I’m not saying the team wasn’t bad. However the losses weren’t all due to the team. Since they had no running game of course the offense flowed through him, he was the only thing that could keep them in games. He either did, or did not.

However you are not accounting for the bad decision making, the turnovers, the bad mechanics. If was simply a matter of getting more talent they would have kept him. Teams dont bench a franchise QB for multiple games and they don’t trade him away when they are entering their prime. Especially if the QB under him has a lower ceiling. There was a reason we were the only suitor. Sure he could return to form, I would say the pieces are in place to do that. But to not admit there is significant risk associated with Wentz is just homerism. Luckily it looks like it is only a two year investment if he is average to bad.

What does it matter if it was a prime time game or not. Was it against equally horrible nfc east teams? They won four games.

There’s no patience with qbs nowadays they want them to step in and be mahomes or Lamar and everyone wants the shiny new toy. Look at all the qb movement this off season it’s ridiculous

The Eagles went with the cheaper option and future potential option not necessarily the best option.

Winning games in prime time shows me a guy that’s not afraid of the big moments I want a QB that shines in big games. He beat the 49ers (before the were injury ravished) Cowboys, and Giants. Played good games and kept them in vs the Ravens, browns, and Steelers

Anyone remember Manning 2001? I think it's fair to say he got fixed.

Adding a great OC and a RB who wouldnt take negative yards works miracles.

What new OC? Tom Moore was Manning's OC from 98 thru 2010. Also I don't recall Dom Rhodes taking a lot of negative yards in 2001.

There is no patience with rookies. But Wentz was in his 5th year and regressed. They went with the best option in their opinion. Teams don’t trade away franchise QBs, unless there is something wrong or they have a falling out.

They beat a healthy 49ers? This is who was out for the 49ers:
Jimmy Garoppolo, Nick Bosa, Solomon Thomas, Richard Sherman, Tevin Coleman on injured reserve. Raheem Mostert (knee), Emmanuel Moseley (concussion), Ahkello Witherspoon (hamstring), Dre Greenlaw (quad), Dee Ford (back) and Jordan Reed (knee) and the lost Ezikiel Ansah during the game.

That’s a 6 win 49er teams. And the Eagles closed that game out with a defensive TD. Wentz had a nice TD with 6 minutes left, also had a god awful interception. All the other teams suck or the defense kept it close. He had two int’s against pit, 2 int’s and a fumble against the Browns, and a fumble against Balt which was probably his best game where he had 200 yards and 2 TDs. And these were his best games last year. We haven’t touched his worst games, which are bad.

This discussion isn’t really making me feel better about the trade.

Again he’s on a better team and will be asked to do less. Rivers had shitty games vs Browns, ravens, and Steelers pretty much made every offense look bad.

So you would feel better going into the season with a rookie? Brissett? Eason? Or Wentz because those were your options

I feel great about it and the good thing is we play the NFC west so we’ll be able to compare Wentz Colts numbers vs NFC west vs Eagles Wentz I can’t wait to revisit this one .....

He was sacked vs Baltimore 6, Pittsburgh 5, and Browns 5

Wentz sacks by game look like this/ 8-0-3-3-5-6-3-4-3-5-6-4

Rivers last year / 0-2-0-1-1-1-2-0-1-1-1-3-0-1-5-0-0

I'm glad Rivers is gone. Never going to have a deep run in the playoffs, against the best defenses with an offense that cannot use the whole field because of your qb's arm and cannot move the pocket in any real sense of the word. It is way more difficult to win when you are so self limited, especially against the best teams. I'm glad that the whole playbook is opened up. Wentz may not be better than Rivers but the offense that the Colts put on the field certainly will be from a larger playbook. This team isn't going to win by having the best qb anyway, like in the past. Not with who we play against. I think our hope is to have the best overall team by dominating on the lines. We are half way there (offense). To me the real key to this year will be the development, or lack there of, of our defensive ends. If we can generate a pass rush from them we could be something special and go deep into the playoffs. Lets hope.

He’s a QB, he’s not going to be asked to do less. He just won’t have to pull the load by himself. But teams go as the QB goes and games will come down to him having to win it himself. But if this was just about him having better talent around him I would be ok. But it’s not, because that wasn’t the only issue. So having better talent around him is only one aspect of the problem because Wentz had a historically bad season.

https://touchdownwire.usatoday.com/2...possible-bind/

Would I feel better with a rookie or Eason? Maybe. Depends on the rookie. And who says that’s the only options? Stafford was available. Rodgers and GB have a falling out. Watson won’t play for the Texans. Miami isn’t sure they like what’s his name. Who knows what would happen.

Teams change too much year to year. A stat comparison to the NFC west really wouldn’t tell you much. It would probably be better to compare him to Rivers to see if we made an upgrade. But this is a pretty brutal schedule, especially early.

I wouldn’t give up a 1st for Stafford and ofcourse the Texans are not trading Watson to us so the only options were Wentz, Darnold, Eason or a rookie let’s be realistic.

Once again you totally disregard the number of times he was sacked and what good protection can do for a QB I don’t believe his issues are as deep rooted as you believe. It’s pretty simple really but two things are clear, dudes still has a cannon and can still run so there’s is 2 options we didn’t have last year already