Bill Streicher-USA TODAY Sports
The Philadelphia Eagles made a lot of acquisitions this past offseason. From Byron Maxwell on defense to DeMarco Murray on offense, it could be said that the Eagles made the most noise. However, possibly the most controversial of those moves was the trade for former St. Louis Rams quarterback, Sam Bradford.
Head coach Chip Kelly sent away 2013 standout quarterback Nick Foles, a fourth-round pick as well as a 2016 second-round pick for the injury prone Bradford. In return the Eagles got a fifth-round pick as well as a conditional pick.
For a quarterback who hadn’t started a meaningful NFL game since Week 7 of the 2013 season and suffered back to back ACL injuries to the same knee, many thought the Eagles gave up way too much. Bradford has never thrown for more than 4,000 yards, has never thrown more than 25 touchdowns in a season, and his highest QBR average in a year is a mediocre 50.3.
Even in Bradford’s successful 2012 season in which he had career numbers in yards and touchdowns, Pro Football Focus only ranked him 21st and behind quarterbacks Ryan Tannehill, Alex Smith, Matt Schaub, and Carson Palmer.
With the news now that the Eagles are trying to extend Bradford and that the two sides are in contract talks, is it something that they should really want to do? For the Eagles, is it really in the best interest of the franchise to extend a quarterback who has yet to even take a single snap for them?
Bradford isn’t going to come cheap either as the market for quarterbacks is at an all-time high. Without ever winning a playoff game, Carolina Panthers quarterback, Cam Newton, got $60 million in guaranteed money. At the same time, San Francisco 49ers quarterback, Colin Kaepernick signed a deal worth up to $114 million, Cincinnati Bengals quarterback, Andy Dalton, signed a deal worth up to $96 million, and Tannehill signed a deal worth up to $77 million.
There is no question the former Oklahoma quarterback is going to want a deal in the same range and with a good amount of that deal guaranteed. The problem with that has a lot to do with what was mentioned above. This is a quarterback who has missed all of or the majority of two straight seasons due to knee injuries, not to mention 2013 when he missed time with an ankle sprain. To invest and risk the future of the team, for a player with as many injuries as Bradford, would seem to be ill-advised.
Bradford struggled in St. Louis with a poor offensive line and no offensive weapons. The Eagles no longer have Jeremy Maclin and DeSean Jackson and just released all-pro guard Evan Mathis. The Birds aren’t necessarily strong in those two areas.
Contract talks between the Eagles and Bradford have gotten nowhere. However, that may be a good thing. It would not be surprising if the Eagles quarterback waits until the end of the season to redo his deal just to see where his market lies.
If that does happen, Bradford gets to try to increase his value in a quarterback-friendly system that is similar to the one that he flourished in with the Sooners, and Kelly and the rest of the team get to see if Bradford can stay healthy.
There is no question that the talent is there for Bradford. Ever since he came out of college, NFL scouts and analysts have believed he could carry a franchise. However, injuries have always been a concern for the star quarterback. At the end of the day waiting until after 2015 makes the most sense for both sides.
