I don't get the accuracy thing, Bradford has been awful over his career.
Has he been inaccurate or has he had nothing to work with? In about 20 fewer games, Nick Foles is 3% more accurate than Bradford. Nick Foles has had at different times DeSean Jackson, Jeremy Maclin, Brent Celek, Zach Ertz, LeSean McCoy and Jordan Mathews at his disposal (two #1 WRs, a #1 TE, and a pretty solid #2 TE, one of the best RBs in the league, and a solid slot WR), plus a very good OL for a good portion of his time here. Sam Bradford has had parts of seasons with Danny Amendola, Branding Gibson, Stephen Jackson, and Chris Givens. It is no guarantee, but I am willing to be a good amount of money, that if Sam Bradford was on the Eagles since day one, he would have better numbers...probably a lot better numbers. True, the argument could be made that good QBs don't need good weapons or whatever, but if you give a guy nothing to work with, chances are he's not going to put up good numbers.