Vick, Foles And Barkley: Assessing the QB Situation

There are a lot of questions about what’s going on with Chip Kelly and the Eagles’ QB situation, especially after the team spent a fourth-round pick on Matt Barkley over the weekend.

So here’s my attempt to make sense of it all (or at least some of it). Let’s go player-by-player, starting with the new guy.


I was as surprised as anyone that the Eagles moved up a few spots in the fourth round and took Barkley. To be honest, when I was doing my draft prep, I thought there was no chance of him landing in Philly.

But I was wrong (hey, it happens).

It’s important to look at where Barkley was drafted. Some are running with the storyline that the Eagles have found their quarterback of the future, arguing that the selection will greatly affect the moves they make going forward. But in reality, that couldn’t be farther from the truth.

Take a look around the league at the other 31 projected starting quarterbacks – 23 were first-round picks, and three were second-rounders. Only five – Matt Schaub (third round), Russell Wilson (third round), Tom Brady (sixth round), Matt Flynn (seventh round) and Tony Romo (undrafted) – were taken after the second round.

If you make the qualifier the fourth round (when Barkley was taken) or later, you’re left with three QBs – Brady, Flynn and Romo.

Let’s look at it a different way. From 2008 to 2012, 38 quarterbacks were taken in the third round or later. Forget performance. Guess how many have even started more than eight games? Three: Colt McCoy, John Skelton and Wilson. In the last five years, only one quarterback (Skelton) taken in the fourth round or later has started more than eight games.

So, what’s my point? The Eagles did not take Barkley with the expectation that he would become their quarterback of the future. They saw value with him in the fourth round, and they pulled the trigger. I have no problem with that. Perhaps he’ll end up surprising like Schaub, Wilson, Brady or Romo. After all, at one point, Barkley was thought to have first-round tools.

But that’s not the expectation. The truth is that, given where he was selected, if Barkley gives the Eagles a bunch of good years as a backup, the pick should be considered a successful one.

This was not about the Eagles finding their QB of the future. This was about giving themselves options. They don’t have a clear No. 1 QB on their roster. Maybe Michael Vick will be a better fit in Kelly’s system. Maybe Nick Foles will show improvement with a better offensive line. Maybe Barkley will surprise and prove to be the QB many thought he was after the 2012 season.

But the other scenario is that none of the above happens, and the Eagles find themselves in a similar situation next offseason, looking to draft a quarterback in the first or second round.


Foles should have been happy when he heard about the Barkley selection.

All offseason, Kelly and Howie Roseman have said the team’s plan was to see what it had in Foles. And that message was not just for public consumption. It was communicated privately to Foles’ camp and to other teams that might have had interest in trading for him.

Maybe Foles believed them all along and was comfortable with his standing on the team. But if it were me, I would have had some doubt in the back of my mind after the Eagles decided to bring Vick back. The Barkley pick, though, showed Kelly is willing to have some flexibility when it comes to the quarterback position. The Eagles spent a fourth-round pick on a QB with limited mobility. That means they’re open to giving Foles a shot.

Sure, you can say he now has more competition, and that’s true. But if Foles doesn’t think he can beat out Barkley, then that’s on him. This was about getting a fair shake. And by all accounts, Foles is going to have a chance to earn the starting nod this offseason.


The idea that the Barkley pick means Vick will be cut is silly. For starters, the Eagles have already paid him $3.5 million when they didn’t have to. They could have been off the hook completely and just cut him earlier this offseason. Vick is now due an additional base salary of $3.5 million that will be paid throughout the course of the season. There’s really no reason to cut him now.

The other factor that can’t be overlooked is he’s the only QB out of the three listed here who can run the read-option. While Kelly’s actions show that he’s willing to go with a quarterback who can’t run, he certainly is not opposed to having one who has the ability to make plays with his feet. That’s assuming, of course, that Vick proves capable in other areas like accuracy and decision-making.

Chris Brown of Grantland wrote a piece on Kelly and the Eagles’ offense yesterday. Here’s a point that relates to Vick:

But this line of thinking still has to be tempered with a bit of realism. Kelly is clearly bright, committed, and open-minded, but the idea that he can step into the NFL and run any offense — spread, pro-style, West Coast, Coryell, Wing-T — seems implausible. He shredded college football running a very specific attack based on very specific principles, and the mathematical advantage he gained from having his quarterback be at least some kind of a threat to run was a central tenet. He might be able to adapt his offense to his players and coaches, but this is not the same thing as continuing and growing what worked at Oregon.

We don’t know exactly what kind of offense Kelly is going to run. We know that the Eagles are going to run no-huddle and push tempo. We know that they’re going to rely on a running game and athletic offensive linemen. But beyond those things, scheme will very much depend on personnel, and more specifically, the quarterback. Remember, Kelly has had a total of three practices so far. He’s nowhere close to making any final decisions.

Also remember that Vick only signed a one-year deal. All along, he seemed like a “band-aid” option until Kelly found his quarterback of the future. The drafting of Barkley does not change that.

Vick will have his chance to win the starting job, but he won’t be handed anything.

Follow Sheil Kapadia on Twitter and e-mail him at
Become a fan of Birds 24/7 on Facebook.

Around The Web

Be respectful of our online community and contribute to an engaging conversation. We reserve the right to ban impersonators and remove comments that contain personal attacks, threats, or profanity, or are flat-out offensive. By posting here, you are permitting Philadelphia magazine and Metro Corp. to edit and republish your comment in all media.

  • theycallmerob

    Don’t ever leave us, Sheil. Your logic and perspective shines a light through all the stupid around us.

    • UncleCarm

      I agree. I almost didn’t read the article because I thought, “What could possibly be determined at this point that would be interesting?” Well, it was interesting. Sheil, your the best.

    • CapeCodEagleFan

      not blowing smoke here sheil, but I refresh your page every ten minutes….hate it when you spend time with your family instead of posting!!

  • Capt. Undapants

    I loved the unbiased realism in this article, Sheil. Barkley is not the guaranteed starter nor the guaranteed future. Same for Foles. Vick is not going to be handed the starting job, nor will he be handed his walking papers.

    Thank you for this article that on its face is unbiased.

    • BrickSquadMonopoly

      Agreed. All this talk about Mike not being on the roster when the season starts is not only rediculous, but laughable.

      • GEagle

        The only way Vick would get Cut, is if he doesn’t win the starting Job, and starts causing problems in the locker room( I Think Vick is better than that)…However, I don’t see how we could rule out a scenario like:

        Vick not winning the starting Job, a playoff contenders starting QB gets hurt for the season during camp, and Vick gets traded so that the playoff team can try and save its season…The only way I can see Vick not being here this year is via trade…I would guess that the window for Vick to be traded would be from end of July to beginning of September….
        The only other scenario I can see for Vick not being an eagle in 2013 is say Foles or Barkley beat him out in Camp Via a large margin….maybe a legit superbowl contender with a playbook already tailored for a mobile QB, takes Vick on as insurance against its mobile starting QB going down with an injury during a year whe there Super Bowl window is open….Let me ask a question. If we were 49ers fans, rooting for a Brilliant young QB like Kapernick to get us over the hump and win a Super Bowl, would we want our GM to go after some injury insurance Ian important year, like Mike Vick?…Obviously Vick can’t backup Brady or Manning…but for a contender, with a play book that suits Vick’s talents, would you want your GM to AQUIRE Vick, if we made him available in a trade come August?….
        i don’t think it’s as simple as, Foles beat out Vick for the stArting job, so know we have to cut and trade Vick at all costs. I think it would take Foles winning the starting Job, AND Barkley or Dixon showing that they can be a capable backup in 2013if called upon…so I guess I would handicap Vicks chances of not being an Eagle during the 2013 season, a small, 20%

  • docboy

    even though he was drafted in the fourth.. he is still a first round top 10 pick talent ( if he had gone last year) you can’t dismiss that…he ( hopefully) will be the steal of the draft…

  • B-West

    That Grantland article goes on to mention the options Kelly is amassing at TE, and how he may be bringing a New England flavor of offense to Philly. I despise New England, obviously, but there is no arguing with their offensive results.

    Although I do not believe our TEs are on par with NE (maybe they can grow into a comparable group), I think our outside WRs are actually better. NE has struggled to find a WR who can stretch the field since Moss left. We have that in spades with Jackson, and he could provide a lot of room for those TE groups to operate.

    • cliff henny

      also vice versa between TE and jackson. why i really like Ertz pick. while celek is a good player, he doesnt stretch the deep middle whick allows every team to roll safety coverage on d-jax. didnt help safeties never budged on play action either. hopefully we’ll see more big plays out of jackson

      • B-West

        Good point on the play action. It all seems to work its way back to the basics. A healthy, improved o-line is the most important offensive change going in to this season. Get the running game and Shady going again, and this offense has a chance to be humming again, sooner rather than later.

  • JofreyRice

    Hey Sheil, any chance you can do a breakdown of Barkley’s college videos, and report? I’m sure most of us would be interested in reading your take.

  • Cranky Caucasian

    Only thing I disagree with is the chance of Vick being cut. My worthless opinion is that if he doesn’t win the starting job, he isn’t on the opening day roster. Cutting him won’t carry any dead cap space (assuming is accurate), he’ll have gotten his fair shot, and the team can finally move forward without him. No reason to keep him around as a backup.

    • cliff henny

      no, it does carry dead money. the amount depends is whether he’s on roster or not. it’s tricky, but by restructuring he lowered his dead money and got some cash out of lurie and howie, so small feat. but 2nd point,since number has been reduced, it’s not high enough to have impact on whether he’s makes team or not.

  • Token

    Heres a Barkley interview with Grantland. Talks about his arm stregth at about 3:30.

  • Tom Millar

    Get ready for some NE style defense too. Watch some Chip Kelly coached Oregon games, and you’ll see a very giving defense that depended on a high-scoring offense and tiring out the opposing team. Stanford was and is smashmouth. Take away Tom Brady (yes, a big takeaway), and you’d be watching system football. Watching Oregon games, the outcome never seemed to turn on star performance–even with Jonathan Stewart out Dennis Dixon or Kenyon Barner playing. That’s what Eagles fans should get ready for.

    • Token

      I just dont think he cares about that side of the ball. Its up to having a good DC. Right now I dont think we do. I expect yet another new DC next year.

      It doesnt help that they are kind of setting the defense up for failure. Relying a lot of injury prone new players. Little depth.

      • poetx99

        i’m not so sure about that. they did some pretty interesting things on defense… unconventional at times. that is kelly’s stamp. i think that he’s enough of a thinker to want a defense that complements what he is doing on offense. andy gave lip service to it and, on paper, tried to put together something like that. in theory, the eagles’ o should have been putting up crazy points, forcing teams to play behind, and run right into the buzz saw of the sack-hungry wide 9 driven scheme.

        in practice, they tilted too much to that and could not reliably get teams off the field on 3rd downs or important drives (really, when HAVE they done that under andy’s tenure?). and more importantly, they lacked playmaking in the secondary to take advantage of qb pressure by getting takeaways. and when the offense sputtered it all fell apart.

        • Token

          I think its documented that he never even talked to the DC at Oregon.

          • Richard Colton

            not even in the interview?

          • BrickSquadMonopoly

            Ya and I heard he flies a hovercraft to work!

          • Token



            “Chip has not said one word to me on the headset in four years as a head coach,” Oregon defensive coordinator Nick Aliotti told Les Bowen of the Daily News. “He’s never been in a meeting, he’s never questioned a call. He’s never said anything when we’ve played badly. He doesn’t say a whole lot when we’ve played well. He’s left me completely alone. It’s been unbelievable autonomy. It’s been a fantastic relationship. I really appreciate it.”

          • cliff henny

            might be referring to him saying he doesnt discuss defensive calls during game. he doesnt micro-manage, he hated it when he was an OC.

          • Token

            “Chip has not said one word to me on the headset in four years as a head coach,” Oregon defensive coordinator Nick Aliotti told Les Bowen of the Daily News. “He’s never been in a meeting, he’s never questioned a call. He’s never said anything when we’ve played badly. He doesn’t say a whole lot when we’ve played well. He’s left me completely alone. It’s been unbelievable autonomy. It’s been a fantastic relationship. I really appreciate it.”

      • GEagle

        billy Davis isn’t going anywhere…Philly will LOVE Davis!!!!

  • Richard Colton

    Nothing about the use of a 4th round pick on a QB precludes the use of a high pick on a QB next year. If the Eagles had taken Geno Smith at #4 or EJ at #35, the way a lot of people predicted, we wouldn’t be able to say that. All things considered, the Barkley pick was an acceptable risk at #98, no matter how it pans out.

  • poetx99

    great (reiterated) point on the mathematical advantage. that is what has me excited about kelly and one of the things that irritated me most about reid (and morningwheg).

    they allowed opposing teams to dictate the math instead of pressing their inherent advantages and creating mismatches.

    desean requires either +.5 or +1 defenders to keep him from blowing the top off of the defense. that means a safety has to roll to his side as well as stay very deep, removing him from being an immediate force in the run game. in those games following the early part of 2010 when the eagles were facing ridiculous versions of 2 deep with safeties 20 and 30 yards off the ball, they did not counter by running up the middle, throwing quick, or throwing in the gaps, they countered by still trying to get deep.

    vick forces you to keep a +0.5 or +1 in backside contain. in his prime he forced probably a +2 (backside contain + LB or S spy). again, andy did not use that to the eagles’ advantage. he kept him in the pocket, removed much of the threat to run, and allowed those extra defenders to have dual responsibilities by not threatening their assignments. but if you moved the pocket left, occupying +1 defenders, and kept desean to the right +0.5 – +1 defenders, lets round down and say that we’ve taken an additional +2 defenders out of the play due to superseding priority — that leaves a 2 man advantage to your run game if you hand off to shady sprinting back toward the middle.

    think about that. shady usually makes at least one guy miss, but in this case we’re saying there is no ‘one guy’, because that defender is either guarding to contain vick, frontside, or to contain jackson backside. if the OL just position blocks, and uses their splits to open creases in the line, shady is untouched and into the second level where he is deadly.

    drop a safety to account for the run game, and now you show the same action and maclin, single covered, is wide open on the skinny post. start rolling that safety playside and vick has the arm strength to do a half roll left and hit a 9 to desean on the backside.

    if used correctly, the math of vick + desean + shady would be unstoppable. now add to that the ability to put 2 or 3 TEs on the field at once who cannot be single covered. (you may have ONE or TWO defenders with the size and agility to cover a receiving threat TE, but not three, and, as chip says, if you go nickel or dime and tip your personnel toward coverage, the eagles will smashmouth that).

    i would love to gameplan around that set of advantages. the difference i get from chip is that he doesn’t value one 50 yard pass more than 10 5 yard runs. both ways of scoring accomplish different things in a game and he’ll be prepared to capitalize on what that does to a defense.

    • cliff henny

      and, kelly migh draw up a new play or two a year, unlike Reid who used the same playbook for 14 yrs, or at least same phylosophy. i pretty much knew what the eagles were going to run from my living room. pretty sure DC’s had a good idea too

      • CapeCodEagleFan

        or a new play at halftime…one hopes…

        • Mac


      • poetx99

        man, i’ll be happy if he just brings the ones from oregon (in the run game — shurmur’s here to complement it with an nfl passing attack).

        and i’ll be ecstatic if we lose that stupid play action on 3rd and long, and in games where shady goes entire series without a rushing attempt. that’s good for 2 wins a year, no bs.

        • cliff henny

          i’m most excited when we pick up back to back 3rd and 1’s by running the ball. a fundamental flaw for 14 yrs, his offense could not pick up 3rd/4th and 1’s. incomplete on 1st, draw on 2nd-teams didnt care whether eagles got 2 or 8 yards, really didnt matter- knew eagles were going 8-15 yrds downfield on 3rd. got to the point i was mad when we picked up 9 on first down. might as well punt on 2nd, next 2 plays are a waste of time.

          • GEagle

            Soooo true man. It’s all about 3rd down, can your offense stay on the field and keep the drive alive? can your defense get off the field?…and you can’t compete if you can’t get that 1yard on 3rd down at a high rate….and then Turnovers. If you can be +2 in turnovers, you will probably win a high rate of games…..A QBs stats on 3rd down and his turnover ratio is crucial…which is one of the reasons I was encouraged with Foles last year…there were SO MANY 3rd and Longs that he bailed us out on with a big throw, only to have those two idiots Bell and Dunlap have it called back on a penalty killing the drive….and when they weren’t getting completions called back with penalties, they wouldnt give Foles more than a 1.5 seconds to throw the ball….and the kid managed to still put up some impressive numbers historically in terms of completion percentage and yards per game,,.,I understand not being ready to annoint him, but I have no clue how some aren’t even encouraged

        • GEagle

          Im actually expecting the exact opposite. I’m expecting a lot of the same passing principles that were used in Oregon(the ones that don’t need to play off the zone reads), with Shurmer here to blend it in with a pro style run game.
          Play action on 3rd and long…hahahahahahaha classic Andy. the shovel pass in the redzone was cool back In 2004

          • GEagle

            Shurmur should also help with transitioning to the different hash marks

    • Richard Colton

      So if I’m adding your numbers correctly…let me see here…it’s going to take a minimum of 13 defenders to stop the Chip Kelly Eagles on any given play. I believe that’s a penalty outside of the SEC.

      At this point, since the superbowl is a given, we need to start worrying about defensive depth. I’m thinking the behemoths we’re going to use in the 3-4 aren’t going to be able to run the number of plays required of them – seeing how our offense is going to score every time we touch the ball. We may want to consider a defensive line rotation. I’m thinking FASTBALLS.

      • Geagle

        We aren’t running a3-4….. It’s 100% going to be a 4-3u

        • cliff henny

          G, for all the blasting you do on people predicting yet-to-be-determined offense/qb…you’re doing it with defense.

          • Richard Colton

            I was just kidding – but I love poet’s optimism. that’s the best part about the pre-preseason. we’re undefeated

          • cliff henny

            i know you were kidding, thought it was funny. f’n fastballs. did you hear reid talk about draft? goto chiefs homesite, you’ll want to puke. i was referring geagle, he rips people when talking about our undetermined offense, but is 100% sure about our equally undetermined defense, more giving him hard time, as i agree it seems 4-3 under makes most sense as base

          • GEagle

            offense can go a million different ways….for people that know the defensive schemes, gap responsibilities, it doesn’t take rocket science to look at our roster, than see the players that we drafted, and get a good idea what defense we will be running this year…there are literally only two choices, and the 3-4 that the media keeps talking about IS NOT a realistic possibility….there are so many more possibilities on the offensive side of the ball….there aren’t anywhere near as many options on defense…I would handicapp our scheme next year as:

            80% chance of 4-3Under
            20% chance of the wade Phillips 3-4 (DRASTICALLY different from the 3-4 the media keeps spouting off about)…

            What do you want me to say? That there is a real chance we will play a San Fran 3-4, when I know we don’t even have close to the right personel to do it?
            I think it’s safe to say, that we have a smart flexible coach who will tailor schemes to the players, Chip has said it a million times, and now I completely believe him….If we were actually going to run a traditional 3-4:

            1) This was one of the deepest NT classes in YEARS..we would have drafted a 320-330lb NT if we were going to run a 3-4
            2) As secretive as howie and chip have been, for months refusing to answer the simplest questions about what sheme we will have to think that chip sits the players down to tell them, what they can and can’t divulge to the media during that mini camp…Did you not find it strange that every player running ofthe sideline for an interview was ever so eager to tell anyone that would listen, how we have been working on the 3-4 for 3 days?
            3) We chose an experienced DC, who hasn’t had much success. the 4-3Under is BIlly Davis’s defense. would it have been that hard to find an experienced, but not successful DC who’s specialty was the 3-4? does chip sound like a guy who will interfere with the dc?
            4) Dline, was by far the biggest weakness going into the draft. We spent a 3rd round pick addressing it. If Bennie Logan was drafted to play in a 3-4, it was the worst draft pick in the history of draft picks. If Logan was drafted to play in a Hybrid, it’s was a BRILLIANT draft pick…
            i dunno Whether the points I just outlined, convince you that
            We are going to play the hybrid..but can we ATleast agree that I made rational arguments for how what I am saying might possibly be true?..well I can’t make a single rational argument for how we could possibly play a real 3-4 this year. I literally can’t make a single argument for how that might be a possibility….
            BTW, about 5 hours after I posted that we are playing a hybrid, a few very knowledgable Eagles analyst, came to the same exact conclusion I did….If you don’t believe me, maybe you will believe the wickedly awesome Tom LAwlor:
            I don’t think, looking at what is required to run a defensive scheme, than look at our roster and form an oppinion… the same thing as saying, the eagles are going to run the Oregon offense, especially since 70% of the people that make that statement, barely even know what the Oregon offense is…You can’t run zone reads with a guy that runs a 5.5…well there are plenty of attributes that you absolutely need to have, ifyou are going to run certain defensive schemes…..
            if someone thinks Its actually possible to run a 3-4 with what we have on this roster, I would love to get into an intelligent debate about it….If anyone see’s something that I’m not seeing, as to how we could possibly play a 3-4 next year, please share it with me. I have been wrong before, and I will be wrong again…but I’m not seeing how it’s a possibility, so someone please enlighten me!

          • CapeCodEagleFan

            the comment section on this site has more intelligent postings than

          • theycallmerob

            Haha, welcome

          • GEagle

            Lol if this is the first time stumbling onto this site, and you are used to, lol well it’s kind of like going from an Andy press conference, to a chip press conference lol…..I honestly don’t understand how has such bad sports coverage, it’s absolute worst are the sixers beat reporter. And basketball isn’t nearly as intricate as football. Yet the sixers beat reporters are historically pathetic. I despise that site, especially that troll CharlieGarner20 that lurks in it

          • cliff henny

            man, wonder what you would have wrote if i said ‘disagree’ instead.

          • GEagle

            Lol sorry

          • poetx99

            haha, yeah, i’m’ being very optimistic. love the bit about needing 13 defenders.

            but after looking at fishduck, and seeing how plays were designed to get a +1 on the defense by taking out one person (and often the strongest defender) with sheer play design… man, you have to be hyped about the possibilities.

            if he can scheme a consistent +1 in college with good, but not necessarily prolifically mobile qbs, what can he do here? teams have allocated +1 to keep a lid on desean, and i trust shady 1 on 1 versus any would-be tackler. if our line is merely average and we spread the defense to take people out of the box, we should get almost 6ypc for shady on creativity and exploiting running lanes.

            and that doesn’t even count on peters fully coming back to the form where he could block two defenders on a play. if the line is healthy, you can pretty much book an eagles scoring record this year.

          • GEagle

            As long as our starting qb doesn’t throw 20ints, and lose 10 fumbles, I’m expecting a high potent offense…

            Our defense is far from elite, but it will be about 5 times better than last years Defense(but that speaks more to the historically pathetic defense that we saw last year)….just having 11 defenders on the field that will play hard and not quit will make us significantly better than the slop we watched last year

      • CapeCodEagleFan

        Yeah, when is chip gonna sign all the “little” high motor guys?!?

    • CapeCodEagleFan

      Reid was a terrible in-game coach. What’s an adjustment? I spent all week on this gameplan and by golly, that’s what we’re doing!

      • poetx99

        exactly! opponent is top 5 passing D, and 30th against the rush? let’s dial up 50 passes!

        oh, hold up. that’s scheme stubbornness. IN game, a team is killing our OL and getting dead bird shots on the qb? dial up some more passes in the 2nd half! <– quintessential andyball.

  • bdbd20

    Get used to hearing this name for the next 11 months: Teddy Bridgewater

    • theycallmerob

      How about we don’t, and just say we did. And we can all come back to this in a year.

    • GEagle

      As if you have any clue what we have in Nick and Matt

  • Mike

    The idea with Barkley may be to hope he goes in the pre-season in the 4th quarter and puts up nice numbers vs scrubs and then use him has a chip in next year’s draft. NFL GMs are a pretty irrational bunch

    • hillbillybirdsfan

      He’s got a good name and some talent so I could see that happening. Throw in some big numbers in some meaningless week 17 game and you’re got a market for sure.

  • Rob Fink

    Completely agree. They resigned Vick because they have plenty of cap room, and there were no clear better options to put on the roster. One year to provide competition is exactly what they need- when somebody wins a job by performing higher than his competition, it is good for everybody involved. Whoever gives CK the best chance to win week 1 against Washington will be the one taking the snaps, be it Vick, Foles, or Barkley. I’ve bed saying and hopin for Foles because I truly believe he can succeed in the NFL with an actual NFL line and a fresh slate. He has the head on his shoulders to succeed, unlike #7

  • mark_in_jax

    “For starters, the Eagles have already paid him $3.5 million when they didn’t have to. They could have been off the hook completely and just cut him earlier this offseason.”

    My understanding was that if they “cut” him, they owed him $3 million. In essence, “restructuring” his contract equals a “free look” at him and control of his tradeable rights for 6 additional months at an extra cost of only $500K (chump change in the NFL).

    • cliff henny

      yes, you are 2/3rds right. the eagles would have guarenteed him 3m if cut (and no one signed him or would have made up difference to 3m) and gave him 3.5m in cash, so far. the part that’s left out is, if cut, his dead money number would have been 7m this yr, but by restructuring/extending, if cut, it’s been reduced to 5m, or another 1.5m since he’s been paid 3.5m (he also has same 5m dead next yr). if he makes team, again, it’s back up to 7m-10m (10m is great, we won super bowl, hope we pay him 10m!!!). so, when it’s stated they could have walked away not owing him anything, it’s true in cash sense, but not when talking dead money, and eagles always have one eye on the cap.

      • nicksaenz1

        I was under the impression that his dead money got moved to this year because of the restructure. Not so?

  • Brian

    Great post. Here’s something I wonder about with Barkley and some other late(er) round QB draft picks. How many were slated to go in the Top Ten one year only to see their stock drop the following year?
    Would this discussion about ‘value’ or ‘needs’ pop up had the Eagles drafted him in the top ten last year?
    Food for thought.

  • Max Lightfoot

    Have to agree, Sheil. I see Barkley as a really good backup, one which every competitive NFL team needs. He’s kinda like Michael Vick in that he won’t last a whole season, IMO. He’s one shoulder-rolling hit away from surgery. He’ll do for now, though. There are so many questions about this upcoming season, not the least being the QB position… But that’s a few drafts away. Go Eags!

  • Johnny_P

    I know I might be crazy for saying this, and will get mad thumbs down, but whatever. Just what if Chip Kelly is forming this team to run a Quarterback by Committee? Just ponder that question for a second or two. The style of QB’s he’s bringing in leads me to believe that. I want to hear your thoughts. Would it be crazy if this innovative college coach tries to be a trend-setter in the NFL with said system? Nothing would surprise me with this guy.

    • Richard Colton

      QB by committee was never his style at UNH or Ore. That doesn’t mean he won’t do it in the NFL, it just runs contradictory to what he’s said about “…one guy just seizing the position.”

      I’m 99% sure I heard CK throw out the old adage about having no QB if you have more than one starting QB. Did anyone else hear him say that or am I imagining it?

      • Johnny_P

        As I sift through my collective memory bank amongst the 304038 articles I’ve read on Chip Kelly, I do recollect him saying that. Thanks for bringing that to the forefront and answering my question.

  • Kev_H

    Chris Brown is forgetting that Kelly was OC at UNH longer than he coached at Oregon and he ran different offenses there.