Trade Your First Rounder For Foles?

[2MinutesHate]

(02-05-2018, 04:05 PM)jowczarski Wrote: This whole conversation (not just on the board, but on reddit and on Twitter) just blows my mind. Foles had a great postseason. Can't take it away from him. Dalton is 0-4. That will always be there until it isn't. But over the balance over their careers, it's not even a debate.

So peraps the question should be, "Would you bench Dalton for Foles if they were both on the team and we made the playoffs?" 

[thillan]

Dalton is better than Foles... are we serious about this?

Even if Foles was slightly better than Dalton, why would it help this team to trade a 1st for Nick Foles? That’s way too high, and wouldn’t help this team at all.

[BengalChris]

(02-05-2018, 12:19 PM)GodFather Wrote: If you were the GM in Cincy, would you trade your first rounder for Foles? He only has 7 million on his contract for this upcoming year and you can get draft picks in a trade with Dalton and the jury is still out on what value you get out of AJ.

Would you do it? Would you go after Foles?

Nah, I'm more interested in finding good OLmen. Three or four would be awesome.

[cooper]

(02-05-2018, 12:19 PM)GodFather Wrote: If you were the GM in Cincy, would you trade your first rounder for Foles? He only has 7 million on his contract for this upcoming year and you can get draft picks in a trade with Dalton and the jury is still out on what value you get out of AJ.

Would you do it? Would you go after Foles?

no..thats  silly

[Shake n Blake]

(02-05-2018, 01:11 PM)Go Cards Wrote: Agree that these things need fixed before anything else. 

It is how Eagles did it. 

and as Shake would hate to say

Philly Philly ! 

(02-05-2018, 01:27 PM)PDub80 Wrote: If I were the Bengals? No.

If I were the Browns, I would offer pick #33 for Foles. He's worth a few wins a year to them as is. Add in new skill position draft picks at #1 & #4 plus free agency and the Browns would be looking very strong for a long time. I think Foles would be cheaper than Cousins and a better over all player.

Agreed. I like Foles, but we already have a solid QB. We need better coaching (not getting it) and a much better o-line (we'll see).

(02-05-2018, 02:45 PM)Wyche Wrote: In that hypothetical situation, I'd ask for Wentz.  Foles is not worth a 1st at all.


It's 1991, do you trade a 1st and a 4th for Jeff Hostetler?

Well in fairness, Foles is 3 full years younger than Hostetler was. He's also had more prior experience and success as a starter. 

Also, Hostetler was pretty successful for the Raiders, posting a 33-22 record as starter in 4 years, making a Pro Bowl and winning a playoff game.

I don't think we should do it, but I couldn't blame a QB needy team for offering a 1st for a younger version of that.

(02-05-2018, 05:08 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: No, I would stick with Dalton.
Dalton/Foles, doesn't matter which one, neither can play Left Tackle, we need that pick to find one.

This was going to be my answer as well. If that top pick is spent on anything other than o-line, I'll be pissed.

[ah5]

(02-07-2018, 11:41 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote:


Agreed. I like Foles, but we already have a solid QB. We need better coaching (not getting it) and a much better o-line (we'll see).


Well in fairness, Foles is 3 full years younger than Hostetler was. He's also had more prior experience and success as a starter. 

Also, Hostetler was pretty successful for the Raiders, posting a 33-22 record as starter in 4 years, making a Pro Bowl and winning a playoff game.

I don't think we should do it, but I couldn't blame a QB needy team for offering a 1st for a younger version of that.


This was going to be my answer as well. If that top pick is spent on anything other than o-line, I'll be pissed.

All for going all out on the o-line but depending whose available, especially in the first round, I wouldn't be upset if they took BPA.

[fredtoast]

Not bashing Foles at all. He made a bunch of great throws in his last two games. But even if he was a slight upgrade from Dalton the difference would not be worth giving up our first round pick.

Dalton is not the problem with this team.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(02-07-2018, 11:41 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: .


Well in fairness, Foles is 3 full years younger than Hostetler was. He's also had more prior experience and success as a starter. 

Also, Hostetler was pretty successful for the Raiders, posting a 33-22 record as starter in 4 years, making a Pro Bowl and winning a playoff game.

I don't think we should do it, but I couldn't blame a QB needy team for offering a 1st for a younger version of that.

Oh I agree.....but we're not QB needy.  If we're talking player trades, or lower round picks.....I'd be interested.  I'd pull the trigger, and let the competition for the starter job commence.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

BTW, this was a thread on the mothership, after the 2013 season too, if nobody has brought it up.

How many horses have been beaten beyond recognition?

[Johnny Cupcakes]

Hell no. The Philly system is set up for him to have success, whereas the Cincinnati system is not. Why give up a first round pick for someone who would come here and not perform as well as Andy Dalton?

[Shake n Blake]

(02-08-2018, 06:21 AM)ah5 Wrote: All for going all out on the o-line but depending whose available, especially in the first round, I wouldn't be upset if they took BPA.

One of either Quenton Nelson, Orlando Brown or Mike McGlinchey should be there. If not, I'd trade back and nab a Billy Price. This team will not address line in FA, so it needs to be in the high rounds of the draft. These mid-round linemen won't get it.

(02-08-2018, 10:03 AM)Wyche Wrote: Oh I agree.....but we're not QB needy.  If we're talking player trades, or lower round picks.....I'd be interested.  I'd pull the trigger, and let the competition for the starter job commence.

We're on the same page. If we could seriously upgrade the QB spot, go for it. Foles wouldn't be an upgrade.

(02-08-2018, 10:29 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: BTW, this was a thread on the mothership, after the 2013 season too, if nobody has brought it up.

How many horses have been beaten beyond recognition?

I thought this felt like deja vu.

Everyone was brought up as a Dalton replacement back then. Foles, Kaepernick, trading for Ryan Mallett, etc. The only one I was down with was signing Peyton Manning after he left Indy. I was one of the very few that wasn't defending Dalton in that thread. 

Everyone said Peyton was washed up, "what about his neck", etc. My response was "how often do you get a chance to sign a HOF QB?"

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

(02-08-2018, 03:36 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: One of either Quenton Nelson, Orlando Brown or Mike McGlinchey should be there. If not, I'd trade back and nab a Billy Price. This team will not address line in FA, so it needs to be in the high rounds of the draft. These mid-round linemen won't get it.


We're on the same page. If we could seriously upgrade the QB spot, go for it. Foles wouldn't be an upgrade.


I thought this felt like deja vu.

Everyone was brought up as a Dalton replacement back then. Foles, Kaepernick, trading for Ryan Mallett, etc. The only one I was down with was signing Peyton Manning after he left Indy. I was one of the very few that wasn't defending Dalton in that thread. 

Everyone said Peyton was washed up, "what about his neck", etc. My response was "how often do you get a chance to sign a HOF QB?"

Absolutely.

We are.

I remember now too.  I think you and I were for Manning (though I was a little concerned with the neck, but felt it worth the gamble), I even thought it would be good for Dalton to learn from him.  I was also on board for Bridgewater, the rest I was meh on.

[Shake n Blake]

(02-08-2018, 05:24 PM)Wyche Wrote: Absolutely.

We are.

I remember now too.  I think you and I were for Manning (though I was a little concerned with the neck, but felt it worth the gamble), I even thought it would be good for Dalton to learn from him.  I was also on board for Bridgewater, the rest I was meh on.

I liked Carson Wentz, but we really didn't have a shot on him. That's what the anti-Dalton guys fail to understand. How often does a clear upgrade come available? It's easy to say "we need an elite guy". Welp...good luck finding one. You need to suck bad enough to nab a #1 pick and hope it's a worthy prospect...then hope that guy pans out. Even if he does, no guarantee he's truly a top 5 guy (see Carson Palmer).

If you're a contender, you have to hope a guy like Brees or Peyton comes available. Again, good luck. Of course, you know all this, but I think that's why we were both for signing Peyton. That kinda opportunity comes once every 20 years maybe.

Our only semi-realistic shot at landing an elite QB would be to roll the dice on a guy at 12. If that guy sucks though, you're stuck with him...as Andy won't take a demotion, and would likely request a trade after that draft. Plus with Mikey's patience, who knows how long a leash such a QB would get. So that's 3-4 more years wasted. Also, any QB we'd have would be saddled with Merv, so we'd have the same problems. 

We'd be much better served trying to find the right coach - who could get the most out of a solid QB - but we're not getting that either.

[Joelist]

This gets sillier every time it is proposed. Without fixing the OL it won't matter who the QB is.

[GodFather]

(02-08-2018, 09:55 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: We'd be much better served trying to find the right coach

You have a better shot at winning powerball buddy!

[Steve]

(02-05-2018, 12:19 PM)GodFather Wrote: If you were the GM in Cincy, would you trade your first rounder for Foles? He only has 7 million on his contract for this upcoming year and you can get draft picks in a trade with Dalton and the jury is still out on what value you get out of AJ.

Would you do it? Would you go after Foles?

NO.!!!!!!!!! 


take the best OT @ 12

fix the O-line  EARLY in this draft....

[GodFather]

(02-08-2018, 11:04 PM)Steve Wrote: NO.!!!!!!!!! 


take the best OT @ 12

fix the O-line  EARLY in this draft....

Then Marvin will let him sit the bench for his first 2 years so he can watch and learn the system!

[*bfine32*]

(02-08-2018, 10:06 PM)Joelist Wrote: This gets sillier every time it is proposed. Without fixing the OL it won't matter who the QB is.

Definitely nothing silly about that statement

[GodFather]

(02-08-2018, 11:17 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Definitely nothing silly about that statement

Do you know what is silly?


Reading the announcement after the 2017 season:

"Bengals Defy Logic, Re-Sign Marvin Lewis To 2-Year Contract Extension To Remain Head Coach"

[Shake n Blake]

(02-08-2018, 10:14 PM)GodFather Wrote: You have a better shot at winning powerball buddy!

We have better odds of evading death and taxes.

(02-08-2018, 11:26 PM)GodFather Wrote: Do you know what is silly?


Reading the announcement after the 2017 season:

"Bengals Defy Logic, Re-Sign Marvin Lewis To 2-Year Contract Extension To Remain Head Coach"

That's the pinnacle of silliness.