money or get a good free agent.

If you like Foles as QB then trading for him should be a good idea regardless of the FO regime.

Agreed...Plus I'm sure after that sizzling performance the Eagles if they try to trade him or going to seek very high pick or picks...I wouldnt want to part with our picks on that behalf, plus at this juncture in his career...Foles is really hit or miss...I'll give credit where due he played a great game on the greatest game anyone can dream of.

Is Foles legit or Trent Dilfer though? I liked the idea of getting him a few years ago, then he flopped. As a stop gap at the right price sure, as the man for something like a first?... Not so sure.

Foles is only under contract for one more season.

I could see a team like Arizona trading a second round pick for him.

If I were the Eagles I'd figure out a way to hang onto Foles until Wentz is all the way back.

Hey tru.............I don't think Philly should trade Foles because there is no guarantee that Wentz will be ready for the start of next season. He suffered two separate tears in his knee and it is a 9-12 month healing process. Thus, his availability for the start of the season is in doubt.

Foles has a 5 year contract that is voided if he's on Philly at the start of season 3 then the contract is voided.

Did you hear this from some random guy on Twitter?

Holy crap.

https://overthecap.com/player/nick-foles/773



I think it means his contract is voided no matter what team is on. They basically found a loophole in the cap system to make the contract more cap friendly. (Reminder: Howie Roseman, the Eagles GM, is a lawyer who started off with the team working as a salary cap counsel. He is also very analytics friendly. He had no experience in football prior to be being hired by the Eagles.)

Exactly...and with our culture, he'll sink back to his lowly former self. Very risky imho...He was able to shine with an offense that elevated his play. Bring him to Cleveland, and I highly doubt he'll ever duplicate that success. Foles will always be closer to a Dilfer mold vs a Tom Brady mold imho...But he did play himself a heck of a Super Bowl, kudos to him.