Michael VickThe offseason has already been wild in Philadelphia, after letting go long-time coach Andy Reid, bringing in Chip Kelly, and now re-signing quarterback Michael Vick.

Reid made the decision to bring in rookie quarterback Nick Foles after Vick's injuries got the best of him. Now in Kansas City, is Reid trying to lure Foles in?

First, let's touch up on the Vick deal.

He has just been awarded a one-year deal where he is guaranteed $3 million, but could earn up to $10 million. I don't agree on re-signing Vick, but the way Philly did it was smart. They re-signed a guy who has shown flashes of a really good quarterback over the years, and did it fairly cheap.

Signing him for only a year was my favorite part of the deal, simply because they don't have to lock in someone who has shown he may not be the best option. I assume all of last season's blame was put on Andy Reid, which is why he is in KC and Vick is still an Eagle.

Now, onto the juicy part. Andy Reid obviously likes Foles, as he chose him over a couple other guys who could play well if put into a good situation (which wasn't Philadelphia this past season), and why wouldn't he? Foles was a hot rookie out of Arizona, big arm, great potential. I think we can all agree he did a really good job being a rookie and put into the situation he was in.

So after Reid's assumed infatuation with Foles, why not give him an opportunity in a Chiefs uniform? Their No. 1 overall pick was most likely going to a quarterback in the Draft, as they suffered through a dismal season from Matt Cassel, and a mediocre one by Brady Quinn. So by bringing in Foles, you trade that pick for two or three later ones, and have more of on opportunity to improve somewhere else.

The good thing for the Chiefs is, they don't need much more improvement anywhere else. I mean, they did have six Pro Bowlers this season.

If Foles is a Chief next season, and they address their other needs though the Draft, Kansas City could be a .500 team, or better, once again.