Page 27 of 39

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 4:36 pm
by Blackout
Love the idea of Arizona landing spot for teddyb_h2o. Since Jimmy G is starting and Brady goes on, i don't wait for anything special from him however. What i've seen on the field is too much conservative.

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2018 4:39 pm
by ericanadian
Pac_Eddy wrote: Wed Jan 03, 2018 7:23 pm
ericanadian wrote: Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:53 pm Sounds like Shurmur is in pretty high demand to take a head coaching job somewhere. Probably not a good thing for whichever QB ends up in Minnesota next year. I hate Shurmur's offense, but it's been extremely effective this season.
Funny. You hate his offense, but it's effective. What don't you like about it?
It's intensely low risk and they're likely to run into trouble if their defense misses a beat. They keep it to short, high percentage throws just as they did with Bradford and rely on big plays after the catch to put up points. Their defense may be enough given the lack of dominant teams in the NFC, but I still have no faith in Keenum or Murray.

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 8:08 am
by Jfever
"lack of dominant teams in the NFC"?

NFC - Minnesota, Phili, N.O., Carolina, L.A., Atlanta
AFC - N.E., Pit, KC, Jack, Ten, Buf

Which of the two divisions has fewer "dominant" teams?

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:18 am
by IBall2
clarion contrarion wrote: Thu Jan 04, 2018 12:00 pm scaredy cat ball usually won't win a super bowl after watching the cowher years that became very apparent . Vikes defense is terrific but if they get down 10 its time to start the team bus and book a tee time. I have heard no one mention it but vikes went 3-2 vs playoff teams and 1 win was against saints before they got cooking. I think there is a distinct possibility they are way over rated and keenum wilts in the bright lights . If philly loses in 2nd round and vikes host their chances go way up but I would not be thrilled backing CK on the road .
Teddy or bradford neither are serious options as super bowl winning type qbs for various reasons . I could see vikes go in a complete different direction at qb with a play off melt down.
In Week 15 against the Panther, the Vikings entered the 4th quarter down by 11 points and tied it up with 3 minutes to go in the game. I wouldn't count them out when down by 10.

Edit: also since you're talking about how they beat a saints team that wasn't in full swing yet, the Vikings should have beat the Lions in week 4 if it wasn't for Dalvin Cook fumbling on his own 30 yard line when he tore his ACL to give the Lions great field position and the go ahead TD.

This was also around the time when the Vikings didn't know who was starting at QB because Bradford thought he could come back from injury so Case wasn't 100% with the 1st team offense. You could say Case wasn't 'in full swing yet' with at the time of the Pittsburgh and Detroit losses early in the season.


And my last note: Pittsburgh went 3-2 against playoff teams this year as well.

Just trying to play devils advocate here

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:14 am
by Friction
I honestly don't like any of the NFC teams that much (over the others) as far as the playoffs go, so I am sticking with my Queens pick until they 1998/2001/2009 us again.... Then I will be a true Minnesotan and change my tune, use every excuse in the book, blame it on the refs, and go back to being jealous of the Packers success. I kid, sort of, not really. I don't think anybody locally would be shocked if Keenum lays an egg in the playoffs even after the season he has had. If you talk to most people here, they truly think something bad will happen and have their fingers crossed. I think that is assumed so much that it has me leaning the other way. I even put my money where my mouth is, which you will be HARD pressed to find in this frozen tundra. Side note, at first it amazed me at how many other 'Snowtans are on these boards, then I realized living here my entire life that it is far from surprising.

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:22 am
by Pac_Eddy
Friction wrote: Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:14 am I honestly don't like any of the NFC teams that much (over the others) as far as the playoffs go, so I am sticking with my Queens pick until they 1998/2001/2009 us again.... Then I will be a true Minnesotan and change my tune, use every excuse in the book, blame it on the refs, and go back to being jealous of the Packers success. I kid, sort of, not really. I don't think anybody locally would be shocked if Keenum lays an egg in the playoffs even after the season he has had. If you talk to most people here, they truly think something bad will happen and have their fingers crossed. I think that is assumed so much that it has me leaning the other way. I even put my money where my mouth is, which you will be HARD pressed to find in this frozen tundra. Side note, at first it amazed me at how many other 'Snowtans are on these boards, then I realized living here my entire life that it is far from surprising.
This team has a different feel for me. I think it's the steadiness. The elite D and the #11 offense that could rank higher if we weren't just trying to drain the clock for most of the 4th quarter this season.

I realize that the odds are still greatly against any single team making the Super Bowl, and 31 of 32 teams end the season with disappointment, but I'm enjoying this ride quite a bit. And the Vikings are built to last. Sixth most cap space next year, getting Dalvin Cook back, shrewd drafting. Skol.

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 11:19 am
by IBall2
I'll get back on topic with Bridgewater. Spielman has a tendency to not use the franchise tag on players over the past few seasons but I could see him using it on Keenum this year. It's his first successful season and the Vikings probably dont want to shell out a huge contract for him based on this season alone. They could then sign Bridgewater to a reasonable 2-3 year contract also this offseason and keep both players for another year to see what they truly have with both QBs. If Keenum continues to show well next year and improves on his numbers, he would be in line for a bigger/longer contract and Bridgewater would stay the backup for the remaining year or 2 of said contract.

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 11:21 am
by Jfever
Sorry for derailing and ranting.... Got me going on this one. So.... one last thing in regard to comments on the Vikies. Lets keep in mind some basic statistics regarding probability. Previous outcomes have zero bearing on future results. This team is not like the 98, or 09 teams. Also, Mn offense is #10 in points scored (which matters) and their Defense is #1 overall. So.... understanding that since their defense IS #1 in 3rd downs, yds given up and points against, its fair to then make the connection that their offense often WAS killing the clock and coasting. Surprised that connection was glazed over by some.

Also of note, in reference to the 3-2 record vs playoff teams. C.Keenams first start (an unexpected one at that!) was vs Pittsburgh at Pittsburgh on a short week. And if you watched the game - you'd recall that the game should have been won by the Vikings. If you don't recall the details, look back to check. 3-2 stat line means very little without context.

The minimizing of this 13-3 team's accomplishments is annoying when it seems some of it comes from folks looking at stat lines and only results. For a team to lose it's #1 draft pick in D.Cook, and its starting QB and still accomplish what the Vikings have - and still subsequently get doubted is quite annoying to me. But, as a Vikings fan, I'm used to it. Many fans in Minnesota are hesitant to go all in, and, rightfully so. But, for me, I'm looking at this team not through lenses of the past performances, rather, at the current balanced make up of the team and their GRIT... They are very very well coached and very prepared, solid in special teams, they have a very solid and about to be healthy offensive line, they have very talented and savy wr's, very competent and tough running backs that play a well balanced game with great ball security. Keenam is as likely to "lay an egg" as Brees, Ryan, and for goodness sakes - Goff and Cam.... I'm looking forward to the doubters eating crow.

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 11:30 am
by IBall2
I kind of like this Vikings rant. Since their week 14 lose to Carolina, they have only given up 3 legitimate points to the opposing teams offense. Week 17 against the bears they gave up a 55 yard field goal in the 4th quarter. Besides that, they gave up a punt return TD to the Bears on a trick play that was very well executed by Tarik Cohen and they gave up a TD run with second string defensive players in the game against Baltimore late in the 4th quarter after Teddy Bridgewater through an INT.

Yes these were 3 awful teams they played against (week 16 was against the packer) but it is pretty impressive how well the Defensive has played over the 3 game stretch.

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 11:46 am
by Phaded
Bridgewater is the type of guy where I really don't think he will amount to much and will be a serviceable guy who won't really win you games.

However - I'm rooting for him just because of his recovery and comeback from his injury. That's a lot of determination to come back from something like that.

I also would not bank on him being a Viking or even trying to figure out the Vikings QB situation. Quite frankly I would not be surprised if they drafted one in the top 2 rounds this year.

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 11:47 am
by clarion contrarion
what I see w/o the purple glasses on is a franchise with 1 playoff win since 2005 post season ,a coach has never won a post season game & a qb that has yet to take a post season snap. The vikes are a great story no argument but if it comes apart at the seams and they are down 10 mid way through the 3rd the pucker factor will be off the charts for the proud purple clad partisans!

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 2:43 pm
by Jfever
clarion contrarion wrote: Fri Jan 05, 2018 11:47 am what I see w/o the purple glasses on is a franchise with 1 playoff win since 2005 post season ,a coach has never won a post season game & a qb that has yet to take a post season snap. The vikes are a great story no argument but if it comes apart at the seams and they are down 10 mid way through the 3rd the pucker factor will be off the charts for the proud purple clad partisans!
Admittedly I'm wearing the purple shades and I've been very quiet about it for quite some time around here. But, when I start seeing the twisting of statistics and opinions from people that seemingly just didn't watch the games, I can't help but bite the hook....

I thought I addressed the misunderstanding of history's results impacting future results but... I'll attempt to clarify as this concept and this misunderstanding effects a great many. I'll repeat as I can see that we must have missed a point I already made. So, first off - hats off to the organizations that have long term continued success. Hats off to the repeat champions and the winners of multiple super bowl rings. In today's age, it is not an easy task and it is truly special that a few NFL organizations have accomplished that feat in recent history. But, now to the math - Previous outcomes of any single franchise going back in time - is in reality completely irrelevant. (I understand human tendency to think otherwise.... but line of logic is basically flawed from the start in most cases and the real world isn't that way at all - due to the massive amount of variables that contribute to any one team's success or failure in any one single year in the time of NFL Free agency).

Why you ask? I'll tell you. Last year's teams and ALL NFL teams going back in time, year in and year out experience turn over. Some more than others and often for different reasons. Every few years on average, teams experience head coaching or assistant coaching changes which has sometimes small, sometimes large ripple effects. So, Coaching turn over, player turn over, etc. player injury, health, discipline, all fluctuate matters and all contribute to unknown future results. So, in the REAL world - results from previous teams, no matter which team have ZERO bearing on future results. That is purely based on statistical probabilities.

This year, it seems to me that the Minnesota vikings have a very legitimate shot at representing the NFC in the Super bowl at US Bank stadium. Why? Like I said above. Balance, coaching, depth, O-line play, #1 shut down defense that is elite at all 3 levels, big play ability on offense, smart ball control, and likely the home field advantage throughout after Philadelphia loses.

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:10 pm
by Shoreline Steamers
JFever,

The fact that 8 of the 12 teams in the playoffs in 2017 were absent in 2016 substantiates your claim. Vikings have as good a shot any any team in the NFC to represent, and the added motivation of the Super Bowl on their home turf can't hurt their chances.

Good luck to you and all the "Purple Shades".

Edit: And with regard to Teddy, I'd like to see both he and Keenum back in 2018, though I don't know if that's realistic salary-wise. Just let Bradford walk. Those knees are worrisome.

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 4:15 pm
by slaughterrt
It would be awesome to see Keenum and Bridgewater back next year. Agree that I don’t know if it’s possible.

I could see Bradford going to Houston to back up D Watson.

Re: Bridgewater

Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2018 4:30 pm
by Space Cowboy
Arm doesn't impress, stares down WRs, doesn't go through progressions very well, constantly seems late and overwhelmed.

I think he's as mediocre as it gets. No better than most "high end" backups.