Jennifer Stewart-USA TODAY Sports
Both Michael Vick and Nick Foles had their opportunities to lock up the starting job for the future based on their 2012 performance. Neither came away with a particularly resounding performance.
Vick suffered through arguably the worst season of his career, throwing 10 interceptions and adding nine fumbles on the ground. He also showed a knack for turnovers at the absolute worst time.
Who can forget the 93-yard fumble return touchdown the Cardinals had on the final play of the first half, or the 99-yard interception touchdown by the Saints, or the fumble diving into the end zone against the Steelers?
As Cold Hard Football Facts did such a tremendous job of pointing out, Vick also played extremely poorly early in games, which put the Eagles into deficits they couldn't recover from. He led the Eagles to 10 first-half points in one of his 10 games last season. And he threw just a single first-quarter touchdown all year.
He did lead three dramatic fourth-quarter comeback victories, but he also played poorly enough in the first 55 minutes to put the Eagles into that position, a la Tim Tebow in 2011.
Foles wasn't much better than Vick, but you have to take into account that he was a rookie still learning the game, not a 10-year veteran who showed an extremely alarming inability to recognize even the most basic blitzes.
Foles also played with a significantly worse supporting cast. He had LeSean McCoy and DeSean Jackson each for two of six games. Vick had McCoy for 10 of 10 and Jackson for nine of 10. Foles also played without Todd Herremans for all six games (Vick had Herremans blocking him for eight of 10 games).
Both played without Jason Peters, and Vick had Jason Kelce for just over a game, compared to none for Foles.
Foles led the Eagles to double-digit points in the first half in five out of six games. The Eagles averaged 18.67 points per game with Foles under center, compared to 15.89 for Vick.
Looking at the basic picture, it's clear that Vick is on the decline of his career. He's 33 years old and has significantly regressed since he was an MVP candidate in 2010.
Foles could be a bust or he could be a superstar, but as far as rookie performances go, his was better than a lot of current NFL greats (Eli Manning, for example).