As we noted last week here on Giants 101, 2014 has officially been re-named "The Year of Eli-Hating." The reason for that is glaringly obvious, as New York Giants quarterback Eli Manning has taken a relentless verbal beating since the onset of the offseason with no signs of it slowing down. It continued again recently, as Eliot Shorr-Parks of The Star-Ledger evaluated all NFL quarterbacks from a trade-ability standpoint and deduced that Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Nick Foles was better than Manning.
Ultimately, Shorr-Parks ranked Foles as the No. 13 quarterback league-wide, while Manning landed in the second-to-last tier, ranking No. 18 overall. And in a player-for-player trade scenario, Shorr-Parks said he would not pull the trigger, preferring to keep Foles to Manning.
Hard decision, but no:
There's no denying that Manning's stock is at an all-time low following a season in which he led the league in interceptions (27), but Shorr-Parks' list very specifically pointed out that the rankings weren't based on a single season of work. Rather, his list and rankings encompass an entire career — yet he still chose Foles over Manning.
While Foles may have looked good at times in 2013, this is a young quarterback who has never played a full 16-game season, has never thrown for more than 3,000 yards and is only a few years removed from the college level. And although he may have a high ceiling, ranking him as the No. 13 quarterback in the league — especially ahead of guys who have proven their ability — seems like a reach. At the same time, we agree with Shorr-Parks that Foles shouldn't be deemed "overrated" as of this point — largely because he doesn't have a sufficient body of work to judge.
Still, Foles over Manning? We're not buying it.
- Be sure to like Giants 101 on Facebook, follow Giants 101 on Twitter & +1Giants 101 on Google+
- Be sure to “like” Sports Media 101 on Facebook and to follow Sports Media 101 on Twitter
- Subscribe to Sports Media 101 using Google Currents