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

A Quarterback Quandary
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Klomp


Moderator
Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Posts: 12798
Location: Marshall
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 9:57 pm    Post subject: A Quarterback Quandary Reply with quote

OK, so the hot-button issue of the offseason seems to be at the quarterback position. Rather than continuing down the path of off-topic posts in either individual thread, it's time to have one thread dedicated for discussion of the quarterback discussion as a whole.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Klomp


Moderator
Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Posts: 12798
Location: Marshall
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 9:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's a good question to kick this thread off, taken from one of the individual threads:

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.

_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gopherwrestler


Joined: 20 Jan 2014
Posts: 5455
Location: 'Sota
PostPosted: Thu Apr 06, 2017 10:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well an extension would be nice, but Bradford has every bit of leverage and won't be cheap. Although next year could be worse.

Either sign him, or we deal with an unproven Teddy, coming of a career threatening injury. Or spend high capital on another QB, something we have now spent 2 first on in the past 3 years. 3 in 4 years.

We could franchise him and give him a contract next year but it would be at a very high price either way.

It's a gamble, if they believe in him, you give the guy the contract. If not, you play it out and hope next year either Teddy is ready, and can play 100% or give him one heck of a contract if he plays good.
_________________

“Once you’ve wrestled, everything else in life is easy.”
-Dan Gable
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Biggs Beefcakes


Joined: 14 Oct 2015
Posts: 289
Location: Faribault/Eden Prairie
PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 3:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Would it look terrible if the team extended Bradford this offseason and traded him next offseason?

That might be a big projection but if Bridgewater comes back healthy - to the point where the brass thinks they can trust him going forward as the guy - and they exercise his 5th year option, would you be willing to trade for Bradford similar to the situation the Eagles just had last summer?

The Bradford people will say pick Bradford. I get that. I'm not looking to stir the "Bradford v Bridgewater" debate here. I just want to know how realistic that option would be.

If the Vikings view Bridgewater and Bradford as close to the same guy, it's entirely reasonable that they'd give Bridgewater the edge given his age/perceived upside and their affection toward his character. Who knows for certain if that's the right call or not but let's say that's their mindset. Could they extend Bradford now, essentially putting off a decision and eventually trade him?

This whole thing is quite fascinating because it feels like - at least for me anyways - that Bradford is closer to his ceiling than Bridgewater and thus if he's this team's QB, they are dangerously close to that KC Chiefs type team where everything has to go absolutely perfect and they will need all the breaks in order to go anywhere. With Bridgewater there's a chance of that too, but there's at least a little more chance - say even 5 percent - that he's got more in the tank ultimately.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SemperFeist


Joined: 13 Jan 2013
Posts: 7831
PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 6:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There's no reason to extend Bradford at this point. He's not going to be any cheaper, and you don't know if last year was a fluke, or if the team actually has the pieces for Bradford to finally succeed.

Let him prove it this season, then start working on an extension. If an extension isn't an easy negotiation, then you can always use the transition tag or the franchise tag on him. Neither one will be any more expensive than Bradford and his agent will be seeking on a new deal, anyways.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Purplexing


Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 5306
Location: Outside Valhalla, looking in.
PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 8:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

IMO, the question posed atop this page is concerned with the QBoTF, who would be looked to for leadership in winning a Super Bowl.

Yet, the pathway taken in the discussion of that question thus far is 'how does Spielman save money?'.

I prefer management spend money where it should be spent; e.g. QB1 at market rate, and not over-spend for other positions; e.g. RB at $18M or $8M.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CriminalMind


Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 8509
Location: Toronto, CA
PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 8:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think we need to extend Bradford now, however if we don't extend Bradford now, the FO should have already [now] made the decision that assuming a good year from him they are prepared to franchise him & let Teddy walk.

Assuming Sam Bradford is healthy, Teddy may not play a meaningful snap [pre-season or regular season] and I can't see us keeping his 5th year option under that circumstance.

Maybe, just maybe, Teddy plays in week 17, if we're completely out, or locked into a playoff.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Worm Guts


Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 1365
PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 8:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CriminalMind wrote:
I don't think we need to extend Bradford now, however if we don't extend Bradford now, the FO should have already [now] made the decision that assuming a good year from him they are prepared to franchise him & let Teddy walk..


I don't agree with that either. If you don't offer him the extension now, it's because you have made any decision now.

CriminalMind wrote:

Assuming Sam Bradford is healthy, Teddy may not play a meaningful snap [pre-season or regular season] and I can't see us keeping his 5th year option under that circumstance.

Maybe, just maybe, Teddy plays in week 17, if we're completely out, or locked into a playoff.


Do you realize we have to pick up the option before the season, not after?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 52470
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CriminalMind wrote:
I don't think we need to extend Bradford now, however if we don't extend Bradford now, the FO should have already [now] made the decision that assuming a good year from him they are prepared to franchise him & let Teddy walk.

Assuming Sam Bradford is healthy, Teddy may not play a meaningful snap [pre-season or regular season] and I can't see us keeping his 5th year option under that circumstance.

Maybe, just maybe, Teddy plays in week 17, if we're completely out, or locked into a playoff.


I dont think the Vikes can afford keeping Bradford on the franchise tag and Teddy on the 5th year option. It might actually work out better for the Vikings if they extend Bradford now and get that 2018 salary to be more favorable than what the franchise tag would be. Commit to lots of guarantees in 2017 and 2018, at least that allows you to let 2018 play out potentially at a more affordable cost. 2017 is a wasted year for Teddy in which he will not be in a position to even challenge for plying time.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Worm Guts


Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Posts: 1365
PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 9:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
2017 is a wasted year for Teddy in which he will not be in a position to even challenge for plying time.


That would be an assumption at this point. I don't think Teddy will be ready to start the season, but if there is an injury mid-season I wouldn't rule out the possibility that he could be the one to step in.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CriminalMind


Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 8509
Location: Toronto, CA
PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 10:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Worm Guts wrote:
CriminalMind wrote:
I don't think we need to extend Bradford now, however if we don't extend Bradford now, the FO should have already [now] made the decision that assuming a good year from him they are prepared to franchise him & let Teddy walk..


I don't agree with that either. If you don't offer him the extension now, it's because you have made any decision now.

CriminalMind wrote:

Assuming Sam Bradford is healthy, Teddy may not play a meaningful snap [pre-season or regular season] and I can't see us keeping his 5th year option under that circumstance.

Maybe, just maybe, Teddy plays in week 17, if we're completely out, or locked into a playoff.


Do you realize we have to pick up the option before the season, not after?


I realize, and it doesn't run contrary to what I said above.
During early March 2018, MIN needs to decide if they want to cut Teddy's 5th year option, or let him keep/play under it.
_________________


Last edited by CriminalMind on Fri Apr 07, 2017 10:14 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CriminalMind


Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 8509
Location: Toronto, CA
PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 10:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
CriminalMind wrote:
I don't think we need to extend Bradford now, however if we don't extend Bradford now, the FO should have already [now] made the decision that assuming a good year from him they are prepared to franchise him & let Teddy walk.

Assuming Sam Bradford is healthy, Teddy may not play a meaningful snap [pre-season or regular season] and I can't see us keeping his 5th year option under that circumstance.

Maybe, just maybe, Teddy plays in week 17, if we're completely out, or locked into a playoff.


I dont think the Vikes can afford keeping Bradford on the franchise tag and Teddy on the 5th year option. It might actually work out better for the Vikings if they extend Bradford now and get that 2018 salary to be more favorable than what the franchise tag would be. Commit to lots of guarantees in 2017 and 2018, at least that allows you to let 2018 play out potentially at a more affordable cost. 2017 is a wasted year for Teddy in which he will not be in a position to even challenge for plying time.


I agree, I don't think Vikings can afford to Franchise Bradford and keep Tedy on the 5th year option. (I also don't think they actually would either).

I would extend Bradford now because I feel a) he is a better QB than Teddy (now/going forward) b) Teddy likely doesn't play any meaningful snaps to compare in 2017 c) options to replace both Bradford/Teddy are likely to be low & expensive & not as talented d) wouldn't be in an ideal draft position to get another QB via the draft e) Bradford has more leverage in a negotiation at the end of 2017
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
perrynoid


Joined: 20 Jan 2006
Posts: 4238
Location: Bismarck, Norse Dakota
PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why not extend Teddy now, to lower his future cap numbers? For example, we could give him a sizable roster bonus now, and put in escalator clauses so that if he reaches certain performance levels, it would trigger salary increases. Also, we might be able to release him if he doesn't ever heal up properly, or trade him if he does heal and we are satisfied with Bradford's play?
_________________
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
VikeManDan


Joined: 22 Dec 2010
Posts: 3190
Location: Minnesota
PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 11:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CriminalMind wrote:
VikeManDan wrote:
Perhaps the franchise tag is an option. The top 5 salaries for 2018 are:

Joe Flacco: $24,750,000
Andrew Luck: $24,400,000
Ben Roethlisberger: $23,200,000
Eli Manning: $22,200,000
Tom Brady: $22,000,000

http://overthecap.com/position/quarterback/2018/

That totals $116,550,000 divided by 5 gives us a tag value of $23,310,000. I realize this number could change if QBs get new contracts.

Someone had posted an article from Arif about the possibility of keeping 2 QBs at ~$38 million. Tagging Bradford and picking up Teddy's 5th year option ($18 million per Arif's article) would be around ~$41 million tied up in the QB position not included QB3. Is it viable to do that for one year to make a decision on which QB to roll with?

Quote:
CBS Sports article: The window for exercising fifth-year options with first-round picks starts after a player's third regular season in the NFL ends (Jan. 2, 2017 with the 2014 first-round picks). The deadline to pick up the option year is May 2.


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/agents-take-a-team-by-team-guide-to-fifth-year-option-decisions/

If the 5/2 date is true we'll be finding out a little bit of the Vikings plan at the QB position.


As with Kalil, the deadline to pick up the option is one date. But there is another date in early March 2018, where we can still cut him with little/no penalty before that 5th year.


Moving this over here...

Wouldn't it be smart then to pick up Teddy's 5th year to give us another year of evaluation on his progress? If we don't like where he is at in March 2018 we could cut ties and work on extending Bradford provided he has another good year.
_________________

"My purpose will not be denied."
- Teddy Bridgewater 9/1/16
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
disaacs


Joined: 13 Dec 2005
Posts: 28290
Location: Brownbackistan
PostPosted: Fri Apr 07, 2017 12:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm fine with either decision they choose to make. I can see arguments being made for either one.

They may take the chance and pick up the option, which could potentially cost them some cap room, but I could also see them not picking it up and seeing where it all plays out and potentially let him hit the market or even consider extending him for a short-term deal until they find out where he's at physically.

If he's willing to consider that last option, that would be my most preferable solution. Don't pick up the option and then extend him for 2 more years for somewhere in the neighborhood of $7M-$10M on average while he gets back to shape. That would get them through the 2018 season at minimum at which point they can decide to either extend him, trade him or cut him prior to the 2019 season.

I don't know if his agent would accept that, but I'm not sure he'd get that $7M-$10M in the market either.

Either way, while I wouldn't extend Bradford now, I certainly would consider it while Teddy is still recovering. I'd almost preferably wait until after this season to consider it and then either extend him, franchise him, or let him test the market depending upon where Teddy is at.
_________________


Thx to Lil Uno!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
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