Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 38 of 38

Thread: My Eagles wager

  1. #21
    Let's talk about Nick Foles. I was just looking at his contract. It was 2 year contract (this was the first year). He made a million dollars this year. The way it is structured, there is a 4 million dollar bonus IF he makes the roster in 2018. Almost makes it seem like that was an out for the Eagles, like they only signed him for this year.

    So what does his two performances in the NFC championship game and Superbowl do for him? Obvioulsy this is Carson's team going forward. Will there be teams interested in Foles as a starter and if so, will they be willing to trade for him, since it appears he is under contract unless he is cut (doesn't make the roster)?

    BTW, my opinion: I don't feel Foles is a legitimate starter in this league. He is a legit backup....as he has obviously proved.

  2. #22
    Best case scenario, Eagles get the 5th pick from Cleveland for Nick and get PSU RB Barkley. Then he makes Charles become Phillys 2nd favorite Barkley of all time and he and Wentz win 8 more.

  3. #23
    Originally Posted by The Boz View Post
    Best case scenario, Eagles get the 5th pick from Cleveland for Nick and get PSU RB Barkley. Then he makes Charles become Phillys 2nd favorite Barkley of all time and he and Wentz win 8 more.
    That would be funny since Wentz was also a Cleveland pick.

    But I don't think that is going to happen. Browns have #1 and #4 pick. They will likely take a QB, either Mayfeild or one of the LA boys, Rosen or Darnold. I am not sure any of which will be great NFL QB's (maybe Rosen). There also is Cousins out there now, for what that is worth.

  4. #24
    I have always liked Foles. Foles was one of those college quarterbacks who had to perform each game, all game, for his team to succeed. If he played a bad half, he had to suck it up, get it together, and go out and compete in the second half against teams that were often better than his. He was hurt one game, pretty badly, and he limped all over creation and kept competing, almost as bad as when Leftwich's college teammates carried him to the line of scrimmage several times during a game. I think Foles has a decent enough arm. He is criticized for throwing some deep moon balls without enough velocity, and to me he's actually lost some velocity as compared to college, but I think his arm strength is more than good enough to start in the NFL.

    I think that the Eagles would probably not have won the title with Wentz at quarterback, because Foles played two magnificent games, really, and nobody could have played much better. I think Foles could start for a third of the teams or thereabouts.

    The Eagles are in a weird spot. How do you trade the SB-winning QB? Hell, how do you not open the starter's job for competition? It's not like Wentz, good as he is, has a track record. Wentz was the most developed of the drafted quarterbacks, and he came from a college team where he was playing meaningful games half of his college starts with loads of playoff games. So he came in mentally developed, too. I'm not sure he's going to get bang-bang better as some people expect.

    If I were the Eagles, I'd either trade Foles for some top notch secondary help (and the Eagles need it, and some cover linebackers, too), or open up the competition to start. I don't see how you can just assign him the backup role. He has tremendous value right now, and the only holes in the Eagles -- cover linebacker/safeties, third down Sproles-type back, could be filled right up with a trade. Eagles could turn themselves into a monster overnight. You have to like a team that actually recognizes line talent on both sides of the ball

  5. #25
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    I think that the Eagles would probably not have won the title with Wentz at quarterback, because Foles played two magnificent games, really, and nobody could have played much better. I think Foles could start for a third of the teams or thereabouts.

    The Eagles are in a weird spot. How do you trade the SB-winning QB? Hell, how do you not open the starter's job for competition? It's not like Wentz, good as he is, has a track record. Wentz was the most developed of the drafted quarterbacks, and he came from a college team where he was playing meaningful games half of his college starts with loads of playoff games.
    My spouse made that same comment, that he didn't think the Eagles would have won SB with Wentz. I don't think that is fair, as we just don't know. Granted hard to have played much better than Foles did the last two games. The interception certainly wasn't his fault.

    Let's not forget Wentz's part in this though. The Eagles had a short road to SB, a bye and two home games, because of Wentz.

    I wasn't sold on Wentz when the Eagles picked him. He progressed faster and further than I thought possible. BUT the Eagles are committed to him. They believe he is their QB for the next 10-12 years. There will be no competition for the starting job.

    It is an interesting situation though. didn't something similar happen with Doug Williams and Washington Redskins in the 80's? before my time, but I thought I heard that.

  6. #26
    Originally Posted by kewlJ View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    I think that the Eagles would probably not have won the title with Wentz at quarterback, because Foles played two magnificent games, really, and nobody could have played much better. I think Foles could start for a third of the teams or thereabouts.

    The Eagles are in a weird spot. How do you trade the SB-winning QB? Hell, how do you not open the starter's job for competition? It's not like Wentz, good as he is, has a track record. Wentz was the most developed of the drafted quarterbacks, and he came from a college team where he was playing meaningful games half of his college starts with loads of playoff games.
    My spouse made that same comment, that he didn't think the Eagles would have won SB with Wentz. I don't think that is fair, as we just don't know. Granted hard to have played much better than Foles did the last two games. The interception certainly wasn't his fault.

    Let's not forget Wentz's part in this though. The Eagles had a short road to SB, a bye and two home games, because of Wentz.

    I wasn't sold on Wentz when the Eagles picked him. He progressed faster and further than I thought possible. BUT the Eagles are committed to him. They believe he is their QB for the next 10-12 years. There will be no competition for the starting job.

    It is an interesting situation though. didn't something similar happen with Doug Williams and Washington Redskins in the 80's? before my time, but I thought I heard that.

    Now KJ, be honest, how many games did you see Wentz play in college? You can't say he "progressed faster and further" unless you saw him play in college a number of times. The fact is that he was the most starting-ready of the quarterbacks drafted. The quarterback you saw in the NFL is the same guy who won a boatload of playoff games in college. If anything, his pass protection was better in the NFL, and he seemed to enjoy the fact he got to throw the ball more than in college.

    I think he looked good in the NFL, but he looked good in college, too. So what I'm saying is that he may have come into the league near his ceiling. Dan Marino came into the league and tore it up by surprise, but the surprise was because he didn't have a whizz bang college offense. If you watched him on Saturdays for years, you knew he was going to be a killer, no matter how many times Pitt's running backs fumbled dive plays on first-and-goal. Marino came in ready made. Wentz pretty much came in ready made, too.

    And I'll go out on a limb and pick next year's semi-ready-made killer. I think the Wyoming QB is going to be fine. He just finished a year where he carried an overmatched team that had lost the previous year's starting wideouts and the all conference RB from the year before. I couldn't believe he came back to run a stripped-down offense, but he did. He's probably the QB most ready to take a horrible beating and not go insane, as opposed to the UCLA and USC QBs, who are used to having seven seconds to throw the ball to all conference wideouts.
    Last edited by redietz; 02-04-2018 at 10:33 PM.

  7. #27
    There is something to be considered for QB's coming back from ACL surgery. Almost all are never as good afterwards as before. Especially mobile type QB's, as Wentz is. The exception to this is Tom Brady, but Brady was neither mobile before nor after.

  8. #28
    grats KJ and others who bet Eagles, and Eagles fans in general.

    i lost my patriots ML bet, but thankfully i didn't bet much. also thankfully the ML didn't get down to -170 or -160, or else i'd have gotten crushed bc i wouulda bet a lot more most likely. i had much more on props and think i came out quite a bit ahead on those (i don't bet them, other people in my group do, but i had action). so it wasn't a total failure, money-wise, for me.

    had a nice night, fun hanging out with friends and others. although tomorrow morning i might be feeling it. x_X

  9. #29
    First congrats to those who were on the eagles. I was not. But like I said on my original poston the big game...its an insignificant betting venture for me in the grand scheme of things.

    Wentz from what I hear will not be ready to start the season. So Foles is going nowhere. He has another year on contract i think doesnt he?

    he was amazing, And both defenses didnt show up. Very entertaining game. One of the best for me, as far as watchability.

    great end to the season

  10. #30
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Now KJ, be honest, how many games did you see Wentz play in college? You can't say he "progressed faster and further" unless you saw him play in college a number of times. The fact is that he was the most starting-ready of the quarterbacks drafted. The quarterback you saw in the NFL is the same guy who won a boatload of playoff games in college. If anything, his pass protection was better in the NFL, and he seemed to enjoy the fact he got to throw the ball more than in college.

    I think he looked good in the NFL, but he looked good in college, too. So what I'm saying is that he may have come into the league near his ceiling.
    Sorry redietz, I somehow missed this post and question last night. I only have a couple minutes because I am heading to the airport shortly to go see a parade.

    I saw Wentz play in college ZERO times. And I am not nor claim to be an expert in evaluating college talent and how it may or may not transfer to the NFL. But, my thinking was, A guy playing at that level in college is playing against lesser defensive talent for the most part. I mean the really good defensive backs and defensive linemen (pass rush) are playing at the major colleges. Really important is the speed of defensive backs. Just a little drop off from the top tier to the next level makes a big difference. In one case squeezing a ball in for a completion and/or TD vs having it going back the other way for a pick 6.

    There already is an adjustment for that speed and skill in defensive backs for any college QB going to the pro level. You always see young pro QB's throw balls that would have been complete in college that are incomplete or worse yet picked at the pro level because the defensive backs have most more speed. There is an adjustment period. My thinking was for a QB coming from that level it is an even bigger adjustment. Almost like jumping from high school to the pros. So I thought he would progress a little slower than a QB with comparable talent and skill set that had been playing against better and faster competition and defensive backs.

    To be honest I was amazed at the year Wentz had and how much he had improved. But now in hindsight, with someone else, I think fair to say a journeyman QB stepping in and having success, you have to consider that at least some of Wentz's great improvement was the team around him. The Eagles have a pretty good team. Good receivers, somehow a decent running game, good offensive line and a decent defense (better than they showed yesterday). the last couple decades in Cleveland prove that a decent young QB needs a reasonable team to grow.

    One of the things I think is really important is how many 4th quarter or OT game winning drives a QB has. You know, you get the ball with 4 minutes left, down by 2 or 5 points and go down the field and score and win the game. The great ones have a lot of these and when they get the ball down 2 or 5 points like that, you know they are going to win.

    Wentz has 1 of these and that's should even have a little asterisk next to it. NYG first game this year. Game tied Eagles forced a punt and got the ball with 13 seconds left. Wentz completed 1 pass for 15 yards and Eagles kicked a 61 yard field goal to win. Not exactly leading your team down the field to win, but it still counts as a 4th quarter game winning drive. But you know what I am talking about: the good ones routinely drive down the field, 70, 80 yards in the final minutes to win a game. I am still waiting for a few of these from Wentz.
    .

  11. #31
    I'm just glad the Patriots didn't win. Would've liked overtime tho, that was my biggest longshot

  12. #32
    I think he looked good in the NFL, but he looked good in college, too. So what I'm saying is that he may have come into the league near his ceiling.

    In order to be equally as effective in the NFL as in college, the QB would have had to show improvement over college performance, once he started playing with and against men vs the boys in college,

    The only QBs that I can say peaked in college were players like Maziel or JaMarcus Russel....people who didnt take advantage of expert pro coaches and didnt want to improve. If a college player doesnt improve over his abilities in college, at best he holds a clipboard all his life in the pros.

  13. #33
    Originally Posted by LarryS View Post
    I think he looked good in the NFL, but he looked good in college, too. So what I'm saying is that he may have come into the league near his ceiling.

    In order to be equally as effective in the NFL as in college, the QB would have had to show improvement over college performance, once he started playing with and against men vs the boys in college,

    The only QBs that I can say peaked in college were players like Maziel or JaMarcus Russel....people who didnt take advantage of expert pro coaches and didnt want to improve. If a college player doesnt improve over his abilities in college, at best he holds a clipboard all his life in the pros.
    If you say so, Larry.

  14. #34
    depends, if you are QB that likes to run, which more do in college, you are totally screwed when it comes to the speed on defense. You have to improve. In most cases it means learning to become a pocket passer. Something totally foreign to many college QBS. College players are cannon fodder. Thats why when a team is up 42-3 with 8 minutes to go, the QBs are throwing the ball around to receivers that are getting hit hard for no god reason. Although Foles was not a runner in college...he still had to improve going up agasint grown me.
    Although it cant be proven, I would suggest that any college player that spent a year in the pros getting coached up, and then placed in college again...would be a better player. Meaning that they hadnt "peaked" AFTER THEIR LAST COLLEGE GAME.
    Like I said..there a re players that dont give a shit and yes they peaked in college. In all positions.

    But when you get to the pros......and do the football thing full time, have weight trainers, nutritionists, fat and muscle optimization, one on one coaching, personal trainers, you become a better player. Therefore you havent "peaked" the moment you step off the college field.
    Unless of course you have all that available to you and you dog it. Take your paycheck and say fuck you. Of course that happens. But I dont think that happened with Foles. I think he had to have goteen better than when he was in college in order to lead grown men, and play against grown men.

  15. #35
    Hi KewlJ:

    Congrats on your Eagles win as well as your bet. I am a lifelong Chicago Cubs fan so I can appreciate long-suffering fans who finally get that sweet victory.

    Unlike you I bet hundreds and not thousands on sports bets. That said, my big bet was on the Eagles on the half as I assumed that while it may be close with Brady leading a comeback at the end, the Pats tend to have a slow start. My main prop bet was laying "No" successful 2 pt conversions but the Eagles kept trying those again and again. Lucky for me -- those kept failing.

    FAB

  16. #36
    Originally Posted by FABismonte View Post
    Hi KewlJ:

    Congrats on your Eagles win as well as your bet. I am a lifelong Chicago Cubs fan so I can appreciate long-suffering fans who finally get that sweet victory.

    Unlike you I bet hundreds and not thousands on sports bets. That said, my big bet was on the Eagles on the half as I assumed that while it may be close with Brady leading a comeback at the end, the Pats tend to have a slow start. My main prop bet was laying "No" successful 2 pt conversions but the Eagles kept trying those again and again. Lucky for me -- those kept failing.

    FAB
    Also, does anyone know if the sports books took a hit given the Super Bowl underdog won? I had thought that books liked to balance the action and settle for the vig. But some events like the Mayweather-MacGregor fight, the books "gamble" on the result rather than trying to balance.

  17. #37
    Originally Posted by FABismonte View Post
    Originally Posted by FABismonte View Post
    Hi KewlJ:

    Congrats on your Eagles win as well as your bet. I am a lifelong Chicago Cubs fan so I can appreciate long-suffering fans who finally get that sweet victory.

    Unlike you I bet hundreds and not thousands on sports bets. That said, my big bet was on the Eagles on the half as I assumed that while it may be close with Brady leading a comeback at the end, the Pats tend to have a slow start. My main prop bet was laying "No" successful 2 pt conversions but the Eagles kept trying those again and again. Lucky for me -- those kept failing.

    FAB
    Also, does anyone know if the sports books took a hit given the Super Bowl underdog won? I had thought that books liked to balance the action and settle for the vig. But some events like the Mayweather-MacGregor fight, the books "gamble" on the result rather than trying to balance.
    http://www.vegasinsider.com/nfl/story.cfm/story/1908322

  18. #38
    Someone told a humerous story about a prop bet on the radio when asked about the prop ..length of the star spangled banner.over/under.
    It was a sports show hosted by Tom Tolbert(an ex NBA player).He has done the show for around 20 years and openly talks about bets he makes almost weekly,

    He said on this type of bet the limits are usually around 200 to keep people with inside info from making a killing. So one year he had inside info about the length of the song. And he bet "over".
    But when the song was going to start the singer was told to speed it up so that the jets were in sync to the end of the song. He lost. It went under.

    SO i guess if someone were to bet it....and if they want to bet the over...they should also know if jet flyover is going to be involved

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Wager for RobSinger
    By LoneStarHorse in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-21-2016, 06:52 PM
  2. Las Vegas wager for Alan
    By LoneStarHorse in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 02-17-2016, 12:07 PM
  3. Coach Belly vs LoneStarHorse wager
    By coach belly in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 116
    Last Post: 02-15-2016, 11:13 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •