Bradford vs Foles

Sam Bradford was the top overall in the 2010 draft. He has been the starting QB for three organizations so far and is on pace to be The Guy for a fourth this year. Nick Foles was a third round pick in 2012. He has played for three teams, but has shuffled between starter and backup.

Which QB has had the better career?

Going by volume, Bradford is the runaway winner. He has more starts, 80 to 39. Bradford has more yards, touchdowns and every other key stat you could want.

The argument for Foles is that he’s got the better highlights. He had the 7-touchdown game back in 2013. Bradford has never even thrown 4 TDs in a game. Foles threw 4 TDs in his first start of 2017.

Foles finished the 2013 season with a rating of 119.2, one of the highest figures in league history. Bradford has never had a rating of 100 or more for a full season. Bradford has 23 career games with a QB rating of 100 or more. If you include the postseason, Foles has 20 such games (I’m excluding games with fewer than 10 passes).

Some people believe you judge QBs by what they do in the postseason. Foles is 3-1, and as you may recall, was the Super Bowl MVP a few months back. Foles has played his best football in the playoffs. He has a career rating of 113.2.

Bradford has never played in a postseason game.

QB wins are a very flawed stat, but for those who like it, Bradford is 34-45-1 as a starter. Foles is 22-17 (25-18 if you count the playoffs).

The numbers don’t paint a very pretty picture for Bradford. He’s the equivalent of the RB who runs for 900 yards and averages 3.8 yards per carry. It is fair to point out that he’s had bad luck with injuries. He’s played on some bad teams. He hasn’t had great coaching.

At the same time, the top overall pick is supposed to be a guy who can overcome that. He’s the guy you build a team around because of his special ability. Bradford will mix in the occasional terrific game, but he’s never lived up to his draft status. His 2016 season was promising. He led the league by completing 71.6 percent of his passes. He threw for 20 TDs and finished with a rating of 99.3.

But Bradford went 7-8 as a starter and the offense was 23rd in the league in scoring. Minnesota had the #3 defense in the league and Bradford still couldn’t get them to the postseason.  Even when he’s good…something still doesn’t feel right.

Bradford and Foles both need the right circumstances to play at a high level. Foles showed just how good he could be in 2013 and 2017. Bradford is still searching for his chance to shine. Looking at the Cardinals roster, it sure doesn’t seem like 2018 will be his year.

I do think Bradford is more naturally gifted and that’s part of why teams keep taking chances on him. When Foles and Bradford struggle, Foles is the worse player. That season finale against Dallas was ugly.

There is a chance that both Foles and Bradford could hit the free agent market in March. It would be interesting to see how teams pursue them.

I think it is too simplistic to say that Foles has had the better career because of winning the Super Bowl. Is he better than Donovan McNabb or Randall Cunningham? No way. That would be a ridiculous idea.

When you combine the great postseason play, the Super Bowl win and the moments of great regular season play, you can say that Foles has had the better career, despite starting half as many games and throwing has as many passes.

Bradford has made more than $100 million in his career, so Gordon Gekko would strongly argue Bradford’s had a much better career.

*****

Next up will be a comparison of Matt Barkley vs Matt McGloin.

_