Case is now the future

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"Ralphie" said:

@"medaille" said: A lot of people are saying that we should keep Case and Bridgewater and that Bradford is the odd man out due to his knee.  I don’t see that as a likely possibility.  Bridgewater wants to start so bad.  I think he’ll go wherever a starting job shows itself or where he can likely outcompete a young QB.  Bradford on the other hand, seems to be the one most likely to accept a backup position depending on his knee situation.  The best case situation that I can see is keeping either Case or Bridgewater, defining them the starter, and keeping Bradford as a backup if he’s willing to do that.

Agreed for the reasons you mentioned.  My choice...barring any free agency wheeling and dealing (Cousins, et al)...would be for next season:
Case Keenum, starting QB
Sammy Bradford, backup
Kyle Sloter, 3rd string

only problem with that... you have your best arm talent by far on the bench.  as soon as Case would stumble a little you would have half the stadium calling for Sam.

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"Ralphie" said:

@"medaille" said: A lot of people are saying that we should keep Case and Bridgewater and that Bradford is the odd man out due to his knee.  I don’t see that as a likely possibility.  Bridgewater wants to start so bad.  I think he’ll go wherever a starting job shows itself or where he can likely outcompete a young QB.  Bradford on the other hand, seems to be the one most likely to accept a backup position depending on his knee situation.  The best case situation that I can see is keeping either Case or Bridgewater, defining them the starter, and keeping Bradford as a backup if he’s willing to do that.

Agreed for the reasons you mentioned.  My choice...barring any free agency wheeling and dealing (Cousins, et al)...would be for next season:
Case Keenum, starting QB
Sammy Bradford, backup
Kyle Sloter, 3rd string

only problem with that... you have your best arm talent by far on the bench.  as soon as Case would stumble a little you would have half the stadium calling for Sam.

@"KingBash" said: Admittedly I didn't read much of this thread but my .02.

Bridgewater will one day be a force to be reckoned with... but that's my personal opinion.

We know what we have in Bradford: a GREAT QB who can't shake the injury bug. But when he's healthy, he's a top 5 QB.

I'll hesitate to talk shit on Keenum because I currently love the guy, but he's a serviceable guy in a great offense. I actually think he can still grow a bit more, but...

Whatever. Let's enjoy yesterday and the fact that next Sunday we all get to go crazy again.

@"A1Janitor" said:

@"Mike Olson" said:

@"AGRforever" said:

@"A1Janitor" said:

@"AGRforever" said:

@"A1Janitor" said: LMAO ignorance of some?

Go fuck yourself.   Who makes you smarter?

Let's go back the past month and look at who thinks Teddy is better than Case and should be our qb.  

Does it make you feel better to tell another VIKING fan to fuck off???  Now if he was a Packer/Saint/Seachicken fan I could see but geez why can't we all just have a debate without going personal on it.

And no you aren't the only guilty.  But telling someone to fuck off is going to get the thread closed. 

I will he goddamned if anyone becomes arrogant about how fucking smart they are or calls me names ... 

My vikings won with our qb Case Keenum.  He has earned a contract.  I am sorry for the Teddy fans that think Teddy is more accurate (he isn't) or has a better arm (he doesn't).

I agree on Case.  I disagree on turning a competitive thread ugly.  The only reason "you're" smarter is you think you're "right" just as other people are entitled to their own opinion.  Give it a rest.  Enjoy the week.  We're playing the the GD NFCC game against a wounded Eagles team with the chance to play a home SB.  

post of the decade right there. 

Nah.   Your green bay post was.  

@"StickyBun" said:

@"KingBash" said: Admittedly I didn't read much of this thread but my .02.

Bridgewater will one day be a force to be reckoned with... but that's my personal opinion.

We know what we have in Bradford: a GREAT QB who can't shake the injury bug. But when he's healthy, he's a top 5 QB.

I'll hesitate to talk shit on Keenum because I currently love the guy, but he's a serviceable guy in a great offense. I actually think he can still grow a bit more, but...

Whatever. Let's enjoy yesterday and the fact that next Sunday we all get to go crazy again.

It isn't a great offense, at least as far as the run game is concerned. Both Murray and McKinnon are averaging under 4 yards a carry. With Dalvin Cook? Yes, it will be a strength. He was averaging 4.8 before getting injured. The Vikings just run the ball often, but not particularly well. And  I don't put that on the O-line, we just don't have a dynamic and natural RB in there without Cook. 

@"JimmyinSD" said: and they force the run to eat clock.  Zim loves his team,  but he doesnt seem to trust them all that much.  I understand running the ball to keep the clock running,  but you know what is even better... keeping the ball on offense so the opposition cant score.  I have been frustrated all year by how quickly the Vikings O (playcalling or lack of audible) will stick their head in the sand and try to run with 8+ defenders in the box.  make the opponents pay for overloading the run.  Hell if we saw a team with their Dime defense in and only having 4 or 5 defenders in the box... wouldn't you audible to a run and take advantage of the weakness.. of course,  so why dont Shurmur and Keenum pass on run overloads?  I think our run avg would be much better if it werent for the obvious runs that are easily stuffed.  I really like what Shurmur has done this year,  but the head scratching runs are kinda frustrating.

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"Ralphie" said:

@"medaille" said: A lot of people are saying that we should keep Case and Bridgewater and that Bradford is the odd man out due to his knee.  I don’t see that as a likely possibility.  Bridgewater wants to start so bad.  I think he’ll go wherever a starting job shows itself or where he can likely outcompete a young QB.  Bradford on the other hand, seems to be the one most likely to accept a backup position depending on his knee situation.  The best case situation that I can see is keeping either Case or Bridgewater, defining them the starter, and keeping Bradford as a backup if he’s willing to do that.

Agreed for the reasons you mentioned.  My choice...barring any free agency wheeling and dealing (Cousins, et al)...would be for next season:
Case Keenum, starting QB
Sammy Bradford, backup
Kyle Sloter, 3rd string

only problem with that... you have your best arm talent by far on the bench.  as soon as Case would stumble a little you would have half the stadium calling for Sam.

Bradford isn't a backup to anyone unless he's hurt. 

@"Mike Olson" said:

@"A1Janitor" said:

@"Mike Olson" said:

@"AGRforever" said:

@"A1Janitor" said:

@"AGRforever" said:

@"A1Janitor" said: LMAO ignorance of some?

Go fuck yourself.   Who makes you smarter?

Let's go back the past month and look at who thinks Teddy is better than Case and should be our qb.  

Does it make you feel better to tell another VIKING fan to fuck off???  Now if he was a Packer/Saint/Seachicken fan I could see but geez why can't we all just have a debate without going personal on it.

And no you aren't the only guilty.  But telling someone to fuck off is going to get the thread closed. 

I will he goddamned if anyone becomes arrogant about how fucking smart they are or calls me names ... 

My vikings won with our qb Case Keenum.  He has earned a contract.  I am sorry for the Teddy fans that think Teddy is more accurate (he isn't) or has a better arm (he doesn't).

I agree on Case.  I disagree on turning a competitive thread ugly.  The only reason "you're" smarter is you think you're "right" just as other people are entitled to their own opinion.  Give it a rest.  Enjoy the week.  We're playing the the GD NFCC game against a wounded Eagles team with the chance to play a home SB.  

post of the decade right there. 

Nah.   Your green bay post was.  

Whew man you are right. 

What I said to him about his post being the post of the decade wasn't a slam at you or anything at all. More so just about the philosphy behind his post. Something that I myself need to remember. Sometimes I (think) am smarter because I THINK I know better. 

|The GB post... I was hammered and I had done absolutely nothing wrong (Like legitimately did nothing wrong as I was told by observers the next day) And then someone is threatening to put me in jail on christmas. Anyway I am willing to take my lumps for my outspoken and over the top stupidity. It happens. Hopefully with increasingly longer intervals as I age. 

@"Mike Olson" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said: and they force the run to eat clock.  Zim loves his team,  but he doesnt seem to trust them all that much.  I understand running the ball to keep the clock running,  but you know what is even better... keeping the ball on offense so the opposition cant score.  I have been frustrated all year by how quickly the Vikings O (playcalling or lack of audible) will stick their head in the sand and try to run with 8+ defenders in the box.  make the opponents pay for overloading the run.  Hell if we saw a team with their Dime defense in and only having 4 or 5 defenders in the box... wouldn't you audible to a run and take advantage of the weakness.. of course,  so why dont Shurmur and Keenum pass on run overloads?  I think our run avg would be much better if it werent for the obvious runs that are easily stuffed.  I really like what Shurmur has done this year,  but the head scratching runs are kinda frustrating.

1) conventional wisdom 2) 13-3 3) Trip to NFCCG 4) If they pass on an overloaded box and don't complete and stop the clock the second guessing would be even worse and the likelihood of something bad happening on a pass in that situation is significantly higher. 

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"Mike Olson" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said: and they force the run to eat clock.  Zim loves his team,  but he doesnt seem to trust them all that much.  I understand running the ball to keep the clock running,  but you know what is even better... keeping the ball on offense so the opposition cant score.  I have been frustrated all year by how quickly the Vikings O (playcalling or lack of audible) will stick their head in the sand and try to run with 8+ defenders in the box.  make the opponents pay for overloading the run.  Hell if we saw a team with their Dime defense in and only having 4 or 5 defenders in the box... wouldn't you audible to a run and take advantage of the weakness.. of course,  so why dont Shurmur and Keenum pass on run overloads?  I think our run avg would be much better if it werent for the obvious runs that are easily stuffed.  I really like what Shurmur has done this year,  but the head scratching runs are kinda frustrating.

1) conventional wisdom 2) 13-3 3) Trip to NFCCG 4) If they pass on an overloaded box and don't complete and stop the clock the second guessing would be even worse and the likelihood of something bad happening on a pass in that situation is significantly higher. 

well that conventional wisdom was one miraculous catch and missed tackle away from seeing the team 1 and done in the playoffs after a 13-3 season. 

I understand all the thoughts that go into it,  but 3 and out doesnt chew the clock either.  and how is a pass against single coverage or wide zones significantly riskier than one against tighter coverage with defenders backed out of the box?  we have seen several times this year where conventional wisdom has bit the team in the ass and they have a hard time stopping the forfeited momentum gained by opposing teams stuffing our O at key moments.  running into a stacked box repeatedly in the 3rd quarter IMO is akin to taking a knee in 99,  it may be conventional thinking... but it doesnt always make it right.

@"Mike Olson" said:

3 and out running the ball chews the clock more than 3 and out throwing the ball. And forces them to use time outs. The blocked punt did more to put this game in danger than any other thing about the game. That was nearly the back breaker. 

Gotta agree with AGforever. Sam cashed in with the last Number #1 overall contract before the Rookie Salary Cap. He cashed in again in FA.

What possible motivation would he have to take a backup QB contract? He's already rich. And why risk the knee if he got forced into action? 

He's eithr going to be healthy enough to want bank and a Starting gig or he's going to retire, IMO.

Aside from how heated it can get when talking Case, Treadwell, etc., which I think is a bit of a symptom of how excited/nervous we all are for Sunday, isn't it great to have the luxury of arguing about QBs and WRs when it wasn't that long ago that the team had squat at both positions? 

@"Mike Olson" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"Mike Olson" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said: and they force the run to eat clock.  Zim loves his team,  but he doesnt seem to trust them all that much.  I understand running the ball to keep the clock running,  but you know what is even better... keeping the ball on offense so the opposition cant score.  I have been frustrated all year by how quickly the Vikings O (playcalling or lack of audible) will stick their head in the sand and try to run with 8+ defenders in the box.  make the opponents pay for overloading the run.  Hell if we saw a team with their Dime defense in and only having 4 or 5 defenders in the box... wouldn't you audible to a run and take advantage of the weakness.. of course,  so why dont Shurmur and Keenum pass on run overloads?  I think our run avg would be much better if it werent for the obvious runs that are easily stuffed.  I really like what Shurmur has done this year,  but the head scratching runs are kinda frustrating.

1) conventional wisdom 2) 13-3 3) Trip to NFCCG 4) If they pass on an overloaded box and don't complete and stop the clock the second guessing would be even worse and the likelihood of something bad happening on a pass in that situation is significantly higher. 

well that conventional wisdom was one miraculous catch and missed tackle away from seeing the team 1 and done in the playoffs after a 13-3 season. 

I understand all the thoughts that go into it,  but 3 and out doesnt chew the clock either.  and how is a pass against single coverage or wide zones significantly riskier than one against tighter coverage with defenders backed out of the box?  we have seen several times this year where conventional wisdom has bit the team in the ass and they have a hard time stopping the forfeited momentum gained by opposing teams stuffing our O at key moments.  running into a stacked box repeatedly in the 3rd quarter IMO is akin to taking a knee in 99,  it may be conventional thinking... but it doesnt always make it right.

3 and out running the ball chews the clock more than 3 and out throwing the ball. And forces them to use time outs. The blocked punt did more to put this game in danger than any other thing about the game. That was nearly the back breaker.