is Foles a fit in St. Louis?

http://www.csnphilly.com/football-philadelphia-eagles/coach-robert-griffin-iii-theres-no-coming-back-he-done?p=ya5nbcs&ocid=yahoo

Foles put up video game numbers in 2014, throwing 27 touchdowns and only two interceptions. His passer rating of 119.2 was the highest in the NFL and the third highest in league history. After a shaky 2014 season, the question is whether his 2013 season was a glimpse at his ability or a product of Kelly’s offense.

“I think in that Chip Kelly system, once he figured it out, he operated it and did a great job early on,” a personnel director said. “But I do not think he is talented [enough] where he will be that way year in and year out, or week in and week out. He is a little stiff in the pocket. I don’t think he has great arm strength. He has pretty good accuracy. I don’t know that he sees everything.”

I mean, I get it. This stuff is off season fodder. Hot stove league nattering. Nobody really takes it seriously, except perhaps when it’s their guy.

And I also acknowledge that a “personnel director” is, one presumes, a helluva better expert than I am. No contest. He furthermore is being put on the spot by an impossible question. How do you really foretell the future about guys with any sort of mixed history?

Still, this sort of comment bugs me. It isn’t because my team’s guy is being dissed. The rating itself is probably fair. I don’t see that Foles has to this point earned better than a middle of the pack rating. It is certainly fair to say that the ’13 results were not backed up by another excellent year and that there is a question of whether this might be a case of the league figuring a guy out. Many a 1 year wonder in many a sport has collapsed in later years and disappeared. It is fair to wonder if Foles will do that.

So what is it that bugs me? Three things.

1st, while it’s fair to question whether Foles will REPEAT ’13, it would also be fair to recognize that ’13 testified to a guy with some damn talent. Foles ain’t no stiff. He actually DID things for an entire season that very few QBs have ever done.

2nd, one cannot discuss Foles in ’13 and in ’14 without factoring in Chip Kelly’s weird system. I know–it cuts both ways. But then … it cuts both ways. You can attribute some of ’13 to the league struggling to get how to defend that system. But then you ALSO must attribute some of ’14 to the league having done just that. I’m not going to make any claim here about either side of the knife. But you can’t talk the one without talking the other.

I’ve said this before, but I’ll just reiterate. Kelly dumped Foles for Sam ’cause he saw in Sam a better fit for his offense. That seems fair enough. Long term, Foles probably can;t be expected to thrive as long and as completely as a healthy Sam could. It’s probably Sam’s dream offense, and was NOT that for Foles. That is a limitation for Foles, but, first, it makes ’13 even more remarkable in that he did it playing away from his strengths and second, it OUGHT to make pundits and commentators cautious. ‘Cause, see …

Foles will not be asked to run Chip Kelly’s offense this year!

I mean, it’s like these guys can’t think anything through. Foles is a traditional type of QB. And playing for Fisher, he will be asked to play … like a traditional QB. If you’re going to comment on stuff, I think you need a sentence on this: “Foles struggled in ’14, and this trend may indicate continuing problems. But he is also going to a system where he will probably fit in better, and may be better able to thrive than in Kelly’s system.” Is that so freaking hard to do?

Third, I just detest the lame, vague, inanity of the “personnel guy’s comments: ”

I do not think he is talented [enough] where he will be that way year in and year out, or week in and week out. He is a little stiff in the pocket. I don’t think he has great arm strength. He has pretty good accuracy. I don’t know that he sees everything.

Talented. What does that mean? He was talented enough to turn in a historic year. How low can his talent level be?

Arm strength? OK, he doesn’t have a gun. But his achievements prove that he has “good” arm strength. Some of the greatest QBs in league history had middle-level arm strength. Espoecially when they were accurate.

And the guy acknowledges that he has “pretty good accuracy.” Well, damn. That’s, uh, pretty good, isn’t it? Can you think of anything more important than a QB being able to throw accurately?

I can. Guy’s gotta read and decide and throw. So what does our personnel genius tell us? He DOESN’T KNOW if Foles SEES EVERYTHING!

I mean, who sees everything? But maybe that’s not fair. There are levels of ability to read and dissect defenses. Manning has been demonstrably brilliant. Colin K is so bad at it that his OC regularly takes away half the field from him. So where might Foles fit in?

This guy, apparently “doesn’t know.” He hasn’t apparently, studied the guy enough to be sure. He is apparently saying, yeah, Foles lit up the league in ’13, and you have to read at least decently to do that, but I am assuming that ’13 doesn’t really count, so I have to assume that there are limits to Foles’ ability to read defenses.

Now, again, I can sympathize to a point. This is a personnel guy–probably not a guy associated with Phi. or StL. He probably hasn’t studied Foles. Maybe his team didn’t play the guy. Understandable?

Well yes … IF the context is honestly included. Suppose the guy said, “I haven’t studied him, but my casual impression is that …” But then, what good is a quotation from an expert that is that lame? Or maybe the guy said something like that but the author or editor cut the qualification. Then, it’s bullshit writing and editing.

No one can know if Foles how Foles will do this year on an offense with problems, including a shaky OL. But if you’re going to comment, then base it on observation. Looking at Foles, what can one see?

All I can do is rely on what I saw from that highlight reel somebody posted the other day. Sure it’s a highlight reel. But it did include a lot of plays. And you know, I dunno if he saw EVERYTHING. But he DID read well enough to get off a lot of passes under duress, often clearly hitting his 2nd or 3rd read. I can’t claim he’s Manning. But he ain’t Colin K. And I don’t see how anyone couldn’t give him some props. He reads well enough and is accurate enough that, in a solid offense, he ought to be pretty effective.

Because, see, NO ONE IS ASKING HIM to achieve at historic levels of brilliance–which he DID in ’13–“year in and year out, or week in and week out.” That’s the point of doing something that is the 3rd best in league history: YOU DO NOT FREAKING DO IT YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT OR WEEK IN AND WEEK OUT! If someone did, it wouldn’t be historic any more.

This happens to athletes who blow up for a year. That then becomes a standard by which they are judged, and it’s damn unfair. Suppose he had had a really nice, B+ year in ’13, but nothing historical. In that case, he’d be judged as other players are judged. It would not be hard to imagine him getting back to B+ level, and the drop to, what, C+ level, wouldn’t seem so precipitous. People wouldn’t feel compelled to deny that he can repeat ’13 because it is so damn hard to accomplish. But turn in an A+ year, and anything short of an A- is seen as a disaster.

In the end, we don’t need an A+ year from Foles. We don’t need him to repeat ’13. We need solid, B level QBing. That’s what all teams NEED unless they are a QB-only team, as Indy was with Manning. B level QBing counts as significant success on a solid team. You can win playoff games with that. I’ll be delighted with B level QBing all year. If we get that, our offense will be more productive than it has been in a decade.

Can Foles do that? How the hell do I know? I’m just a tired old fan who played a bit of low level college ball in a completely different era.

But I think I have enough wit to posit the question correctly. And I think a general principle would be to say that a guy who turned in Foles’ ’13 achievements is a talented guy who has shown the raw capabilities of playing pretty good QB. I think I SEE in his play nifty feet, open eyes, quickness of mind, and the ability to shift targets and throw darts that can be caught. B level performance would seem me to be a good bet, and I’m smart enough to know the value of that.

But then, I’m not a “personnel guy” pundit who is too lazy to observe sharply, think clearly, write responsibly, or really say anything that could turn out to be proven wrong.

Trouble is if you write to avoid the possibility of being wrong, you also eliminate the possibility of being right.