It came across as a little curious when Chip Kelly openly said earlier this week that the Eagles were offered a first round pick for Sam Bradford just a day after trading for him. It looks like he wasn't lying, however.
In an interview with Mike Florio of ProFootballTalk, Rams head coach Jeff Fisher admitted that the Rams were being offered a first round pick for Bradford. But Fisher, who wouldn't have a quarterback if he traded Bradford, wanted a player to replace him instead. So that's where Nick Foles came in.
"There were some discussions, yes, but from our standpoint, the first-round pick — obviously it’s attractive, but you still don’t have a quarterback. It’s a late pick and then would we move up and get into position to draft one? It didn’t make sense to us."
It's not exactly clear which team made the offer, and there's no telling if the same team made the offer separately to both the Rams and the Eagles. It does seem like the Cleveland Browns could have been the team since they are in need of a quarterback and also own two first round picks (No. 12 and No. 19). Other teams in the later half of the first round aren't really in need of a quarterback.
So what does this potentially tell us about the Eagles? Well, assuming if the team offering a first was the Browns, which it might not be, I think it says the Eagles didn't overpay for Bradford. Here's a look at the actual trade again:
EAGLES GET: QB Sam Bradford, 2015 5th round pick, conditional 2016 pick*
RAMS GET: QB Nick Foles, 2015 4th round pick, 2016 2nd round pick
*Eagles will surrender 2016 2nd-round pick to Rams in QB trade no matter what. But will get back a conditional 2016 pick from Rams. It will be a 3rd if Bradford does not play at all; and a 4th if he starts less than 50 percent of plays."
The 2015 pick swap isn't a huge deal since they only involve moving around in the 2015 draft order. So I'm kind of ignoring that part here. The biggest issue people might have is the Eagles have to give up a 2016 second. But if the Rams were being offered a first (No. 19?), it doesn't seem too bad that the Eagles only got Bradford for a future second (potentially in the 50's in 2016?) and Foles.
Of course, if you thought highly of Foles, you may disagree with that sentiment. It seemed clear that Foles wasn't in Philadelphia's long-term plans, however, so it made sense for them to get something for him instead of just letting him play out the final year of his rookie deal.
And I didn't even mention the conditional pick the Eagles could potentially receive, which is obviously critical. If Bradford gets hurt, the Eagles will be getting either a third or fourth round pick depending on the situation. If that's the case, it won't be so much the Eagles giving up a second round pick completely as it is moving down a round or two in the draft order. That's not great, but it's not terrible and could be worse. Assuming Bradford does stay healthy and play well, giving up the second is justified. If he stays healthy and struggles, that would be more troublesome.
So a long story short, if the Rams were truly originally offered a first for Bradford from another team, I don't see how anyone could suggest the Eagles got fleeced in the Bradford trade. If anything, it was pretty fair based on market value.