I have a good feeling about BOTH Foles and Mannion.
Dunno … maybe just wishful thinking. But I like both these guys.
I don’t see “Big Star” in them. I do see competent, solid QBs who can do well on a good team. They have good size, good arms, decent football IQs, and bravery.
I think Foles’ big year with Philly is significant. It doesn’t mean he will play at an All Pro level year after year. It DOES mean that he has the goods to thrive on the field, week after week.
Remember how Austin Davis looked good for a few weeks and then went belly up when the league figured him out? He throve on a narrow bandwidth, and then the league figured out how to shut him down. He was a limited QB playing on a short string. By contrast, Foles got through a full year of superb performance. Yes, he tailed off the next year. But play a high profile full season of QB at NFL-history levels, and that means you got some game.
The next year, his performance tailed off, and then the Philly HC shipped him out of town. How shall we see that? The league caught up to Foles? Or to the system? I’d lean toward the latter.
But then, should we attribute Foles’ success in ’13 to the system, not to him? I think this is tricky. I think it makes sense to attribute the ungodly, historic-level of success to the system. But I don’t think that a poor QB could have kept that system going as long as he did. And remember–I claim nothing more than mid-table level competence. Just a solid, quality QB playing in a system that kept the league hopping for a year.
I also think that Chip Kelly’s decision to ship Foles out don’t necessarily reflect that badly on Foles. Ultimately, I think, Foles’s competitive package doesn’t fit Kelly’s offense that well. On the one hand, this makes his ’13 performance even more remarkable. On the other hand, I think that he will be much better off in the long run playing in a conventional, NFL-style offense. I just see him as the sort of guy who can play well in a traditional scheme with good talent and a stable context. I just see him as a guy who can be a step up from a limited but competent “game manager” guy. I just have a feeling he can be better than mid-table. I have a good feeling about the guy.
As for Mannion, the stuff I’ve read suggests the same sort of potential. I see him as an excellent, bargain-priced prospect for development.
I am also not convinced by the arguments that dismiss the running game. Football is football. You can’t tell me that a quality running game won’t take pressure off the QB and enhance a generally sound passing game. A sound, NFL-quality QB playing with a productive running game and with pretty good WRs can do very well. Think of Carson Palmer. He’s not a true star. But in a good situation–as with Arians at AZ–he can be pretty damn effective. I don’t see why Foles and/or Mannion can’t do something similar.
The issue here is synergy. Effective OC + running game + sound WRs and TEs + sound OL + solid QB = a potent offense which, coupled with a really good defense, can do something in the league. I think Foles and Mannion will hold up their part of the challenge. So, is the rest in place?
Well we all know the answer. The RBs and TEs are there. The OL is a big question mark. We know all of that.
I would say that I like our WR corps. I like the size of Britt and Quick. And Bailey’s route running. (Tavon’s a wild card–whatever he might provide would be a bonus. I don’t really count on anything from him.) And you know I’ve never worried about our OC under Fisher.
Assuming the OL is sound–a BIG assumption–the pieces are there for a really positive offensive synergy. It will be up to the coaches to bring the OL up to the mark and to transform potential into productivity. And I just feel that, in that formulation, Foles and/or Mannion would be better than OK.
Just a feeling, based on pretty inadequate information. We’ll see, won’t we?
By virtue of the absurd ...
.
