Where's Teddy B going?

[Ice]

Surprised nobody's mentioned Buffalo. That seems like the most obvious landing spot.

They already drafted their future QB. Don't see that at all. Bridgewater is in his last year. They don't want a 6 million dollar rental.

[M-Dub]

Surprised nobody's mentioned Buffalo. That seems like the most obvious landing spot.

They already drafted their future QB. Don't see that at all. Bridgewater is in his last year. They don't want a 6 million dollar rental.

“Future” being the key term. I’m admittedly in the #neverJoshAllen camp, but even his most ardent supporters (he does have those, right?) would concede that he’s not ready to start week 1. Nathan Peterman has exactly half a game’s more experience than Allen as a regular season NFL starter, and he tossed four picks in that brief appearance. Not sure how long McCarron will be out, but $6 million for a one-year band-aid at the most important position in football is actually pretty cheap by NFL standards.

[Phaded]

I am not even sure Bridgewater is an improvement on McCarron or Peterman.

Regardless, Bills seem happy with where they are at. If a team was interested in Bridge, they would have tried to sign him. The Jets were not exactly in a bidding war.

[Ice]

I am not even sure Bridgewater is an improvement on McCarron or Peterman.

Regardless, Bills seem happy with where they are at. If a team was interested in Bridge, they would have tried to sign him. The Jets were not exactly in a bidding war.

True and the Bills gave McCarron a 2 year 10 million dollar with 7.9 million guaranteed with a 4 million signing bonus.

[Fantasyfanatic11]

Surprised nobody's mentioned Buffalo. That seems like the most obvious landing spot.

Buffalo already has 3 crap QB's why would they make it 4?

[Valhalla]

I look at his stat line...

This is the most common argument against Teddy, because most people simply haven't really watched him play, or watch through a fantasy football lens looking for big highlight bomb touchdowns or consistent redzone passes.

It's simply not a fair criticism of him to compare him to what you expect from your average QB play...without considering the history/situation he was in. Compare him to other rookie/2nd year QBs that were in nearly constant I-form and 2TE sets that were getting consistently DESTROYED by only 3-4 rushers. There were many, many GIFs and even ESPN highlights on how the Vikings often front 7 (2TE) were getting rapidly defeated (letting guys through almost untouched) by 3 and 4 man rushes, and allowing opposing defenses to double team every WR (often just 2 of them) or have very dense zones. This was an offense that nearly ALWAYS ran on the early downs and most passing opportunities were in 3rd and obvious...with still extra blockers ineffectively trying to stop the rush. One of the most heavily pressured QBs in the NFL at that time, with a RB that couldn't catch well, and nothing much at WR talent. In a VERY unimaginative offense doing NO favors for any QB, especially a guy who ran a lot of shotgun in college...Oh and I believe he had the fewest (or damn near) pass attempts in the league (on a per game basis) because the play calling was of a Peterson and defense mindset.
Compare him to other QBs in that situation, or even REMOTELY CLOSE to a situation that bad, and see how he stacks up to that average.
Bridgewater wasn't playing below average. His statistical output was below average. Many fans (even Vikings fans that watched him regularly) have a hard time seeing past the low statistical output, and just can't get their minds around effective and efficient QB play without big totals.

[skip]

I don't think the answer is going to be about which pedestrian QB he replaces but rather which QBs get hurt.
If Aaron Rodgers were to go down again, taking a shot on Bridgewater makes a lot more sense than another disasterous season with Matt Barkley.

[mgscott]

I look at his stat line...

This is the most common argument against Teddy, because most people simply haven't really watched him play, or watch through a fantasy football lens looking for big highlight bomb touchdowns or consistent redzone passes.

It's simply not a fair criticism of him to compare him to what you expect from your average QB play...without considering the history/situation he was in. Compare him to other rookie/2nd year QBs that were in nearly constant I-form and 2TE sets that were getting consistently DESTROYED by only 3-4 rushers. There were many, many GIFs and even ESPN highlights on how the Vikings often front 7 (2TE) were getting rapidly defeated (letting guys through almost untouched) by 3 and 4 man rushes, and allowing opposing defenses to double team every WR (often just 2 of them) or have very dense zones. This was an offense that nearly ALWAYS ran on the early downs and most passing opportunities were in 3rd and obvious...with still extra blockers ineffectively trying to stop the rush. One of the most heavily pressured QBs in the NFL at that time, with a RB that couldn't catch well, and nothing much at WR talent. In a VERY unimaginative offense doing NO favors for any QB, especially a guy who ran a lot of shotgun in college...Oh and I believe he had the fewest (or damn near) pass attempts in the league (on a per game basis) because the play calling was of a Peterson and defense mindset.
Compare him to other QBs in that situation, or even REMOTELY CLOSE to a situation that bad, and see how he stacks up to that average.
Bridgewater wasn't playing below average. His statistical output was below average. Many fans (even Vikings fans that watched him regularly) have a hard time seeing past the low statistical output, and just can't get their minds around effective and efficient QB play without big totals.

I was wondering when someone here would bring up why Teddy didn't light up the stats in Minny. While I don't think he is elite, I see him as an upgrade to at least 5 current starters, probably more. He didn't get any more free agent interest because he was coming back from a horrific knee injury and was yet to prove he is recovered. That being said, he isn't likely to be traded barring an injury.

[thebeast]

While it has been great to see Bridgewater back on an NFL field, Fantasy Twitter is making it seem like Bridgewater is the next "great" QB.

I just don't understand it, it's been a minute but did he ever "wow" in Minnesota? Would he really be that big of an "upgrade" to a Bortles or Tannehill type?

Bortles, yes. Teddy is not a gamebreaking QB, but he's much better at not losing a game than Bortles. With Jacksonville's defense and run game he'd be a perfect addition.

I really don't get the Bortles hate at all. He had a pretty good season with basically no WRs, he took the Pats to the edge with late round and udfa rookies, he supported a 1K WR when ARob was there. I think he's a lot better than people think both in the NFL and in fantasy and I would be surprised if the Jags moved on from him.

[FantasyFreak]

To the bench.

[Valhalla]

To the bench.

Unfortunately true. Being benched for a QB that he is outplaying...

[mgscott]

To the bench.

Unfortunately true. Being benched for a QB that he is outplaying...

Agreed. That is likely his lot until a starter gets injured. Doesn't matter how much better he has been.

[HundPRM]

Would he really be that big of an "upgrade" to a Bortles or Tannehill type?

I don't think so. Jacksonville had been a "favorite" to bring in a QB for a couple years now and it hasn't happened yet. They just went toe to toe with the Patriots in the AFC championship game with Bortles. If they do move on, it isn't for someone like Bridgewater. His opportunity is going to come when a team runs out of other options.

I think Jax dropped the ball not taking the OTHER Louisville QB. Lamar with that Def, those WRs and Fournette?

[Kelldon]

I could see the Saints going after Teddy B. Next year will prolly be Brees last year.

[skip]

I could see the Saints going after Teddy B. Next year will prolly be Brees last year.

I highly doubt the Saints are replacing a QB with 4 seasons of 5000 yards passing with Bridgewater.