In the end, the entire coaching staff and Rick have to make decisions that are best for this football team. With that in mind, Teddy has been brought off the PUP list and is now active and the backup to the current starter. This tells me that the team and front office feel that Teddy can play and now they just need to see it during live action.
We don't see practices, guys and girls...we don't know what these people know. But to me it is telling that Teddy is now active and backing up Case. If all of the folks I mentioned above didn't truly believe that Teddy could play (and play pretty well) they would have returned him to the PUP list after making that determination a couple of weeks back.
No matter how things shake out this season, we have to know that the coaching staff and front office are not going to just let Teddy Bridgewater walk away next spring without knowing whether or not he can still play QB for the Minnesota Vikings. They are not tolling his contract. IMO they already know he can play, but it has simply been hard to justify pulling Case at this point in the season when he's been winning. Not for a second do I believe a switch would cause any split in the locker room, nor do I think there's a difference of opinion between front office and coaching about where Teddy stands. So that leaves them in a bit of a quandary, because unless we find ourselves enjoying the luxury of resting our starters late in the season for the playoffs it may be hard to see Teddy hit the field if they don't just roll the dice and insert him in the lineup soon. Besides, it doesn't seem like an ideal situation to just throw Teddy out with the backups in that scenario as it would not be a true gauge of where he's at by surrounding him with the second team players.
In a different thread I wondered aloud if they'd find a way to extend both of these guys in the offseason on "prove it" deals and let them battle it out in training camp next spring. I could see the team desiring that scenario but I don't think the QBs in question would. So...that puts us back to the current dilemma at hand...
Good call starting Case - IMO
Quote: @prairieghost said:
In the end, the entire coaching staff and Rick have to make decisions that are best for this football team. With that in mind, Teddy has been brought off the PUP list and is now active and the backup to the current starter. This tells me that the team and front office feel that Teddy can play and now they just need to see it during live action.
We don't see practices, guys and girls...we don't know what these people know. But to me it is telling that Teddy is now active and backing up Case. If all of the folks I mentioned above didn't truly believe that Teddy could play (and play pretty well) they would have returned him to the PUP list after making that determination a couple of weeks back.
No matter how things shake out this season, we have to know that the coaching staff and front office are not going to just let Teddy Bridgewater walk away next spring without knowing whether or not he can still play QB for the Minnesota Vikings. They are not tolling his contract. IMO they already know he can play, but it has simply been hard to justify pulling Case at this point in the season when he's been winning. Not for a second do I believe a switch would cause any split in the locker room, nor do I think there's a difference of opinion between front office and coaching about where Teddy stands. So that leaves them in a bit of a quandary, because unless we find ourselves enjoying the luxury of resting our starters late in the season for the playoffs it may be hard to see Teddy hit the field if they don't just roll the dice and insert him in the lineup soon. Besides, it doesn't seem like an ideal situation to just throw Teddy out with the backups in that scenario as it would not be a true gauge of where he's at by surrounding him with the second team players.
In a different thread I wondered aloud if they'd find a way to extend both of these guys in the offseason on "prove it" deals and let them battle it out in training camp next spring. I could see the team desiring that scenario but I don't think the QBs in question would. So...that puts us back to the current dilemma at hand...
What options did the Vikings have? Things were awfully quiet on the Bradford front. Sloter is an unknown. I have my doubts that Teddy is truly ready, seeing that Sloter was deactivated on Sunday cleared that up, but not pulling Case and putting in Teddy leaves room for some doubt. They played the Sam Bradford should be back for a long time, interestingly long enough for Teddy to be eligible to come back. If Sloter was active last Sunday I would completely doubt Teddy is ready. I Doubt that the Vikings would gamble at the position, but there is a reason Case was not pulled after the 2nd interception and I have yet to find it. I think it would be in the best interest of the Vikngs to wait as long as possible to "showcase" Teddy. All eyes are on that knee and if they put him out there with limited ability it shows how vulnerable we are at the position and when teams know that then there is extra motivation to "cut the head off the snake"
What still lingers is the Tolling option for Teddy or has that been solved?
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ Mike Olson said:
Its relevant because it's the last game bridgewater played and we the poster I was replying to was discussing crazy situations.
except his hypothetical could happen this year... its extremely unlikely that our OL goes to shit, our WRs turn into crap, and we end up hosting a historically cold game that comes down to a kicker... oh yeah, i forgot the part that the OC decides not to try and throw except on plays that are about impossible to run for a first down.
2015 should have zero bearing on any discussion involving the 2017 QB situation. what would you say if people were bringing up Cases performances as a Ram? Pretty much the same arguement, this 2017 Vikings offense is so far from the 2015 offense its like a completely different team.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ Mike Olson said:
Its relevant because it's the last game bridgewater played and we the poster I was replying to was discussing crazy situations.
except his hypothetical could happen this year... its extremely unlikely that our OL goes to shit, our WRs turn into crap, and we end up hosting a historically cold game that comes down to a kicker... oh yeah, i forgot the part that the OC decides not to try and throw except on plays that are about impossible to run for a first down.
2015 should have zero bearing on any discussion involving the 2017 QB situation. what would you say if people were bringing up Cases performances as a Ram? Pretty much the same arguement, this 2017 Vikings offense is so far from the 2015 offense its like a completely different team.
As unlikely as losing your Starting QB for the year, starting running back for the year....
Quote: @PapaScott said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Mike Olson said:
Its relevant because it's the last game bridgewater played and we the poster I was replying to was discussing crazy situations.
except his hypothetical could happen this year... its extremely unlikely that our OL goes to shit, our WRs turn into crap, and we end up hosting a historically cold game that comes down to a kicker... oh yeah, i forgot the part that the OC decides not to try and throw except on plays that are about impossible to run for a first down.
2015 should have zero bearing on any discussion involving the 2017 QB situation. what would you say if people were bringing up Cases performances as a Ram? Pretty much the same arguement, this 2017 Vikings offense is so far from the 2015 offense its like a completely different team.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ Mike Olson said:
Its relevant because it's the last game bridgewater played and we the poster I was replying to was discussing crazy situations.
except his hypothetical could happen this year... its extremely unlikely that our OL goes to shit, our WRs turn into crap, and we end up hosting a historically cold game that comes down to a kicker... oh yeah, i forgot the part that the OC decides not to try and throw except on plays that are about impossible to run for a first down.
2015 should have zero bearing on any discussion involving the 2017 QB situation. what would you say if people were bringing up Cases performances as a Ram? Pretty much the same arguement, this 2017 Vikings offense is so far from the 2015 offense its like a completely different team.
As unlikely as losing your Starting QB for the year, starting running back for the year....
yep probably just as likely, i am sure the odds are about even.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ PapaScott said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Mike Olson said:
Its relevant because it's the last game bridgewater played and we the poster I was replying to was discussing crazy situations.
except his hypothetical could happen this year... its extremely unlikely that our OL goes to shit, our WRs turn into crap, and we end up hosting a historically cold game that comes down to a kicker... oh yeah, i forgot the part that the OC decides not to try and throw except on plays that are about impossible to run for a first down.
2015 should have zero bearing on any discussion involving the 2017 QB situation. what would you say if people were bringing up Cases performances as a Ram? Pretty much the same arguement, this 2017 Vikings offense is so far from the 2015 offense its like a completely different team.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ Mike Olson said:
Its relevant because it's the last game bridgewater played and we the poster I was replying to was discussing crazy situations.
except his hypothetical could happen this year... its extremely unlikely that our OL goes to shit, our WRs turn into crap, and we end up hosting a historically cold game that comes down to a kicker... oh yeah, i forgot the part that the OC decides not to try and throw except on plays that are about impossible to run for a first down.
2015 should have zero bearing on any discussion involving the 2017 QB situation. what would you say if people were bringing up Cases performances as a Ram? Pretty much the same arguement, this 2017 Vikings offense is so far from the 2015 offense its like a completely different team.
As unlikely as losing your Starting QB for the year, starting running back for the year....
yep probably just as likely, i am sure the odds are about even.
Well I hope we have seen the absolute worst.
As the saying goes "It looks like Friday, But Sunday is a comin"
Quote: @PapaScott said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ PapaScott said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Mike Olson said:
Its relevant because it's the last game bridgewater played and we the poster I was replying to was discussing crazy situations.
except his hypothetical could happen this year... its extremely unlikely that our OL goes to shit, our WRs turn into crap, and we end up hosting a historically cold game that comes down to a kicker... oh yeah, i forgot the part that the OC decides not to try and throw except on plays that are about impossible to run for a first down.
2015 should have zero bearing on any discussion involving the 2017 QB situation. what would you say if people were bringing up Cases performances as a Ram? Pretty much the same arguement, this 2017 Vikings offense is so far from the 2015 offense its like a completely different team.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ Mike Olson said:
Its relevant because it's the last game bridgewater played and we the poster I was replying to was discussing crazy situations.
except his hypothetical could happen this year... its extremely unlikely that our OL goes to shit, our WRs turn into crap, and we end up hosting a historically cold game that comes down to a kicker... oh yeah, i forgot the part that the OC decides not to try and throw except on plays that are about impossible to run for a first down.
2015 should have zero bearing on any discussion involving the 2017 QB situation. what would you say if people were bringing up Cases performances as a Ram? Pretty much the same arguement, this 2017 Vikings offense is so far from the 2015 offense its like a completely different team.
As unlikely as losing your Starting QB for the year, starting running back for the year....
yep probably just as likely, i am sure the odds are about even.
Well I hope we have seen the absolute worst.
As the saying goes "It looks like Friday, But Sunday is a comin"
i said earlier this year that we will never see another year like last year in terms of OL play... and I hope I am right.
as far as that saying... I have never heard that before... but of course I am not very old... let me ask my friend PFaithful, I am sure he is old enough to know what it meant when Jesus said it. B)
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ PapaScott said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ PapaScott said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Mike Olson said:
Its relevant because it's the last game bridgewater played and we the poster I was replying to was discussing crazy situations.
except his hypothetical could happen this year... its extremely unlikely that our OL goes to shit, our WRs turn into crap, and we end up hosting a historically cold game that comes down to a kicker... oh yeah, i forgot the part that the OC decides not to try and throw except on plays that are about impossible to run for a first down.
2015 should have zero bearing on any discussion involving the 2017 QB situation. what would you say if people were bringing up Cases performances as a Ram? Pretty much the same arguement, this 2017 Vikings offense is so far from the 2015 offense its like a completely different team.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ Mike Olson said:
Its relevant because it's the last game bridgewater played and we the poster I was replying to was discussing crazy situations.
except his hypothetical could happen this year... its extremely unlikely that our OL goes to shit, our WRs turn into crap, and we end up hosting a historically cold game that comes down to a kicker... oh yeah, i forgot the part that the OC decides not to try and throw except on plays that are about impossible to run for a first down.
2015 should have zero bearing on any discussion involving the 2017 QB situation. what would you say if people were bringing up Cases performances as a Ram? Pretty much the same arguement, this 2017 Vikings offense is so far from the 2015 offense its like a completely different team.
As unlikely as losing your Starting QB for the year, starting running back for the year....
yep probably just as likely, i am sure the odds are about even.
Well I hope we have seen the absolute worst.
As the saying goes "It looks like Friday, But Sunday is a comin"
i said earlier this year that we will never see another year like last year in terms of OL play... and I hope I am right.
as far as that saying... I have never heard that before... but of course I am not very old... let me ask my friend PFaithful, I am sure he is old enough to know what it meant when Jesus said it. B)
I don't think Jesus said it.
but since we are on the "religious" tone. The Isrealites had been wondering in the dessert for 40 years, God had promised them "the land of milk and honey" when they arrived outside that promised land they sent out scouts 12 of them. 10 of them came back with dire warnings "they are Giants" "We cannot defeat them" "We have been led here to die at the hand of these Giants" but two of the scouts Joshua and Caleb thought otherwise They people cried out for Joshua and Caleb to be executed "We should go back, to where we came from" they said. Because the people "refused" to go into the land that was promised he did not allow them to enter the promised land. It was not until they that refused perished that God allowed them to enter the promised land. I sure wish we were promised a Superbowl... But we have a group that is fearful of tougher opponents and we have a QB that believes that he can defeat those "giants" and surrounding him are men that believe it too. BOOM BOOM SKOL BOOM BOOM SKOL
Quote: @PapaScott said:
@ prairieghost said:
In the end, the entire coaching staff and Rick have to make decisions that are best for this football team. With that in mind, Teddy has been brought off the PUP list and is now active and the backup to the current starter. This tells me that the team and front office feel that Teddy can play and now they just need to see it during live action.
We don't see practices, guys and girls...we don't know what these people know. But to me it is telling that Teddy is now active and backing up Case. If all of the folks I mentioned above didn't truly believe that Teddy could play (and play pretty well) they would have returned him to the PUP list after making that determination a couple of weeks back.
No matter how things shake out this season, we have to know that the coaching staff and front office are not going to just let Teddy Bridgewater walk away next spring without knowing whether or not he can still play QB for the Minnesota Vikings. They are not tolling his contract. IMO they already know he can play, but it has simply been hard to justify pulling Case at this point in the season when he's been winning. Not for a second do I believe a switch would cause any split in the locker room, nor do I think there's a difference of opinion between front office and coaching about where Teddy stands. So that leaves them in a bit of a quandary, because unless we find ourselves enjoying the luxury of resting our starters late in the season for the playoffs it may be hard to see Teddy hit the field if they don't just roll the dice and insert him in the lineup soon. Besides, it doesn't seem like an ideal situation to just throw Teddy out with the backups in that scenario as it would not be a true gauge of where he's at by surrounding him with the second team players.
In a different thread I wondered aloud if they'd find a way to extend both of these guys in the offseason on "prove it" deals and let them battle it out in training camp next spring. I could see the team desiring that scenario but I don't think the QBs in question would. So...that puts us back to the current dilemma at hand...
What options did the Vikings have? Things were awfully quiet on the Bradford front. Sloter is an unknown. I have my doubts that Teddy is truly ready, seeing that Sloter was deactivated on Sunday cleared that up, but not pulling Case and putting in Teddy leaves room for some doubt. They played the Sam Bradford should be back for a long time, interestingly long enough for Teddy to be eligible to come back. If Sloter was active last Sunday I would completely doubt Teddy is ready. I Doubt that the Vikings would gamble at the position, but there is a reason Case was not pulled after the 2nd interception and I have yet to find it. I think it would be in the best interest of the Vikngs to wait as long as possible to "showcase" Teddy. All eyes are on that knee and if they put him out there with limited ability it shows how vulnerable we are at the position and when teams know that then there is extra motivation to "cut the head off the snake"
What still lingers is the Tolling option for Teddy or has that been solved?
lol...why are you even asking me that??? Yeah Sloter's an unknown, but if Teddy couldn't play then Sloter would be the option...you know, because he'd be the only other healthy QB on the roster. Teddy is healthy, so he was the backup. End of story.
The reason Case wasn't pulled last week?? The second interception came in the fourth quarter (the beginning of, I'll concede that) but barring an injury to Case I see no benefit to stick Teddy in the game in that situation--not for the team and not for Teddy. Asking any player to immediately get into the flow of the game with 1 quarter remaining and the lead suddenly in doubt is a pretty tall assignment, especially for a guy who hasn't played in a game since last preseason. If and when the team decides to go with Teddy the best scenario for him would be to name him the starter for said upcoming game. That way he gets an entire game to get his "sea legs" and get in rhythm with the offense.
Quote: @prairieghost said:
@ PapaScott said:
@ prairieghost said:
In the end, the entire coaching staff and Rick have to make decisions that are best for this football team. With that in mind, Teddy has been brought off the PUP list and is now active and the backup to the current starter. This tells me that the team and front office feel that Teddy can play and now they just need to see it during live action.
We don't see practices, guys and girls...we don't know what these people know. But to me it is telling that Teddy is now active and backing up Case. If all of the folks I mentioned above didn't truly believe that Teddy could play (and play pretty well) they would have returned him to the PUP list after making that determination a couple of weeks back.
No matter how things shake out this season, we have to know that the coaching staff and front office are not going to just let Teddy Bridgewater walk away next spring without knowing whether or not he can still play QB for the Minnesota Vikings. They are not tolling his contract. IMO they already know he can play, but it has simply been hard to justify pulling Case at this point in the season when he's been winning. Not for a second do I believe a switch would cause any split in the locker room, nor do I think there's a difference of opinion between front office and coaching about where Teddy stands. So that leaves them in a bit of a quandary, because unless we find ourselves enjoying the luxury of resting our starters late in the season for the playoffs it may be hard to see Teddy hit the field if they don't just roll the dice and insert him in the lineup soon. Besides, it doesn't seem like an ideal situation to just throw Teddy out with the backups in that scenario as it would not be a true gauge of where he's at by surrounding him with the second team players.
In a different thread I wondered aloud if they'd find a way to extend both of these guys in the offseason on "prove it" deals and let them battle it out in training camp next spring. I could see the team desiring that scenario but I don't think the QBs in question would. So...that puts us back to the current dilemma at hand...
What options did the Vikings have? Things were awfully quiet on the Bradford front. Sloter is an unknown. I have my doubts that Teddy is truly ready, seeing that Sloter was deactivated on Sunday cleared that up, but not pulling Case and putting in Teddy leaves room for some doubt. They played the Sam Bradford should be back for a long time, interestingly long enough for Teddy to be eligible to come back. If Sloter was active last Sunday I would completely doubt Teddy is ready. I Doubt that the Vikings would gamble at the position, but there is a reason Case was not pulled after the 2nd interception and I have yet to find it. I think it would be in the best interest of the Vikngs to wait as long as possible to "showcase" Teddy. All eyes are on that knee and if they put him out there with limited ability it shows how vulnerable we are at the position and when teams know that then there is extra motivation to "cut the head off the snake"
What still lingers is the Tolling option for Teddy or has that been solved?
lol...why are you even asking me that??? I threw out the question because you said the Vikings would not have activated him or named him the back up if he was not ready to see live action. I think it's assumed that Teddy is completely ready, so I think it's a legitimate question "what are the options" What if Teddy is not ready to play, let's just assume that for a moment. You have Case, Sam and Sloter and Teddy as your QB's Sam is injured it's really a head scratcher as to the extend of it, it's really not a pressing issue it's not being talked about so take him out of the equation, Sloter is there because the Vikings obviously see something in him they like, evidence by the contract they signed him to, but he's as raw as you can get potential or not he is obviously not going to start. So we are now left with Case and Teddy It's assumed that Teddy is 100 percent, Zimmer has even said so, but to say anything else than that is really not wise. If you admit that Teddy is not 100 percent, you have ONE quarterback that is your option. I said in my post that my doubts were eased with Sloter being inactive, but my doubts still do remain. Teams are going to try to eliminate your strengths and take advantage of your weaknesses. Knowing that you just have to knock out the starting QB puts the Vikings at a big disadvantage.
Yeah Sloter's an unknown, but if Teddy couldn't play then Sloter would be the option...you know, because he'd be the only other healthy QB on the roster. Teddy is healthy, so he was the backup. End of story. That is certainly what it looks like, but is it possible that Teddy is not completely healthy? I think it is and could explain why Case was not pulled after throwing two interceptions in a row. I don't recall if you specifically have been saying it, but there are people namely Canthony that are making the claim that Zimmer and the Vikings are looking for an opportunity to put Teddy in.
The reason Case wasn't pulled last week?? The second interception came in the fourth quarter (the beginning of, I'll concede that) but barring an injury to Case I see no benefit to stick Teddy in the game in that situation--not for the team and not for Teddy. Asking any player to immediately get into the flow of the game with 1 quarter remaining and the lead suddenly in doubt is a pretty tall assignment, especially for a guy who hasn't played in a game since last preseason. If and when the team decides to go with Teddy the best scenario for him would be to name him the starter for said upcoming game. That way he gets an entire game to get his "sea legs" and get in rhythm with the offense. Thanks! this is the only answer to my question of why they didn't pull case. I agree that's not the best opportunity to bring in Teddy, but it is what you would ask of a back up QB It's what was asked of Case in the Bears game granted he had 2 quarters to make something happen.
|
