Look, this would not even be a consideration if the coaching staff didn't know that Teddy was the better QB. They don't want to put him in because he has a nice smile or that he's a really nice guy who goes to kids' birthday parties. This is a debate right now between a QB who's on a roll and a better QB. And that's a legit debate. It's not an easy decision.
I think it's one that will EVENTUALLY be decided on the side of the better QB, but WHEN? Aye, there's the rub...
HH he isn't getting the majority of reps. That in itself should tell you where they are at. Now perhaps that changes this week and Bridgewater gets the lions share of the reps. But that isn't reality right now. Declaring Bridgewater as the starter IMO presents a high risk towards a negative result, whereas bringing him off the bench presents a smoother road for both the player and the coach. First the player gets to play without the pressure of starting. Second the coach doesn't have to appear to be fixing something that isn't broken. If the coach makes that decision and the player comes in and plays great then it's all gravy, if not fans will wonder why they switched horses in mid-stream. Conversely if the coach waits until mid game after Keenum falters, then if Teddy does well... again gravy, if the player falters well they had to see if he could outperform where case was at AND they have cover to start him the next week. THis is where a former player agreed with me as we were discussing this issue before the game on sunday. I don't know if his opinion carries more weight or not.
Now you were the one in your opening OP that said that this would generate interesting conversation and here you are deriding my part in the conversation as negative (which is absolutely preposterous). On Teddy, I simply never have thought the guy was anything special at QB. I don't think he sucks or think he is bad in any way. I just haven't seen anything for me to think he is an above average QB. That's not negative. Honestly I put in so much time money and energy into this team... well I'd have to be one hell of a sado masochist to do that in a quest for negativity.
Quote: @Mike Olson said:
HH he isn't getting the majority of reps. That in itself should tell you where they are at. Now perhaps that changes this week and Bridgewater gets the lions share of the reps. But that isn't reality right now. Declaring Bridgewater as the starter IMO presents a high risk towards a negative result, whereas bringing him off the bench presents a smoother road for both the player and the coach. First the player gets to play without the pressure of starting. Second the coach doesn't have to appear to be fixing something that isn't broken. If the coach makes that decision and the player comes in and plays great then it's all gravy, if not fans will wonder why they switched horses in mid-stream. Conversely if the coach waits until mid game after Keenum falters, then if Teddy does well... again gravy, if the player falters well they had to see if he could outperform where case was at AND they have cover to start him the next week. THis is where a former player agreed with me as we were discussing this issue before the game on sunday. I don't know if his opinion carries more weight or not.
Now you were the one in your opening OP that said that this would generate interesting conversation and here you are deriding my part in the conversation as negative (which is absolutely preposterous). On Teddy, I simply never have thought the guy was anything special at QB. I don't think he sucks or think he is bad in any way. I just haven't seen anything for me to think he is an above average QB. That's not negative. Honestly I put in so much time money and energy into this team... well I'd have to be one hell of a sado masochist to do that in a quest for negativity.
He isn't getting the majority of reps, that's true. Putting Bridgewater in a game that Keenum is failing isn't better, IMHO, it's worse. Not only are you taking away any shot of Keenum playing better and pulling out a win, but you're also putting Bridgewater in with Keenum's game plan. The starting QB should finish the game.
I don't agree with the don't fix what's not broke stance. Put the best team on the field, that's it. If switching to the QB that Zimmer feels gives the team the best shot and the Vikings fail, they were probably going to do that anyway (unless Bridgewater it's stinking up the place, but then they can go back to Keenum as that has already happened this year).
You have a bias against Bridgewater, that's fine. You're not a BikingVob about it. Just try to judge Keenum and Bridgewater without it. In another thread, you brought up Bridgewater's slow starts, but Keenum has done the same in this current offense. They're pretty similar in style and any knock on one will probably apply to the other because of that. You don't think Bridgewater brings an upside, I disagree, no big deal. We don't have a say in it anyway.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
Look, this would not even be a consideration if the coaching staff didn't know that Teddy was the better QB. They don't want to put him in because he has a nice smile or that he's a really nice guy who goes to kids' birthday parties. This is a debate right now between a QB who's on a roll and a better QB. And that's a legit debate. It's not an easy decision.
I think it's one that will EVENTUALLY be decided on the side of the better QB, but WHEN? Aye, there's the rub...
That pretty much sums it up.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Look, this would not even be a consideration if the coaching staff didn't know that Teddy was the better QB. They don't want to put him in because he has a nice smile or that he's a really nice guy who goes to kids' birthday parties. This is a debate right now between a QB who's on a roll and a better QB. And that's a legit debate. It's not an easy decision.
I think it's one that will EVENTUALLY be decided on the side of the better QB, but WHEN? Aye, there's the rub...
That pretty much sums it up.
Only currently Keenum is the better QB.
Quote: @Mike Olson said:
HH he isn't getting the majority of reps. That in itself should tell you where they are at. Now perhaps that changes this week and Bridgewater gets the lions share of the reps. But that isn't reality right now. Declaring Bridgewater as the starter IMO presents a high risk towards a negative result, whereas bringing him off the bench presents a smoother road for both the player and the coach. First the player gets to play without the pressure of starting. Second the coach doesn't have to appear to be fixing something that isn't broken. If the coach makes that decision and the player comes in and plays great then it's all gravy, if not fans will wonder why they switched horses in mid-stream. Conversely if the coach waits until mid game after Keenum falters, then if Teddy does well... again gravy, if the player falters well they had to see if he could outperform where case was at AND they have cover to start him the next week. THis is where a former player agreed with me as we were discussing this issue before the game on sunday. I don't know if his opinion carries more weight or not.
Now you were the one in your opening OP that said that this would generate interesting conversation and here you are deriding my part in the conversation as negative (which is absolutely preposterous). On Teddy, I simply never have thought the guy was anything special at QB. I don't think he sucks or think he is bad in any way. I just haven't seen anything for me to think he is an above average QB. That's not negative. Honestly I put in so much time money and energy into this team... well I'd have to be one hell of a sado masochist to do that in a quest for negativity.
I seem to remember Case getting 2/3s, Bridgewater getting
1/3 reps with the starters. Enough for
Bridgewater to have a chance to get familiar with the playbook and receivers,
and show what he’s got to the coaches.
If Bridgewater wasn’t neck and neck with Keenum or ahead of him, I think
Zimmer would have shut the door on this debate for the time being and said “Keenum’s
playing better right now, we’ll be
sticking with him for the foreseeable future, and Bridgewater is working his
ass off and improving every day.”
With regards to risks to the team and our season, I think it’s
pretty balanced between sticking with Case and moving to Bridgewater. With Case the risk is that he returns to his
normal, which you worry is not good enough to compete consistently with the big
dogs. With Bridgewater, you are risking
that he has regressed past who he used to be due to injury and time off. This team is stacked and it is making life
easy for our QBs. If Bridgewater came in
and played 2014 or 2015 level of quality, that’s about equivalent to what Case
brings to the table and it’s not a risk.
With regards to risks to Zimmer, he's primarily judged on
what works, but I agree that the risk to his image is less if he continues with
Case until he has a bad game, but imagine the legacy he could cement by putting
Bridgewater in when Keenum is hot, and the team dominates the 2nd
half of the season going into the playoffs.
That would take a hefty pair of balls.
Obviously, I don’t think you can switch now, because he
played a very solid game and you should reward that. I also don’t think you can waffle back and
forth. I think once you make the switch
you need to commit to it. I think you
need to commit to one of the QBs by week 13 (4 games left). I think this lends to just leaving Keenum in
there until he has a meh game.
Quote: @silverjoel said:
@ Mike Olson said:
HH he isn't getting the majority of reps. That in itself should tell you where they are at. Now perhaps that changes this week and Bridgewater gets the lions share of the reps. But that isn't reality right now. Declaring Bridgewater as the starter IMO presents a high risk towards a negative result, whereas bringing him off the bench presents a smoother road for both the player and the coach. First the player gets to play without the pressure of starting. Second the coach doesn't have to appear to be fixing something that isn't broken. If the coach makes that decision and the player comes in and plays great then it's all gravy, if not fans will wonder why they switched horses in mid-stream. Conversely if the coach waits until mid game after Keenum falters, then if Teddy does well... again gravy, if the player falters well they had to see if he could outperform where case was at AND they have cover to start him the next week. THis is where a former player agreed with me as we were discussing this issue before the game on sunday. I don't know if his opinion carries more weight or not.
Now you were the one in your opening OP that said that this would generate interesting conversation and here you are deriding my part in the conversation as negative (which is absolutely preposterous). On Teddy, I simply never have thought the guy was anything special at QB. I don't think he sucks or think he is bad in any way. I just haven't seen anything for me to think he is an above average QB. That's not negative. Honestly I put in so much time money and energy into this team... well I'd have to be one hell of a sado masochist to do that in a quest for negativity.
He isn't getting the majority of reps, that's true. Putting Bridgewater in a game that Keenum is failing isn't better, IMHO, it's worse. Not only are you taking away any shot of Keenum playing better and pulling out a win, but you're also putting Bridgewater in with Keenum's game plan. The starting QB should finish the game.
I don't agree with the don't fix what's not broke stance. Put the best team on the field, that's it. If switching to the QB that Zimmer feels gives the team the best shot and the Vikings fail, they were probably going to do that anyway (unless Bridgewater it's stinking up the place, but then they can go back to Keenum as that has already happened this year).
You have a bias against Bridgewater, that's fine. You're not a BikingVob about it. Just try to judge Keenum and Bridgewater without it. In another thread, you brought up Bridgewater's slow starts, but Keenum has done the same in this current offense. They're pretty similar in style and any knock on one will probably apply to the other because of that. You don't think Bridgewater brings an upside, I disagree, no big deal. We don't have a say in it anyway.
In case's starts he has produced totals of :
Tampa Bay 34Detroit 7Packers 23Ravens 24Browns 33Redskins 38
Not a whole lot of room for slow starts other than the Detroit game.
Quote: @Norse said:
@ greediron said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Look, this would not even be a consideration if the coaching staff didn't know that Teddy was the better QB. They don't want to put him in because he has a nice smile or that he's a really nice guy who goes to kids' birthday parties. This is a debate right now between a QB who's on a roll and a better QB. And that's a legit debate. It's not an easy decision.
I think it's one that will EVENTUALLY be decided on the side of the better QB, but WHEN? Aye, there's the rub...
That pretty much sums it up.
Only currently Keenum is the better QB.
Sez who? If that was true, I highly doubt Zimmer would be entertaining the idea of a switch. There is only one reason to make a switch at this point in the season. Well 2, but 1 would be the QB is sucking and season is lost. The only reason that fits for us is that one QB is significantly better and gives the team a better chance at making a run.
Quote: @Mike Olson said:
@ silverjoel said:
@ Mike Olson said:
HH he isn't getting the majority of reps. That in itself should tell you where they are at. Now perhaps that changes this week and Bridgewater gets the lions share of the reps. But that isn't reality right now. Declaring Bridgewater as the starter IMO presents a high risk towards a negative result, whereas bringing him off the bench presents a smoother road for both the player and the coach. First the player gets to play without the pressure of starting. Second the coach doesn't have to appear to be fixing something that isn't broken. If the coach makes that decision and the player comes in and plays great then it's all gravy, if not fans will wonder why they switched horses in mid-stream. Conversely if the coach waits until mid game after Keenum falters, then if Teddy does well... again gravy, if the player falters well they had to see if he could outperform where case was at AND they have cover to start him the next week. THis is where a former player agreed with me as we were discussing this issue before the game on sunday. I don't know if his opinion carries more weight or not.
Now you were the one in your opening OP that said that this would generate interesting conversation and here you are deriding my part in the conversation as negative (which is absolutely preposterous). On Teddy, I simply never have thought the guy was anything special at QB. I don't think he sucks or think he is bad in any way. I just haven't seen anything for me to think he is an above average QB. That's not negative. Honestly I put in so much time money and energy into this team... well I'd have to be one hell of a sado masochist to do that in a quest for negativity.
He isn't getting the majority of reps, that's true. Putting Bridgewater in a game that Keenum is failing isn't better, IMHO, it's worse. Not only are you taking away any shot of Keenum playing better and pulling out a win, but you're also putting Bridgewater in with Keenum's game plan. The starting QB should finish the game.
I don't agree with the don't fix what's not broke stance. Put the best team on the field, that's it. If switching to the QB that Zimmer feels gives the team the best shot and the Vikings fail, they were probably going to do that anyway (unless Bridgewater it's stinking up the place, but then they can go back to Keenum as that has already happened this year).
You have a bias against Bridgewater, that's fine. You're not a BikingVob about it. Just try to judge Keenum and Bridgewater without it. In another thread, you brought up Bridgewater's slow starts, but Keenum has done the same in this current offense. They're pretty similar in style and any knock on one will probably apply to the other because of that. You don't think Bridgewater brings an upside, I disagree, no big deal. We don't have a say in it anyway.
In case's starts he has produced totals of :
Tampa Bay 34Detroit 7Packers 23Ravens 24Browns 33Redskins 38
Not a whole lot of room for slow starts other than the Detroit game. You're moving the goal post on me.
Scores at halftime:
Pit- 3
TB- 21
Det- 7
Chi- 3
GB- 14
Bal- 9
Cle- 12
Was- 28
Yes, I understand Keenum didn't really play the first half against Chi.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ Norse said:
@ greediron said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Look, this would not even be a consideration if the coaching staff didn't know that Teddy was the better QB. They don't want to put him in because he has a nice smile or that he's a really nice guy who goes to kids' birthday parties. This is a debate right now between a QB who's on a roll and a better QB. And that's a legit debate. It's not an easy decision.
I think it's one that will EVENTUALLY be decided on the side of the better QB, but WHEN? Aye, there's the rub...
That pretty much sums it up.
Only currently Keenum is the better QB.
Sez who? If that was true, I highly doubt Zimmer would be entertaining the idea of a switch. There is only one reason to make a switch at this point in the season. Well 2, but 1 would be the QB is sucking and season is lost. The only reason that fits for us is that one QB is significantly better and gives the team a better chance at making a run.
Significantly 
I thought Case's current QBR rating was #3 in the NFL what is Teddy rated at?
|
