Lovefest With Teddy Could Hit Rough Patch

[JustinTime18™]

http://www.1500espn.com/vikings-2/2017/0...ugh-patch/

[Guest]

Geez they are scraping the bottom of the barrel.  This is all old "speculation".   Been reported many times. Nothing new here.

[Guest]

@twgerber said:
Geez they are scraping the bottom of the barrel.  This is all old "speculation".   Been reported many times. Nothing new here.

Typical Zulgad I'm afraid... 

[Guest]

Yup.  Dulzag submitting another "new" and well thought out article.

[Guest]

It's THE ISSUE among many...Man, what an important year on and off the field. Sheesh, just when you thought things might settle down at Winter Park.

[Guest]

The important points are that there is some grumbling about how long Teddy actually needs to be on the PUP for his contract to toll. Some think its a full year.

The article speculates what if Teddy challenges the PUP designation down the road. Idea being Teddy gets to a point where he wants to play and a storm rolls in over the designation.

It's important to know whether there is gray area in his contract tolling for another season. If both sides believe their interpretation of the rule is right, why wouldnt there be a fight over it if Teddy's camp believes he can play?

Its one thing if the Vikes are right and Teddy is stuck in the rules set by the CBA. It's another if his camp believes the team is wrong about the 6 weeks on the PUP and he really thinks he can play this year.

[Guest]

This was all written about a few months ago.  This isn't new "speculation".   It's a rehash of other articles without one bit of new detail/info.

[Guest]

@BlackMagic7 said:
The important points are that there is some grumbling about how long Teddy actually needs to be on the PUP for his contract to toll. Some think its a full year.

The article speculates what if Teddy challenges the PUP designation down the road. Idea being Teddy gets to a point where he wants to play and a storm rolls in over the designation.

It's important to know whether there is gray area in his contract tolling for another season. If both sides believe their interpretation of the rule is right, why wouldnt there be a fight over it if Teddy's camp believes he can play?

Its one thing if the Vikes are right and Teddy is stuck in the rules set by the CBA. It's another if his camp believes the team is wrong about the 6 weeks on the PUP and he really thinks he can play this year.

Those "gray areas" worry me. If the Vikings believe they can toll Bridgewater's contract but that is challenged, they could lose a legal challenge in a couple ways:

• because they were wrong about how long he needs to stay on PUP (is there precedent in the NFL for "tolling" a contract of a first-round pick?), or 
• because Bridgewater wins the argument that he was physically able to play but the team had him on PUP for purposes of tolling his contract. 

My guess is that would result in Teddy being declared an unrestricted free agent next March.

[Guest]

It is what its going to be with Bridgewater. I really like the kid, but that injury was very unusual and harsh. I don't know how he'll respond and neither does the team. Only time will tell, so they can't commit to the guy yet.

[Guest]

Until cleared by Doctors, this is all just noise & speculation!