Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Teddy's Wants and Needs (No 5th year option? Pg.72)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 69, 70, 71 ... 81, 82, 83  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Purplexing


Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 5338
Location: Outside Valhalla, looking in.
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 7:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Duff Man wrote:
Klomp wrote:
Duff Man wrote:
But long story short those checkdowns on 3rd and long aren't really helping the team win games. Just something he needs to improve on (drastically) if he wants to take that next step.

Something may not help you win games, but doing it can also help you not lose a game.


How did that work for Bradford and the vikings this year?


Wasn't our offensive line one of the worst in the league or was I dreaming for 6 months?


Bradford had a very good QB rating, 99.x, and set the all time NFL single season passing completion percentage record, 71.6%?, in the process, with only a few INTs.
Related:
Rudolph and Theilen both had 'career years', with career high catches and yards. Diggs also had a good year. stats not provided.


The Vikings were 8-8, which was disappointing, but not unreasonable, considering the loss of a QB, RB, and several starting OL to injuries, and the abrupt departure of the OC during the season.

IFYP in regard to 'the offense'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dolmonite26


Joined: 05 Jan 2014
Posts: 1887
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://zonecoverage.com/2017/vikings/quarterback-salaries-are-flattening-relatively-which-might-make-bradwater-tough-but-not-impossible/

Article from Arif in regards to the impending cap situation with Bridgewater and Bradford. Interesting even if he didn't draw a very helpful conclusion.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 52625
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dolmonite26 wrote:
http://zonecoverage.com/2017/vikings/quarterback-salaries-are-flattening-relatively-which-might-make-bradwater-tough-but-not-impossible/

Article from Arif in regards to the impending cap situation with Bridgewater and Bradford. Interesting even if he didn't draw a very helpful conclusion.


Bradford needs to be extended, I don't see how MNcan avoid that.

I'd rather not devote 38 million on the QB position in 2018. At that point, I'd rather just let Teddy test the market and not give him the 5th year option.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
disaacs


Joined: 13 Dec 2005
Posts: 28565
Location: Brownbackistan
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
Dolmonite26 wrote:
http://zonecoverage.com/2017/vikings/quarterback-salaries-are-flattening-relatively-which-might-make-bradwater-tough-but-not-impossible/

Article from Arif in regards to the impending cap situation with Bridgewater and Bradford. Interesting even if he didn't draw a very helpful conclusion.


Bradford needs to be extended, I don't see how MNcan avoid that.

I'd rather not devote 38 million on the QB position in 2018. At that point, I'd rather just let Teddy test the market and not give him the 5th year option.


I'm probably leaning towards not giving him the 5th year option either and see where he's at at the end of the season.
_________________


Thx to Lil Uno!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Duff Man


Joined: 05 May 2013
Posts: 990
Location: Sveltville
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Purplexing wrote:
Duff Man wrote:
Klomp wrote:
Duff Man wrote:
But long story short those checkdowns on 3rd and long aren't really helping the team win games. Just something he needs to improve on (drastically) if he wants to take that next step.

Something may not help you win games, but doing it can also help you not lose a game.


How did that work for Bradford and the vikings this year?


Wasn't our offensive line one of the worst in the league or was I dreaming for 6 months?


Bradford had a very good QB rating, 99.x, and set the all time NFL single season passing completion percentage record, 71.6%?, in the process, with only a few INTs.
Related:
Rudolph and Theilen both had 'career years', with career high catches and yards. Diggs also had a good year. stats not provided.


The Vikings were 8-8, which was disappointing, but not unreasonable, considering the loss of a QB, RB, and several starting OL to injuries, and the abrupt departure of the OC during the season.

IFYP in regard to 'the offense'


Cute colors.


But anyways, they had a chance to win many more games this year but Bradford floundered on a LOT of potential GW drives -- these are the situations where the checkdowns I'm talking about just didn't cut the mustard.

Passer ratings are nice until you look at context. Bradford was extremely mediocre this year, especially in crucial GWing situations.


That cmp% was great though man! WOW he was sure accurate on those dumpoffs!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CriminalMind


Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 8631
Location: Toronto, CA
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
Dolmonite26 wrote:
http://zonecoverage.com/2017/vikings/quarterback-salaries-are-flattening-relatively-which-might-make-bradwater-tough-but-not-impossible/

Article from Arif in regards to the impending cap situation with Bridgewater and Bradford. Interesting even if he didn't draw a very helpful conclusion.


Bradford needs to be extended, I don't see how MN can avoid that.

I'd rather not devote 38 million on the QB position in 2018. At that point, I'd rather just let Teddy test the market and not give him the 5th year option.


I agree, if it comes to this....

Anyone know what is the 1st day a trade can be completed? and is that before or after the deadline to keep/cut the 5th year option.

I'm hoping Teddy can play in our 2017 season finale, with Bradford resting for a playoff game. Then trade Teddy afterwards.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
disaacs


Joined: 13 Dec 2005
Posts: 28565
Location: Brownbackistan
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

They wouldn't be able to trade him after Week 8 of the regular season, as after that point, he's officially a free agent after the end of the season (if they decline the option). Their only option would be to extend him, they can't trade him unless they do a NBA-style sign and trade.

If they accept the option, they certainly could trade him after the new league year starts...they just would have less cap space, which could affect their ability to sign other free agents should they be unable to trade him.

I'm glad I don't have to make that call.
_________________


Thx to Lil Uno!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
vike daddy


Most Valuable Poster (2nd Ballot)

Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 82975
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Teddy's health and recovery, or lack thereof, may answer the question/dilemna for us. how many of us really expect him to make a full recovery? how many expect even if he did that after two years off he will be effective?

the Bridgewater Era may very well be a short one, i am more concerned with Zimmer's ability to move on from it if/when the time comes.
_________________


Everson Griffen: We can be special. But its up to us.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
disaacs


Joined: 13 Dec 2005
Posts: 28565
Location: Brownbackistan
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 3:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vike daddy wrote:
Teddy's health and recovery, or lack thereof, may answer the question/dilemna for us. how many of us really expect him to make a full recovery? how many expect even if he did that after two years off he will be effective?

the Bridgewater Era may very well be a short one, i am more concerned with Zimmer's ability to move on from it if/when the time comes.


If Bridgewater had been 27-28 years old instead of 23 when he got injured, I would be more concerned. I actually think his age is the one thing that he has going for him with this type of injury.
_________________


Thx to Lil Uno!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Cearbhall


Joined: 08 Mar 2017
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 3:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would lean towards giving Teddy the fifth year option and then seeing where things are at at the end of the season. The option year isn't fully guaranteed until sometime after this coming season. The Vikings will have to make a decision on whether they'll go with Bradford, Bridgewater, or other after this season. Until then, I would try to keep all my options open.

Having the ability to keep Bridgewater on the fifth year option, keep Bradford on the franchise tag, or let either or both go is ideal IMO. Having more than one option gives the Vikings some negotiating leverage to sign one of them long-term next offseason. Until it is more clear who that should be, I wouldn't lock into either of them long-term unless the terms of the deal were very favorable to the team.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dolmonite26


Joined: 05 Jan 2014
Posts: 1887
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 5:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My question for those who believe the team should extend Bradford now is this:

do you believe they should do this because you think Bradford is a legitimate "QBoTF" (which I believe intrinsically means you think he'll improve on his career performances by a fairly significant margin)?

---or---

do you think they should do this because Bradford has proven he's a least competent (I would agree) and whether he improves or not you shouldn't let that walk given the precarious nature of the position?

I'm curious about some of your thoughts.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 52625
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 7:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dolmonite26 wrote:
My question for those who believe the team should extend Bradford now is this:

do you believe they should do this because you think Bradford is a legitimate "QBoTF" (which I believe intrinsically means you think he'll improve on his career performances by a fairly significant margin)?

---or---

do you think they should do this because Bradford has proven he's a least competent (I would agree) and whether he improves or not you shouldn't let that walk given the precarious nature of the position?

I'm curious about some of your thoughts.


I'd say a little bit of both. After going through the Ponder, Cassel, Freeman and early Teddy years, a QB of Bradfords ability is awesome to have. He's not perfect but MN could do much worse.

Bradford can also reasonably be the QB of the future (4-5 years let's say). Bradford showed progress and had a career year despite no run game and the worst OL in football. I think he can get better (less fumbles, more TDs) The bigger question is if Btadford has maxed out. I don't think he has. Bradford is young enough to build around for the next five years and still has a bit of upside. He may not be a top five guy but I'm not sure Teddy has that upside either.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SemperFeist


Joined: 13 Jan 2013
Posts: 7944
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 7:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not ready to call Bradford the quarterback of the future, which is why I'm not ready to give him an extension, but I do think he can get better and become the quarterback of the future. Bradford has only had the same offensive coordinator for back to back years once in his career. And during the second year under Brian Schottenheimer, Bradford was looking like that top pick that people expected (he had 14 TDs and only 4 INTs in 7 games before his injury).

I'm very intrigued as to how he'll do in his second year under Shurmur.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
perrynoid


Joined: 20 Jan 2006
Posts: 4255
Location: Bismarck, Norse Dakota
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 7:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think Bradford is a good fit for this team; he turns the ball over very little, which is what we need in a QB given the strength of our defense. He reads the field well and gets rid of the ball quickly. He has a very nice deep ball, which will keep opposing defenses honest. He should be in the upper third of QB's this season.
_________________
However, you're right that it did improve a bit. I'm just not sure I trust our coaching staff to develop offensive lineman.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CriminalMind


Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 8631
Location: Toronto, CA
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 8:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dolmonite26 wrote:
My question for those who believe the team should extend Bradford now is this:

do you believe they should do this because you think Bradford is a legitimate "QBoTF" (which I believe intrinsically means you think he'll improve on his career performances by a fairly significant margin)?

---or---

do you think they should do this because Bradford has proven he's a least competent (I would agree) and whether he improves or not you shouldn't let that walk given the precarious nature of the position?

I'm curious about some of your thoughts.


My opinion is a combination of both above.
I think Bradford is a competent QB (more than Teddy) and I think Bradford can improve on his career performances by a good margin (Teddy unknown in this regard). Bradford is the QBoTF until you draft another one.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 69, 70, 71 ... 81, 82, 83  Next
Page 70 of 83

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group