Sielski: Aging QBs thriving, so did Eagles make right move?
No matter how you or I or Howie Roseman or Doug Pederson or Tom Condon came down on the question that has defined the Eagles' offseason and will define their future - what should this team do at quarterback? - everyone could agree on the discussion's underpinnings. Everyone understood the choices that the Eagles, in pursuing and acquiring Carson Wentz, would have to make, the smaller questions implicit in that bigger one.
No matter how you or I or Howie Roseman or Doug Pederson or Tom Condon came down on the question that has defined the Eagles' offseason and will define their future - what should this team do at quarterback? - everyone could agree on the discussion's underpinnings. Everyone understood the choices that the Eagles, in pursuing and acquiring Carson Wentz, would have to make, the smaller questions implicit in that bigger one.
Taking Sam Bradford's playing career and injury history into consideration, would it be smarter to commit to him than it would be to go after the No. 2 pick in the draft and, in turn, Wentz? Was Bradford, at 28, a better long-term bet than Wentz, who is 23? Because of the NFL's rookie wage scale, which would keep his salary-cap hit under $9 million for each of his contract's first three years, Wentz would always be the more cost-effective option.
In fact, Fletcher Cox's six-year, $103 million extension all but ensures that the Eagles will either trade or release Bradford after this season. Already, the Eagles are $11.3 million over the projected 2017 salary cap and just $8.8 million under the projected 2018 cap, according to the database OverTheCap.com. No team has more to trim to get under the '17 limit, and no team is closer to the '18 ceiling. Some pricey players will have to go, and after he collects his $18 million this year, Bradford figures to be near the top of the list.
Assuming Wentz develops into a franchise quarterback, and does so quickly, the Eagles will be happy to make those decisions and sacrifices. But their strategy rests on a presumptive answer to one of those smaller questions: that, of course, it's wiser to invest in the younger Wentz than it is the older Bradford. Based on recent evidence, that presumption isn't as self-evident as one might think.
As Kevin Clark of TheRinger.com detailed last week, the NFL is in the midst of a golden era for golden-oldie quarterbacks. "The top eight players by passing yards per game last season were all north of 30, a feat never equaled in the NFL," Clark wrote. Nine times since 2011, a quarterback 34 or older has played at least 10 games and posted a passer rating of at least 100; before that five-year span, it had happened six times in league history. More, of the 13 quarterbacks who threw 29 or more touchdown passes last season, seven were older than Bradford, and the youngest of those seven was Aaron Rodgers, who is 32.
This trend is no coincidence. The increased knowledge of and emphasis on training and nutrition can allow every player, quarterbacks included, to lengthen his career. And by making the sport more pass-friendly (calling pass interference and illegal contact more closely, for instance) and the offseason less rigorous (players cannot wear pads during the nine-week program), the league has created conditions favorable to savvier, more experienced quarterbacks. In this environment, a veteran quarterback's mind becomes a more effective weapon against defenses and a vital advantage over a callow challenger trying to take his job.
There are reasons that the Arizona Cardinals' Carson Palmer - at age 35, having suffered season-ending knee and elbow injuries in his 20s, having reportedly planned to retire in 2011 - had the best season of his career in 2015. Among those reasons: He was healthy, and over time, he has gotten smarter.
Now, consider Bradford's growth. After his terrible second season in the NFL, when he went 1-9 as a starter and completed just 53.5 percent of his passes, he has improved gradually. Over the 37 games he has played since, his per-16-game averages are as follows: a 61.9 completion percentage, 3,941 yards, 23 touchdowns, 13 interceptions, and an 85.7 passer rating.
Over Bradford's last 21 games - the seven he played for the Rams in 2013 and the 14 he played for the Eagles last year - he has posted a 63.6 completion percentage and an 87.9 passer rating; per 16 games, he has averaged 4,123 yards, 25 touchdowns, and 14 interceptions. These statistics are not otherworldly. But they do indicate that, when all his body parts are in proper alignment, Bradford is competent and - in the right surroundings, with the way the league is evolving - perhaps can be something more. He fits the profile of the kind of quarterback who could thrive as he ages: a pocket passer whose intelligence is regarded as his strongest asset.
I'm not suggesting that ascendance is assured for Bradford. I'm suggesting it's possible, maybe as likely as a Division I-AA quarterback's blossoming into a superstar, and in a league in which a team's rebuilding process can take less than a year to complete, the Eagles shut themselves off from that possibility.
They opted against competence and made a bid for greatness by trading up to get Wentz, and he may very well validate their choice. But the notion that they had no choice at all is false, and the risk that they made the wrong one is real, should time turn out to be on Sam Bradford's side.
@MikeSielski