The narrative surrounding the Eagles quarterback situation is obvious: Carson Wentz is an MVP-caliber quarterback. Nick Foles, not. Because the Eagles lost Wentz to an ACL injury late in the season, they became underdogs in two consecutive home playoff games, embracing the notion in a very creepy fashion.

Foles gets no respect, primarily because he already struggled as Eagles quarterback, got traded for Sam Bradford and later was benched by the Rams for Case Keenum. His path to Super Bowl starting quarterback is a strange one.

Wentz gets all the love because he is a second-year franchise quarterback with an outstanding physical skillset and a massive ceiling. 

But maybe the two aren't so different. A graphic thrown on the screen during ESPN's coverage of the Super Bowl Opening Night is pretty eye-popping when comparing the two quarterbacks and their record/success/etc. as Eagles quarterbacks.

Obviously there are caveats here. Foles, who was drafted in 2012, has played longer than Wentz, who was drafted in 2016. Foles played for the Eagles first as a backup in 2012 (he would start six games that year and go 1-5), then started 10 games in 2013, when he threw for 27 touchdowns and two interceptions. He would later go 6-2 as a starter in 2014 and get traded that offseason to the Rams. 

While he was gone, the Eagles drafted Wentz, presumably to sit behind Bradford, but Teddy Bridgewater got hurt and they dealt Bradford out of town too. Wentz started 16 games in his rookie season and every game up until he was hurt this season, when Foles took over. Foles has gone 4-1, including the playoffs, and now has statistics that are virtually identical with the Eagles to Wentz. 

There are some slight discrepancies when it comes to the touchdowns and picks, but he has one more win and a higher QBR. 

It's not an argument that Foles = Wentz, because his statistics happened under three different coaching staffs (Andy Reid, Chip Kelly and Doug Pederson). It's more of a wild coincidence. 

But it is worth noting that, from a statistical standpoint, maybe the dropoff from Wentz to Foles is not quite as steep as we've led ourselves to believe.