Ehlinger as our Taysom Hill?

[Smonroe]

We're pretty sure they're going to keep Sam on the 53.  If so, he'll probably be inactive every week.

 

This may have been brought up before, if so, sorry.  But here's my thought:

 

Foles was brought in mainly to bring his experience to the QB room and the sidelines.  Pointing out things that Matt should know.

 

If they make him inactive, he can still do that.  

 

That gives them the opportunity to set up some gadget plays for Sam.  I know they did that before, but they could expand on that.  At the very least, it makes the opposing defenses prepare for something different each week.  And there would be a purpose for him being on the roster, other than our fear that he'd be snatched by another team.

 

I wonder if Frank has thought about that strategy.

[csmopar]

20 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

We're pretty sure they're going to keep Sam on the 53.  If so, he'll probably be inactive every week.

 

This may have been brought up before, if so, sorry.  But here's my thought:

 

Foles was brought in mainly to bring his experience to the QB room and the sidelines.  Pointing out things that Matt should know.

 

If they make him inactive, he can still do that.  

 

That gives them the opportunity to set up some gadget plays for Sam.  I know they did that before, but they could expand on that.  At the very least, it makes the opposing defenses prepare for something different each week.  And there would be a purpose for him being on the roster, other than our fear that he'd be snatched by another team.

 

I wonder if Frank has thought about that strategy.

Well I’m sure he has considering he’s stated as much in an interview a while back. He also schemed plans for Brissett when we had Rivers. Now who knows if we will ever run them, but I bet he’s already schemed them up

[throwing BBZ]

 

 Your premise is faulty and NO.

  Frank got a few 4th and 1 conversions from Jacoby and a few stupid looking ones too. Sam has potential so... there could be some weeks he could be activated on Sundays. 

 The thing is Ryan should be Excellent in the red zone and you do have a great RB to take care of business.

[MikeCurtis]

This morning I was watching "Breakfast with Ken" on Youtube

 

He is a good watch and made the following points..... 

You keep Ehlinger on the 53 if the answer to one of the 2 questions is yes

 

Is Ehlinger going to win you games in 2022?

Is Ehlinger your QB of the future?

 

My read is that BOTH answers are a resounding NO

 

I think you have to cut the kid, and hope that you can stash him on the practice squad

 

There are many choices for a backup, each and every year.....  

 

We gave Foles a 2 year contract......  He is a proven backup

 

Holding a spot for Ehlinger to be an occasional option QB, doesnt seem prudent

 

Not when our OL depth is weak

Not when our DL depth is weak

 

[Smonroe]

28 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Well I’m sure he has considering he’s stated as much in an interview a while back. He also schemed plans for Brissett when we had Rivers. Now who knows if we will ever run them, but I bet he’s already schemed them up

I just think if we’re going to have three QBs on the roster, why not get something out of the other active one.  Foles can do his job as well inactive or not.  And even if Sam never gets in a game, the Ds have to prepare for him.  
 

Plus Matt is rarely hurt, so it’s worth taking that chance.  If Ryan should go down, there’s no doubt Foles would be the starter.  
 

For Sam’s plays I’m thinking less in the red zone, and more on a first down mid field.  You have JT, Hines, and a mobile QB in the backfield.  That has to open up the backend for a quick pass.  

[Smonroe]

5 minutes ago, MikeCurtis said:

This morning I was watching "Breakfast with Ken" on Youtube

 

He is a good watch and made the following points..... 

You keep Ehlinger on the 53 if the answer to one of the 2 questions is yes

 

Is Ehlinger going to win you games in 2022?

Is Ehlinger your QB of the future?

 

My read is that BOTH answers are a resounding NO

 

I think you have to cut the kid, and hope that you can stash him on the practice squad

 

There are many choices for a backup, each and every year.....  

 

We gave Foles a 2 year contract......  He is a proven backup

 

Holding a spot for Ehlinger to be an occasional option QB, doesnt seem prudent

 

Not when our OL depth is weak

Not when our DL depth is weak

 

You ask those questions to any team and 90% would say no to their backups.  That’s not good logic.

 

But I agree that if Sam is put on waivers, there’s a good chance he doesn’t get picked up.

 

When I asked which team would pick him up in a different thread I just kept hearing “some team”.  Someone said the Browns.  Who have 3 veterans on their roster now and will get Watson back.  So that’s ridiculous.  
 

Still, I think we keep him.  I think his ceiling is as a Barkley type of backup. Great preseason QB. Never going to be a starter.  

[FanOutOfTown]

I guess if the coaching staff wants then go for it. My only worry is by using him you’re taking touches/passes away from Ryan and Taylor. Do you really want to give Ehlinger, who hasn’t seen NFL action in the regular season against 1st string defenses, the ball over those 2? I’m hesitant.

[Smonroe]

3 minutes ago, FanOutOfTown said:

I guess if the coaching staff wants then go for it. My only worry is by using him you’re taking touches/passes away from Ryan and Taylor. Do you really want to give Ehlinger, who hasn’t seen NFL action in the regular season against 1st string defenses, the ball over those 2? I’m hesitant.

 

If I'm Frank, I'm putting him in against the Texan or Jags if the game is going well.  Not in a pressure or redzone situation, but at midfield.  Let him bootleg or even throw a short pass.

 

That would at least make the Chiefs and Titans have to spend time preparing for him.

 

Main point, if he's on the 53 at least keep him active.  Possibly take advantage of him being there.  Foles can do his job just as well while he's inactive.

[richard pallo]

If we were a rebuilding team I could see the argument.  But we are not.  We are a contending team.  Huge difference.  Can’t see wasting a roster spot when we have other more important needs.  Hopefully they can trade him.  If not see if he can make it to the PS.  

[RollerColt]

Sam and Taysom are roughly similar height and weight wise. Does Sam have experience as a tight end or gadget role? I know he can run, but can he catch as well? 

 

I guess I'd be okay with it as long as Reich doesn't get too cute with the play... For this year, I'd like for us to return to our roots. Many believe this roster is the best it's been in a while. Therefore, instead of trickery, we should play old school like in '06 and just straight up beat our opponents with the basics. 

[Smonroe]

6 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

Sam and Taysom are roughly similar height and weight wise. Does Sam have experience as a tight end or gadget role? I know he can run, but can he catch as well? 

 

I guess I'd be okay with it as long as Reich doesn't get too cute with the play... For this year, I'd like for us to return to our roots. Many believe this roster is the best it's been in a while. Therefore, instead of trickery, we should play old school like in '06 and just straight up beat our opponents with the basics. 

 

I wasn't thinking about him playing anything other than QB (who is a threat with his legs).  Mainly to serve two purposes - to get some use from him if he makes the roster, otherwise he's inactive every week.  Secondly, to make other teams prepare for him even.  I'm really just trying to justify him being on the roster.  IMO, scared that someone else might pick him up isn't a good reason.

 

We're going to have to prepare for Willis when the Titans come to town.  Turn about is fair play.

[chad72]

30 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

If we were a rebuilding team I could see the argument.  But we are not.  We are a contending team.  Huge difference.  Can’t see wasting a roster spot when we have other more important needs.  Hopefully they can trade him.  If not see if he can make it to the PS.  

 

Like all 3rd QBs that get love this time of the season, so does Sam E. However, he doesn't carry red flags like Chad Kelly and there is a chance he makes it as a 3rd QB for a team like the Eagles or Ravens where their primary QB is a running threat. However, I would not be surprised either if we get a chance to retain him on the PS, which would be a slam dunk move if we do end up cutting him.

[chad72]

19 minutes ago, Smonroe said:

 

I wasn't thinking about him playing anything other than QB (who is a threat with his legs).  Mainly to serve two purposes - to get some use from him if he makes the roster, otherwise he's inactive every week.  Secondly, to make other teams prepare for him even.  I'm really just trying to justify him being on the roster.  IMO, scared that someone else might pick him up isn't a good reason.

 

We're going to have to prepare for Willis when the Titans come to town.  Turn about is fair play.

 

Injury factor is a real concern too. Luck missed games, Jacoby missed a game (remember Hoyer vs Dolphins??), Wentz played banged up, Mahomes got banged up and missed games in 2020, Lamar Jackson missed games last year, Big Ben did, Jameis Winston did, Kyler Murray did, and that is a big reason why lots of teams carry a 3rd QB. You are playing the odds that Foles gives you a high level of production without needing a viable 3rd QB to back him up w.r.t injury. 

[FanOutOfTown]

1 hour ago, Smonroe said:

 

If I'm Frank, I'm putting him in against the Texan or Jags if the game is going well.  Not in a pressure or redzone situation, but at midfield.  Let him bootleg or even throw a short pass.

 

That would at least make the Chiefs and Titans have to spend time preparing for him.

 

Main point, if he's on the 53 at least keep him active.  Possibly take advantage of him being there.  Foles can do his job just as well while he's inactive.

Seems like the smart/safest route if you’re going to do it. Wouldn’t be opposed to that at all.

[FanOutOfTown]

7 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Injury factor is a real concern too. Luck missed games, Jacoby missed a game (remember Hoyer vs Dolphins??), Wentz played banged up, Mahomes got banged up and missed games in 2020, Lamar Jackson missed games last year, Big Ben did, Jameis Winston did, Kyler Murray did, and that is a big reason why lots of teams carry a 3rd QB. You are playing the odds that Foles gives you a high level of production without needing a viable 3rd QB to back him up w.r.t injury. 

Wasn’t it 2020 where all the Cards had to do was beat a backup for the Rams and they make they playoffs? If I remember right Murray got hurt and couldn’t play and the Rams smacked them.

[Moe]

I think they will use Woods on a few plays this season 

[GoColts8818]

I’ve said all along if they keep Sam Frank will probably have special package for him to take advantage of his skill set.  I am not sure he can be exactly like Tyson because I don’t think Sam has the receiver experience Tyson had but I could be wrong.  Still I think Frank would find a way to use him if they keep beyond just being a third string QB.  There is a huge caveat to that though.  IF they dress him on game days.  Just because he’s on the final 53 doesn’t mean he will be active.  Having three QBs active is almost unheard of in todays NFL.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I wouldn’t be surprised if not only do we keep him but could have some plays.

[Smonroe]

15 minutes ago, chad72 said:

 

Injury factor is a real concern too. Luck missed games, Jacoby missed a game (remember Hoyer vs Dolphins??), Wentz played banged up, Mahomes got banged up and missed games in 2020, Lamar Jackson missed games last year, Big Ben did, Jameis Winston did, Kyler Murray did, and that is a big reason why lots of teams carry a 3rd QB. You are playing the odds that Foles gives you a high level of production without needing a viable 3rd QB to back him up w.r.t injury. 

 

I get that.  But Ryan isn't in the Jackson, Murray, or Ben type of QB.  He's more in the Peyton mold, doesn't run much and if he does he goes down.  How many games has he missed in his career?

 

Of course, injuries can always happen that's why they have Foles.  Remember they went with Sam last year as #2 once they realized Eason wasn't going to handle it.  And he never threw a pass.  We all agree that he's improved, but is he really a guy you want to be one injury away from starting?

[shasta519]

Hill is definitely more of an athlete than Sam. I don't know if it would work as well. But it wouldn't make much sense

 

It was goofy enough when Reich would take out Rivers and put in JB or Burton to vulture short TDs. 

 

But this was before JT had truly broken out. So putting in a mobile third-string QB at the goal line when you have the best RB in the NFL is even goofier. Plus, what is the point of putting together a roster of tall pass catchers if it not for improving the RZ/EZ efficiency?

[RollerColt]

2 minutes ago, shasta519 said:

But this was before JT had truly broken out. So putting in a mobile third-string QB at the goal line when you have the best RB in the NFL is even goofier. Plus, what is the point of putting together a roster of tall pass catchers if it not for improving the RZ/EZ efficiency?

The Seahawks in hindsight would vehemently agree with this statement. 

[Myles]

Ballard should be kicking the tires seeing if any team would trade for him.   His stock won't ever be any higher than it is now.   A 6th or 7th round pick would be nice.  I'm not confident he'll make it through waivers.

[DaColts85]

We need 53 players to help this year. Not another TC crush who won’t do anything for us in a regular game. He needs to be cut and if he makes it to the practice squad great, if not who cares. We will have another just like this in a year or two. Many hear were so high on Chad Kelly like he was the future too. Slow down a little. 

[shasta519]

8 minutes ago, RollerColt said:

The Seahawks in hindsight would vehemently agree with this statement. 

 

Yes they would. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

6 minutes ago, Myles said:

Ballard should be kicking the tires seeing if any team would trade for him.   His stock won't ever be any higher than it is now.   A 6th or 7th round pick would be nice.  I'm not confident he'll make it through waivers.

All your getting is a 6th or 7th round pick.

[RollerColt]

5 minutes ago, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

All your getting is a 6th or 7th round pick.

Yeah. If we're going that route, I'd rather trade for a player who could contribute on the team now. Problem is, I doubt we'd be able to get such a player with Sam alone. 

[shasta519]

7 minutes ago, Myles said:

Ballard should be kicking the tires seeing if any team would trade for him.   His stock won't ever be any higher than it is now.   A 6th or 7th round pick would be nice.  I'm not confident he'll make it through waivers.

 

Didn't they just draft him with a 6th round pick last year? What would be the point of drafting him only to trade him for the same pick a couple years later? 

 

I don't know if he gets claimed. Teams have had all offseason, TC and preseason to build their QB depth charts, with players that know the offense. Barring a barrage of injuries to the QB room, teams aren't likely throw all of that work and time out to claim some random late-round QB, who doesn't know their offense, just because he played well in two PS games against 3rd-stringers. 

 

JMO. I think he will be stashed on the PS. But I could see them keeping him on the 53 if they truly believe in him as a potential QB2 or more. 

[NewColtsFan]

37 minutes ago, Myles said:

Ballard should be kicking the tires seeing if any team would trade for him.   His stock won't ever be any higher than it is now.   A 6th or 7th round pick would be nice.  I'm not confident he'll make it through waivers.

If the Colts believe Sam can eventually become a good high level backup why would you give up on him now?    A good backup, who would likely be somewhat inexpensive in his second contract is a valuable asset.   And they got him for cheap. 

[Scott Pennock]

If the Colts had the intention of having Sam as the backup QB then they would not have signed Foles this off-season specifically for that intent. 
 

When you have a starting QB of Matt Ryan’s stature, backed up by a QB of Foles stature then Sam is simply a wasted roster spot because he would be inactive every week. 
 

That spot could be used for a rotational defensive lineman that would actually get snaps.

 

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

2 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:

If the Colts had the intention of having Sam as the backup QB then they would not have signed Foles this off-season specifically for that intent. 
 

When you have a starting QB of Matt Ryan’s stature, backed up by a QB of Foles stature then Sam is simply a wasted roster spot because he would be inactive every week. 
 

That spot could be used for a rotational defensive lineman that would actually get snaps.

 

 

It’s not wasted if they see him as a future backup it maybe more. A 7th LB or any other player they keep is likely to be a healthy scratch.

[AwesomeAustin]

No

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

30 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

If the Colts believe Sam can eventually become a good high level backup why would you give up on him now?    A good backup, who would likely be somewhat inexpensive in his second contract is a valuable asset.   And they got him for cheap. 

The only issue I see with this he will eventually become a FA. Would he develop enough to get a starting chance somewhere else and there might not be the option of signing him again as the backup. 
 

One thing for sure though is colts are investing time in him and see something. Might be a reason they didn’t go after a QB in the third round of draft. Ballard told him he needed to go work with Tom House. 

[Scott Pennock]

Just now, TaylorTheStudMuffin said:

It’s not wasted if they see him as a future backup it maybe more.

If they saw him in that light then why sign Foles for two years? 
 

Sam Ehlinger 

2021 - Rookie season

2022 - Nick Foles under contract 

2023 - Nick Foles under contract

2024 - Final year of rookie contract 

 

Yes they love his moxie and intangibles, but a QB that will be inactive every week is a roster spot better used elsewhere on the roster.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

6 minutes ago, Scott Pennock said:

If they saw him in that light then why sign Foles for two years? 
 

Sam Ehlinger 

2021 - Rookie season

2022 - Nick Foles under contract 

2023 - Nick Foles under contract

2024 - Final year of rookie contract 

 

Yes they love his moxie and intangibles, but a QB that will be inactive every week is a roster spot better used elsewhere on the roster.

It’s a lot more nuanced then just that.

[throwing BBZ]

1 hour ago, RollerColt said:

Yeah. If we're going that route, I'd rather trade for a player who could contribute on the team now. Problem is, I doubt we'd be able to get such a player with Sam alone. 

 

 Mr. Speaker, i wish to revise and extend my remarks.
 Let's hope Washington calls, we might get a 5th out of them.
  

  If there is interest in Sam we would likely be looking for a player the Other team is hoping to stash, but they figure someone would sign him.
 Like an o-lineman.
 To me, a team would have to be very unhappy with their backup QB situation to bring on a guy that won't throw to the middle of the field, and has no NFL starting experience.
 I like him some, and he is only 23. But will his inner Drew Brees come out in another year or two. If he can learn to fire those timing passes over the middle well... he can start. lol 

[Myles]

1 hour ago, shasta519 said:

 

Didn't they just draft him with a 6th round pick last year? What would be the point of drafting him only to trade him for the same pick a couple years later? 

 

 

I think the roster is fluid and things have changed allot in the past year.   They have a starter in Ryan for the next couple years.  They have their backup in Foles for the next couple years.   I think the draft pick is more valuable than a bench player with little chance of being a starter.   That said, I would love to have him on the practice squad.  I don't want to see the Colts keep only 3 RB's in order to keep Sam on the 53 man roster.  getting a 6th or 7th round draft pick would be much better than losing him to waivers.

[iuswingman]

4 hours ago, Smonroe said:

I just think if we’re going to have three QBs on the roster, why not get something out of the other active one.  Foles can do his job as well inactive or not.  And even if Sam never gets in a game, the Ds have to prepare for him.  
 

Plus Matt is rarely hurt, so it’s worth taking that chance.  If Ryan should go down, there’s no doubt Foles would be the starter.  
 

For Sam’s plays I’m thinking less in the red zone, and more on a first down mid field.  You have JT, Hines, and a mobile QB in the backfield.  That has to open up the backend for a quick pass.  

 

I don't think Foles can be inactive and still serve as the backup QB.  If Matt gets injured, then Foles would have to be active to come in the game.

 

Sounds like you're trying to turn Foles into the QB coach. 

[ruf]

3 hours ago, RollerColt said:

Sam and Taysom are roughly similar height and weight wise. Does Sam have experience as a tight end or gadget role? I know he can run, but can he catch as well? 

 

I guess I'd be okay with it as long as Reich doesn't get too cute with the play... For this year, I'd like for us to return to our roots. Many believe this roster is the best it's been in a while. Therefore, instead of trickery, we should play old school like in '06 and just straight up beat our opponents with the basics. 

we don't have the Oline for that

[Smonroe]

1 hour ago, iuswingman said:

 

I don't think Foles can be inactive and still serve as the backup QB.  If Matt gets injured, then Foles would have to be active to come in the game.

 

Sounds like you're trying to turn Foles into the QB coach. 

 

Sam would be the backup, Foles would be inactive.  He'd still be doing the same thing we brought him in for, helping Matt out by pointing out what he sees.

 

They'd be taking a chance, because if Ryan had to lead the game I don't think Sam is ready to play against #1s.  But how often has Ryan left a game?

 

I just see it as a strategy where we get some use out of guy that we're afraid would get snatched if we put him on waivers.  Again, I don't think it would happen. 

[RollerColt]

53 minutes ago, ruf said:

we don't have the Oline for that

*Yet. I'll lose all hope when there's no time left for hope. In the meantime I'm going for cautiously optimistic? Wishful thinker? 

 

Eh.. probably right... 2018 would've been the year for that.