JT speculates about this in his chat–what would the Rams give for Foles?

http://theramshuddle.com/topic/jt-chat-127/

Foles doesn’t do a whole lot for me. Keep in mind, the trading period doesn’t start until March 10. So I wouldn’t read too much into this rumor. But rest assured, it won’t be the last. I’m thinking maybe a third-rounder for Foles.
by jthomas 4:33 PM

I wouldn’t read much into trade rumors in January. But I’ll be a week’s pay right now. There’s no way the Rams are trading a No. 10 overall for Nick Foles.
by jthomas 4:40 PM

The Eagles don’t really have a replacement for Foles as we speak. So I wouldn’t sweat this much at this point.
by jthomas 5:06 PM

I’m not convinced there is anything to the Foles speculation.
by jthomas 5:32 PM

—

And…here’s an article about that that:

What is Nick Foles’ trade value?

http://www.csnphilly.com/blog/700-level/what-nick-foles%E2%80%99-trade-value?p=ya5nbcs&ocid=yahoo

According to a report, as many as three teams would have interest in acquiring Nick Foles were the Philadelphia Eagles to make the passer available for trade. Of the potential suitors, the St. Louis Rams were singled out as a possible destination.

Naturally, the fact that Foles could be coveted by another team will only further fuel speculation that he could be an important bargaining chip in a move up the draft board, specifically in an attempt to obtain Oregon quarterback Marcus Mariota. We’ve highlighted again and again the absurdity behind this thinking, barring Mariota falling out of the top few picks, although the recent report does raise an interesting hypothetical question.

What might Foles fetch in a trade?

No doubt, those who take such rumors seriously have their eyes on the Rams’ first-round pick, No. 10 overall. It’s attractive to the Mariota crowd as a potential launching point to No. 1 or No. 2, where the Heisman Trophy winner is most often expected to go.

However, Foles alone wouldn’t warrant the Rams giving up such a high selection. Perhaps if the Eagles also surrendered their first—No. 20—you might have something that begins to warrant consideration. That probably depends on just how much the Rams like Foles.

Let’s take the whole Mariota thing out of the equation for a moment. What would Foles be worth in a more typical situation?

Relatively often, what you see as a return in a lot of high-profile quarterback trades is a package headlined by a second-round pick. It’s what the Eagles got for Kevin Kolb in 2010, along with cornerback Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie. It’s what the San Francisco 49ers got for Alex Smith in 2013, along with a conditional pick that turned out to be another second.

There are examples of first-round picks being exchanged for players such as Carson Palmer and Jay Cutler in recent years, but those signal-callers had more defined bodies of work.

The notion that Foles, right now, would warrant a 2015 first-round pick on his own—particularly toward the top of the draft—seems highly unlikely. A second this year and a conditional next seems like it would be a fairly standard offer in this situation.

Of course, this really would be all about Mariota, otherwise why would the Eagles trade Foles? Who else would be under center in 2015?

Which takes us back to the potential deal with the Rams where the Eagles would flip-flop first-round picks in exchange for Foles. Using the draft trade chart provided by ProFootballTalk, and allegedly used in front offices around the NFL, the difference between picks No. 10 and 20 is a value of approximately 450 “points”—or essentially the 45th pick in the draft. That’s a second-rounder.

So, in theory at least, as the crux of a trade, beside any throw-ins and sweeteners, it’s not that outlandish.

However, what remains is still the issue of how the Eagles would jump from No. 10 to wherever they needed to go to get Mariota, provided he is one of the top prospects in the draft. And if we’re using Washington’s infamous Robert Griffin III gambit as any sort of template, we’re talking no less than three firsts and a second for the right to move up again. At that point, it seems far safer to attempt to build around Foles.

Not only would such a play be extremely risky and possibly set the franchise further back than Mariota alone could correct—he’s not Andrew Luck, folks—the Eagles would essentially need to have that deal in place before trading Foles. Otherwise, they could get stuck at No. 10 and wind up with neither quarterback.

With that in mind, perhaps the likeliest scenario for a Foles trade would be Mariota makes it to the Rams’ pick at No. 10, and then the phone rings. Not gonna lie, it’s an intriguing thought.

One I wouldn’t take too seriously just yet.

The Tennessee Titans and Houston Texans were also said to have interest in Foles, but it doesn’t appear either club is positioned as well as the Rams to help the Eagles move. The Titans own the No. 2 pick, which could be where Mariota goes if the Tampa Bay Buccaneers prefer Jameis Winston first overall, only Foles would be a very small part of any deal that went down there.

It seems the Rams may be uniquely situated to help the Eagles in their supposed quest for Mariota if the interest is legitimate. However, a lot of other things would have to fall into place before any of this could even come close to becoming reality.

PA Ram wrote:

Sorry I don’t have better info.

Of the Eagles fans I know, it’s not big news on their radar. They talk more about deflategate.

Actually that was pretty good.

.

fwiw

JT doesn’t think the Breer article is that significant.

.

http://theramshuddle.com/topic/jt-chat-127/

Jim. Bernie had a line in a longer piece over the weekend (I think) about Peacock recently talking with Godell. Do you happen to see this (or hear about it on your own)? Not much was made of the statement, but it’s interesting to me (if true) that the NFL apparently continues to work with Stl on the stadium when an NFL.com reporter comes out and says the Rams are essentially gone with league approval. Can you help me mak sense of this?
by TS 5:34 PM

Again, I think you’re reading way too much into the Albert Breer article.
by jthomas 5:34 PM

Bernie: More twists in the Rams-LA game

By Bernie Miklasz

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/bernie-miklasz/bernie-more-twists-in-the-rams-la-game/article_3abc21b2-d1dc-59e4-b254-14ab23ddcefa.html

PHOENIX • From what I understand, the freak-out level was running high among St. Louis football fans in reaction to a story written by Albert Breer on NFL.com.

If you haven’t had a chance to read the piece, here’s the link.

And here’s one of the key passages from Breer’s story:

“The early January announcement that Rams owner Stan Kroenke is planning an extravagant Inglewood stadium sent shockwaves through NFL circles, but — according to those with direct knowledge of the proceedings — was met with quiet applause at the league office, which has been waiting for a powerful plan like this one to get behind. And despite St. Louis and Missouri officials responding quickly with their own stadium vision, the momentum here has very clearly shifted west.”

I’m not as bothered by this as many of you seem to be.

A while back I came to an unfortunate conclusion: the NFL can’t be trusted. And the NFL will do what it wants to do.

So in that context, nothing really surprises me.

Including Breer’s story.

When commissioner Roger Goodell told me he wanted the Rams to remain in St. Louis, I wanted to believe him. And I did at the time. But a lot’s changed over the past two-plus years, and it would be foolish for me (or anyone) to believe that the NFL will sincerely look out for our town’s interests.

This isn’t to say that the NFL won’t play a positive role in facilitating the STL stadium plan organized by Dave Peacock and Bob Blitz.

The league’s first response — dispatch executive VP Eric Grubman to St. Louis — was encouraging.

But the level of trust in the NFL should only go so far.

When push comes to shove the league will do what’s best for the league.

It’s best to view all of the quotes and the stories through that prism.

The NFL (through various sources) is telling a lot of different things to different people. The league is very good at designing a message based on where the message’s target audience.

This is a league that put Grubman in charge of preparing for the eventual return of NFL football to Los Angeles. But while Grubman is supervising the league’s interests in Los Angeles, he’s also going to meetings in St. Louis and Oakland to offer advice on how to keep their teams.

Does that sound logical to any of you?

Los Angeles lands a team only if another market loses a team. And the same powerful league executive is working both ends of the spectrum.

This seems to be a rather obvious conflict of interest.

This sets up a situation where you have one league executive (Grubman) traveling to St. Louis to try and reassure the locals … and you have another NFL person (or persons) telling Breer that Los Angeles is looking great, and is closer to getting a team than it’s been in a long time.

Part of Grubman’s message during his visit to St. Louis was to make it clear that the NFL expected Kroenke to follow the league rules on franchise relocation. But Grubman also worked in the phrase “subjective judgments” several times — also letting it be known that when the owners sit down to vote, they can form their own version of reality and vote accordingly. The NFL owners can choose to ignore the rules if they want to.

I tried to stress that part in my column written after Grubman’s visit.

In one 20-minute interview, Grubman reaffirmed his desire to help St. Louis … and encouraged St. Louis to build the new stadium as quickly as possible … but he wouldn’t guarantee that a new stadium would keep the Rams in St. Louis.

All about those subjective judgments.

I can see why the NFL would have quietly applauded the Kroenke stadium plan.

I wrote this on Jan. 6:

“The NFL could decide that Kroenke represents its best opportunity to set up shop in Los Angeles. He checks off several important boxes. He has the money and the willingness to build his own stadium there. He has the real estate to house the project. He has an NFL team to anchor the Los Angeles stadium complex. The situation in Los Angeles has been a mess for 20 years, leaving a trail of flimsy stadium plans and promises. Kroenke’s all-encompassing commitment provides a neat, tidy package that can solve the NFL’s longstanding LA problem.

“Kroenke can deliver a Los Angeles solution. The NFL’s second-wealthiest owner is throwing down to go big into Los Angeles. With no other credible Los Angeles plans on the table, does the NFL have the stomach (and integrity) to cut Kroenke at the knees? Call me skeptical.”

So if someone from the league (or from the Rams’ front office, or both) are telling Breer that the Kroenke plan is looking pretty sweet right now, it comes as no surprise to me. It shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone in St. Louis.

Kroenke’s plan gives the NFL a chance to get something going in LA — either by signing off on Stan’s plan, or by using his plan to put pressure on groups that want to build a Los Angeles football stadium on a more attractive site.

Breer’s story was also useful to Kroenke in that it changed the narrative by shifting the focus back to Los Angeles.

Peacock has been riding a pretty good wave of positive publicity over the past two or three weeks, with the national media picking up on the stadium plan here. Moreover, Peacock has been engaged in conversations with NFL owners. The pro-STL case was getting out there.

So how do you counteract that?

Steer the narrative away from St. Louis — where there has been some new momentum — and casts the sunshine on the possibilities in Los Angeles.

(By the way, just so we’re clear: I’m not being critical of Breer in any way. He’s just doing his job, and writing a story based on his reporting and his conversations with well-placed sources.)

Breer’s also story serves a purpose in St. Louis. Let’s repeat it for those who didn’t understand it the first 100 times: if St. Louis wants to remain in the NFL, this is a time of urgency. Things are moving fast, and if the Peacock-Blitz plan has any chance of becoming a reality, it has to begin taking shape as soon as possible.

If the story demoralized Rams fans … well, that’s exactly what Kroenke wants.

As I’ve written before: one possible strategy is to poison the well and then make the claim that there’s soft support for the Rams in St. Louis.

So if you want to give up, please understand three things:

1. There will be many more twists and turns to this story, so it’s best to ride with it instead of overreacting to every news story, news nugget or speck of speculation.

2. By throwing in the towel, you are playing directly into Kroenke’s hands, and thereby making it easier for the NFL to turn its back on St. Louis.

3. Peacock isn’t giving up. Hardly. He’s more driven than ever to make the stadium a reality. No matter how many times his efforts are undermined, Peacock will continue to make his case directly to the NFL, and make it as difficult as possible for the NFL to pull the Rams out of St. Louis — if in fact the NFL wants to do that.

The best thing Peacock can do is keep working hard on the stadium project and make it as difficult as possible for the NFL to pull out of this market — if in fact the NFL is inclined to do so.

Rams to city: We’ll stay for another year

By David Hunn

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/rams-to-city-we-ll-stay-for-another-year/article_c281a12a-afbb-5e1d-acd3-808c04d35497.html

ST. LOUIS • The Rams will play at the Edward Jones Dome next season.

Rams management sent a letter to regional officials Monday afternoon.

The letter said the team was converting its 30-year lease to an “annual tenancy,” effective April 1 and, “in the absence of intervening events,” extending through March 31, 2016.

The notice, which has long been expected, does two things:
•It allows owner Stan Kroenke to pull the team out of St. Louis as soon as 2016, because the Rams lease will now expire at the end of every season. The original lease was to expire in 2025.
•It also legally binds the Rams to play at the Edward Jones Dome next fall — a point on which many here were uncertain.

Rams Chief Operating Officer Kevin Demoff did not immediately return a call seeking comment Monday.

Some have expected the Rams to leave St. Louis for years, since the team engaged in a lengthy battle over upgrades in its lease with the Jones Dome.

Two years ago, a three-member arbitration panel ruled in favor of the Rams’ request for publicly financed renovations worth perhaps $700 million.

Dome authorities declined, giving the Rams the option to go year-to-year on the team lease.

A year ago, word leaked out that Kroenke had bought a football field-sized lot in Inglewood, Calif., about 30 miles from the Rams’ old home in Anaheim.

Then, in early January, Kroenke and an investment group announced plans to build a privately financed, 80,000-seat stadium in Inglewood.

Days later, a two-man team appointed by Gov. Jay Nixon revealed a counterproposal: A 64,000-seat, open-air stadium on the Mississippi River, just north of downtown St. Louis. The cost would rise to nearly $1 billion, Nixon’s team predicted, and include as much as $405 million from taxpayers.

National Football League officials said they were working with Nixon’s team to build a viable plan for St. Louis.

Kroenke will need approval from 24 of the league’s 32 teams to move the Rams to Los Angeles. NFL officials have insisted Kroenke won’t move without permission.

Terms of the Rams lease remain the same next year, said Kitty Ratcliffe, president of the St. Louis Convention & Visitors Commission, which manages the Dome. The team pays $250,000 in annual rent.

Nixon’s task force said neither the notice sent to the CVC nor a successful initiative petition announced Monday to rezone Kroenke’s land in LA surprised them. “Nor do they have any effect,” the task force said in a statement, “on our stadium plans for the north riverfront of St. Louis.”

Zooey wrote:

What do you think of THAT Format Hell, zn?

Go ahead. Delete it. See if I care.

edit

Just to be utterly clear. You’re playing around, right? You don’t really have an issue with the format thing? (If you do, it’s fine…speak up!)

They say Hackett has a Coryell system.

So did Schott.

But I looked, and I don’t know why that gets said. I don’t know where he would have apprenticed that system. He was with Gruden in Tampa in 2006-7 and that’s of course a WCO. He was then with Buffalo from 2008-9 and that too was a WCO.

Rams sorting through coordinator options

By Nick Wagoner

http://espn.go.com/blog/st-louis-rams/post/_/id/15785/rams-sorting-through-coordinator-options

EARTH CITY, Mo. — The St. Louis Rams and San Francisco 49ers are the only teams remaining without an offensive coordinator in place. With 10 coordinator jobs all over the league having been filled (11 if you count Scott Linehan’s “promotion” in Dallas), the list of known candidates for the Rams has dwindled.

But the Rams and coach Jeff Fisher will have to make a decision at some point and could be drawing closer to one. Tuesday brings with it one option that is still in play for the job and another that’s been taken off the table.

The most obvious of those choices is former Buffalo offensive coordinator Nathaniel Hackett. Hackett interviewed with Fisher last Thursday and remains firmly in the mix for the job. In fact, Hackett is the only outside candidate known to have interviewed for the job to this point and is scheduled to speak to the Rams again on Tuesday. The fact that he’s getting a second interview at the very least means Fisher is intrigued enough to continue considering him, even if it guarantees nothing when it comes to hiring him.

Also on Tuesday, another candidate the Rams are known to have interest in was supposed to become available for interviews. That’s Indianapolis Colts special assistant Rob Chudzinski. The Rams previously requested permission to interview Chudzinski but the Colts denied them permission. San Francisco has also expressed interest in Chudzinski but hasn’t talked to him yet.

But the Colts announced Tuesday morning that Chudzinski will be staying in Indianapolis as associate head coach. At the Colts’ end-of-season news conference, general manager Ryan Grigson indicated that retaining Chudzinski was a possibility.

“I’m not going to get into specifics,” Grigson said. “But it’s ultimately my job to make sure that good people stay in this building and don’t just walk right out. So we’ll address that and do our best to keep good people here.”

Hackett spent the past two seasons as the offensive coordinator for Doug Marrone in Buffalo. During his time, the Bills struggled offensively with an unsettled quarterback situation not unlike the one the Rams currently have. Still, there are some league observers who believe Hackett has the makeup to be successful if given the right tools with which to work.

Aside from Hackett, the only other potential candidates linked to the job include in-house options such as tight ends coach Rob Boras and quarterbacks coach Frank Cignetti. It’s also possible there are others that have not been revealed, but without many candidates to consider, the Rams will have to come to a resolution to their search sooner than later.

From Why Buffalo Bills OC Nate Hackett Isn’t To Blame For Team’s Inconsistent Offense

http://billsmafia.com/2014/10/27/buffalo-bills-oc-nate-hackett-isnt-blame-teams-inconsistent-offense/

If you go to the link the article breaks down plays and has screen caps to illustrate

Through the first eight games of the Buffalo Bills 2014 season, offensive coordinator Nathaniel Hackett has emerged as the whipping boy of fans looking to place blame for the team’s inconsistent offense. From vague spews of rage regarding play-calling to play-design, whenever things don’t go Buffalo’s way, Nathaniel Hackett has somehow been at fault in the minds of fans.

Now, this column isn’t intended to pin Hackett as some outstanding coordinator that’s getting the shaft from fans, because that’s not the case. But, I do think that the second-year coordinator deserves quite a bit more credit than he’s received, specifically for the passing game that he’s installed.

Heading into this season, the Bills made it clear that they wanted to be a run-first team, in order to ease the development of EJ Manuel, who was entering his second year in the NFL. The team added Chris Williams and Anthony Dixon in free agency, while trading for Bryce Brown and selecting Cyrus Kouandjio, Cyril Richardson and Seantrel Henderson in the 2014 NFL Draft.

It didn’t take long to realize that Manuel would be unable to take a step forward in his development behind a young, inexperienced and ineffective offensive line, so the team went to Kyle Orton after the Houston Texans loss.

Orton is a veteran quarterback that can read coverages and get the ball out quickly with a collapsing pocket. While the lack of production from the rushing attack has been an issue, the guard play seems to be more at fault than when the plays have been called. What Hackett does have control over is play-design and when to call those plays. When the offensive line has held up, Hackett’s design in the passing game has almost always gotten a receiver open, particularly in the middle of the field.

…

While the Bills’ offense has been frustrating to watch at times and it’s easy to point fingers, Nate Hackett has done an adequate job, considering the situation the team is in. A weak offensive line isn’t conducive to running the ball, but he’s using the short passing game as an extension of the run, and he’s calling plays that test defenses both vertically and horizontally.

As the year wears on and the offensive line continues to gel, we should see a bit more production out of the rushing attack, but for now, let’s judge players and coaches on things that they control

Tipsheet: Foles could provide QB solution for Rams

By Jeff Gordon

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/jeff-gordon/tipsheet-foles-could-provide-qb-solution-for-rams/article_80339bc3-5258-572b-ae2e-c94ac48f5c32.html

Philadelphia Eagles coach Chip Kelly is trying to run the Oregon offense in the NFL. He loves Oregon quarterback Marcus Mariota.

Since Mariota is expected to go near the top of the draft and the Eagles don’t pick until No. 20 in the first round, putting together a trade package for the Heisman Trophy winner won’t be easy.

That is where the Rams could come in. Should the Eagles opt to move quarterback Nick Foles to clear space for Mariota, the Rams would likely make a bid.

And the Rams have the 10th overall draft pick. If the Rams are willing to spend it to get a proven alternative at quarterback, the Eagles could throw that pick in the trade package for a top pick to land Mariota.

Foles, who is 6-foot-6 and 243 pounds, is immobile — like the star-crossed Sam Bradford. But Foles has fully operational legs. He has completed 61.6 percent of his career passes and thrown 46 touchdown passes against just 17 interceptions.

But he took a step back last season. Foles played just eight games last season before suffering a fractured collarbone. He threw 13 TD passes in those games but also 10 interceptions — a far cry from his stunning 27-2 TDs-to-INTs ratio the season before.

Foles, 26, will be entering the “walk” year of his contract, so he will be heavily motivated to get back on track.

The Rams wouldn’t be the only team bidding for Foles, should he hit the market as some expect, so we could have a bit of intrigue as the NFL season nears.