Sam Bradford

St. Louis Rams quarterback Sam Bradford is now a member of the Eagles (AP Photo | Bob Leverone, File)

The Eagles made a blockbuster move for a quarterback on Tuesday, but it wasn't the quarterback Eagles fans were hoping for — nor the one they believed their head coach coveted.

Gone is Nick Foles, but instead of welcoming in Oregon quarterback Marcus Mariota, the Eagles apparently are ready to usher in the Sam Bradford era.

The move left plenty of fans (and media members) scratching their heads, wondering if there was another move to come, or if head coach/general manager Chip Kelly was really hitching his wagon to Bradford.

Here's an attempt at making sense of the trade.

Why did the Eagles trade for Bradford?

That answer is easy — to get rid of Foles.

It's been clear for months that the team wasn't committed to Foles, and they were going to trade him. As reported by NJ Advance Media, the team had been shopping Foles at the Senior Bowl in January. They didn't find many suitors, but the Rams were one of them.

Swapping Bradford for Foles allowed each teams to get rid of a quarterback who no longer fit their plans, with limited financial risk. Both quarterbacks only have one year remaining on their deals.

Why did the Eagles also surrender a second-round pick?

That is difficult to understand, but it might be a harsh reality.

You would think that Foles, who is younger than Bradford and has had just as much success, if not more, would be enough to make the trade happen.

Instead, the Eagles also had to send a 2016 second-round pick and a 2015 fourth-round pick to acquire a veteran quarterback making $12.9 million and coming off two ACL tears.

That's likely a sign that Foles didn't have the kind of value fans believed he might.

Do the Eagles really want Sam Bradford?

That is what the team wants you to believe. While Kelly has been predictably silent on the trade, the team's website already is selling Bradford's jerseys and touting him as the team's new quarterback.

Bradford makes some sense for the Eagles. When their offense really clicked in 2013, it was when Foles was deadly accurate, made the right decisions and executed Kelly's plays. In 2014, Foles took a major step back.

What Foles did in 2013, Bradford should be able to do on a much higher level — make the right read before the snap, get the ball out quickly and accurately. If Bradford can reach the potential he showed to make him the No. 1 pick in 2010, it isn't hard to see him having success under Kelly.

But isn't he injury prone?

Bradford twice has torn an ACL, and a lower body injury in 2011 caused him to miss six games. Over his five-year career, Bradford has played in 49 games and missed 31 — a trend that doesn't match Kelly's saying that "durability is the best ability."

Is Bradford now the "franchise quarterback"?

That answer is no, and getting that straightened out really helps to understand the trade.

Kelly wouldn't commit to Foles after the quarterback won him an NFC East title, a Pro Bowl MVP and threw 27 touchdowns and two interceptions. He wouldn't commit to DeSean Jackson after a 1,332 yard season, and he wouldn't commit to LeSean McCoy after becoming the franchise's all-time leading rusher.

So, no — Kelly likely isn't handing the keys to the franchise over to Bradford, a guy with a one-year contract given to him by another team. Nor is Kelly tying his coaching career to Bradford before even one practice.

Why did they pay Mark Sanchez?

Sanchez was signed before the Bradford deal, of course. But his role now is the same: Compete for the starter's job and provide the Eagles with a backup who can win.

Kelly has been clear since coming to the Eagles that he wants two quarterbacks he can trust on his roster. It's why he didn't trade Sanchez last summer when his value was sky-high after an impressive training camp.

By paying Sanchez a guaranteed $5.5 million to stick around, Kelly gets a guy he can trust on the field and in the locker room.

So does this mean the Eagles won't make a play for Mariota?

That is the million-dollar question.

The two things that stick out about the Bradford trade — the big salary and the draft pick — are easily explained away. Bradford can be cut and the team doesn't have to pay him a dime. The pick is a second-rounder two drafts from now. Add that Kelly wanted to get rid of Foles, and the Eagles actually didn't give up much for Bradford.

So, any attempts to get Mariota might not have been impacted. If he falls in the draft to a pick where they can reach him, having Bradford likely won't stop that. Perhaps this makes them a little less desperate.

So in the end, good or bad trade?

The Eagles gave up a player they didn't want and with diminished value despite a 14-5 record under Kelly. The line for Foles was a short one.

It's possible trading a second-round pick in 2016 comes back to bite the Eagles, but with a massive hole at quarterback, it's likely a small price to pay.

In return, the Eagles got a quarterback who would have been the top free agent at his position if he had been released by the Rams. The Eagles get to take a look at him for a few months, and decide if he is worth the $12 million check he is owed this season.

Bradford may never play a snap for the Eagles. He might be a trading chip to get closer to Mariota. He might become the starter. He might get hurt again. Or he might turn into the player that made him the No. 1 overall pick.

But it might have been worth the price paid for the Eagles to find out.

Eliot Shorr-Parks may be reached at eshorrpa@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @EliotShorrParks. Find NJ.com Sports on Facebook.