Vikings Message Board.Com

fiestavike wrote: your knowledge of football is 0.

No, you apparently aren't aware that every one of those players except Sanchez have had years where they blasted Bridgewaters production out of the water.

Im getting the feeling that you are overrating the crap out Bridgewater for the aspects of his game that you like, that is all well and dandy but it doesn't change the fact that he puts up back up numbers, that likely could be replicated our out produced by a backup, given the right situation.

Let me guess Fiesta, the stats and on field production don't matter because you like Bridgewater. Yea, I certainly dont know what im talking about right, who in their right mind would use things that actually occured on field in reality to justify their opinion? #### that noise!

Jordysghost wrote: No, you apparently aren't aware that every one of those players except Sanchez have had years where they blasted Bridgewaters production out of the water.

Im getting the feeling that you are overrating the crap out Bridgewater for the aspects of his game that you like, that is all well and dandy but it doesn't change the fact that he puts up back up numbers, that likely could be replicated our out produced by a backup, given the right situation.

Let me guess Fiesta, the stats and on field production don't matter because you like Bridgewater. Yea, I certainly dont know what im talking about right, who in their right mind would use things that actually occured on field in reality to justify their opinion? #### that noise!

You don't have the foggiest idea what happens on a football field.

fiestavike wrote: You don't have the foggiest idea what happens on a football field.

Yes I do, that is why I never have any problem supporting my opinions with something that actually happened on the field.

Interesting though, that someone disagreeing that Bridgewater is so irreplaceable triggers such a juvinile and unsubstantiated attack on my perspective football knowledge, I have the common courtesy to keep my opinions on your football knowledge to myself.

Against my better judgement, I'm going to throw something into this "discussion".

Just because Teddy's stats look pedestrian, don't assume that he didn't do some great things "that actually happened on the field".

There are a lot of little things that he does well that create opportunities for other players. I would argue that he performed better than Jay Cutler typically performs even though Cutler "actually does things on a football field" historically better than Teddy. More succinctly: let those two QBs trade teams and see who puts up better numbers. I feel like you're making the mistake of holding one player accountable for a unit without recognizing that even Aaron Rodgers would have a statistical seizure behind our O-line.

That's the cool thing about football for most of us: there are too many variable to be able to definitely make statements about most aspects of the game. I would love to know your background in statistical analysis to be able to so confidently proclaim that you can tell a QB's story based on their ESPN stat profile, though.

DK Sweets wrote:Against my better judgement, I'm going to throw something into this "discussion".

Just because Teddy's stats look pedestrian, don't assume that he didn't do some great things "that actually happened on the field".

There are a lot of little things that he does well that create opportunities for other players. I would argue that he performed better than Jay Cutler typically performs even though Cutler "actually does things on a football field" historically better than Teddy. More succinctly: let those two QBs trade teams and see who puts up better numbers. I feel like you're making the mistake of holding one player accountable for a unit without recognizing that even Aaron Rodgers would have a statistical seizure behind our O-line.

In Jordy's defense, I think a lot of loyal Vikings fans are understandably doing the opposite and holding the rest of the offense more accountable for Bridgewater's performance than Bridgewater himself. As far as I'm concerned the truth lies in the middle. There ARE variables, as you said, but the biggest is the player himself. The offensive line has been bad but put Aaron Rodgers behind that same line last year and I have no doubt we would have seen a dramatically different, and much more effective, offense.

Mothman wrote: put Aaron Rodgers behind that same line last year and I have no doubt we would have seen a dramatically different, and much more effective, offense.

Yes, but incidentally, Aaron Rodgers is among the best Quarterbacks at those minutiae that Bridgewater also excells at. He is exceptionally well equiped to cope with pressure because of pocket presence, elusiveness, accuracy etc. What he has over Teddy is that he also has developed the rest of his game to become, perhaps, the best quarterback playing today. Nobody is comparing Teddy to A-Aron anyway. Peyton Manning might also have done well with the Vikings line. He had some pretty grim lines in Indianapolis on a couple occasions. He would have had to rely on reading the defense and unloading the ball extremely quickly to cope with that pressure. Also a skill Teddy has not mastered. If you pick the best QBs to ever play the game, some of them could have done better than Bridgewater did last year. This is not a newsflash to anyone. Nobody is contending that Teddy Bridgewater is Aaron Rodgers or Peyton Manning anyway.

In fact, Nobody except the naysayers seem to miss that the truth is in the middle. Nobody denies Bridgewater's short comings, but the naysayers deny his strengths, even while he is sedated and being examined for an injury which could have cost him his leg and could cost him his career. And the worst part is that they don't deny them based on his play and production on the field (what he actual does in actual situations) by by citing how few tds he's thrown, how few yards he's accounted for, as though life exists in a vacuum. The debate, at this point, is only about the debate, because its clearly got nothing to do with football, so I'm happy to be done with it until someone wants to engage in it rationally instead of dogmatically.

fiestavike wrote: Yes, but incidentally, Aaron Rodgers is among the best Quarterbacks at those minutiae that Bridgewater also excells at. He is exceptionally well equiped to cope with pressure because of pocket presence, elusiveness, accuracy etc. What he has over Teddy is that he also has developed the rest of his game to become, perhaps, the best quarterback playing today. Nobody is comparing Teddy to A-Aron anyway.

DK just wrote "Aaron Rodgers would have a statistical seizure behind our O-line". That's why I mentioned Rodgers in my response.

The debate, at this point, is only about the debate, because its clearly got nothing to do with football, so I'm happy to be done with it until someone wants to engage in it rationally instead of dogmatically.

The debate has everything to do with football. However, it seems like you don't care for the evidence or what it implies and you clearly don't like hearing criticism of one of your favorite players from a Packer fan. You want to have a rational discussion? You've spent the last few days posting responses like "you are an oaf", "your knowledge of football is 0" and "You don't have the foggiest idea what happens on a football field." Those replies were petulant, not rational.

Mothman wrote: DK just wrote "Aaron Rodgers would have a statistical seizure behind our O-line". That's why I mentioned Rodgers in my response.

In my defense, I'm right.

Don't get me wrong, he'd have better numbers than Teddy did, but he's not getting the 4,000 yards, 40 TDs, and 65% completion rate he's become accustomed to.

DK Sweets wrote:In my defense, I'm right.

That's a darn good defense!

Don't get me wrong, he'd have better numbers than Teddy did, but he's not getting the 4,000 yards, 40 TDs, and 65% completion rate he's become accustomed to.

I understand and I agree, the poor OL play would definitely impact his game. It impacts any QB's game.

DK Sweets wrote:In my defense, I'm right.

Don't get me wrong, he'd have better numbers than Teddy did, but he's not getting the 4,000 yards, 40 TDs, and 65% completion rate he's become accustomed to.

You think so? Aaron has had lines every bit as bad as your current one for a good portion of his career, 2008, 2009 etc. etc.

Dude used to take 50 sacks a year on the regular.

fiestavike wrote: Yes, but incidentally, Aaron Rodgers is among the best Quarterbacks at those minutiae that Bridgewater also excells at. He is exceptionally well equiped to cope with pressure because of pocket presence, elusiveness, accuracy etc. What he has over Teddy is that he also has developed the rest of his game to become, perhaps, the best quarterback playing today. Nobody is comparing Teddy to A-Aron anyway. Peyton Manning might also have done well with the Vikings line. He had some pretty grim lines in Indianapolis on a couple occasions. He would have had to rely on reading the defense and unloading the ball extremely quickly to cope with that pressure. Also a skill Teddy has not mastered. If you pick the best QBs to ever play the game, some of them could have done better than Bridgewater did last year. This is not a newsflash to anyone. Nobody is contending that Teddy Bridgewater is Aaron Rodgers or Peyton Manning anyway.

In fact, Nobody except the naysayers seem to miss that the truth is in the middle. Nobody denies Bridgewater's short comings, but the naysayers deny his strengths, even while he is sedated and being examined for an injury which could have cost him his leg and could cost him his career. And the worst part is that they don't deny them based on his play and production on the field (what he actual does in actual situations) by by citing how few tds he's thrown, how few yards he's accounted for, as though life exists in a vacuum. The debate, at this point, is only about the debate, because its clearly got nothing to do with football, so I'm happy to be done with it until someone wants to engage in it rationally instead of dogmatically.

Your confusing the aspects of Teddys game that you like for, things that he he has mastered and refined to the put of no replacement.

Sorry, but there are things about Teddys game I like as well, that doesn't mean they couldnt be replicated by a back up QB given the right support.

DK Sweets wrote:Against my better judgement, I'm going to throw something into this "discussion".

Just because Teddy's stats look pedestrian, don't assume that he didn't do some great things "that actually happened on the field".

There are a lot of little things that he does well that create opportunities for other players. I would argue that he performed better than Jay Cutler typically performs even though Cutler "actually does things on a football field" historically better than Teddy. More succinctly: let those two QBs trade teams and see who puts up better numbers. I feel like you're making the mistake of holding one player accountable for a unit without recognizing that even Aaron Rodgers would have a statistical seizure behind our O-line.

That's the cool thing about football for most of us: there are too many variable to be able to definitely make statements about most aspects of the game. I would love to know your background in statistical analysis to be able to so confidently proclaim that you can tell a QB's story based on their ESPN stat profile, though.

It isn't that a players worth can only be measured in statistics, I understand that there are aspects of Bridgewaters game people like, but I think there is a tendency to massively overvalue the areas where people think he is good at in spite of the statistics, for example..

Do I believe that Bridgewater has done a decent job feeling the pressure, moving around, and compensating for the weakness it O line in the pocket? Yea, I do, but many act as if he is an expert in such an area and that it would be nearly impossible to find a backup to replace him because of such, It goes back to what I said about taking an aspect of a players game you like, and clinging to it for dear life to justify the idea that 'We cant replace Bridgewater' (Not nessicarily saying you are doing that, just some people.).

Aaron has had worse O lines then this one and didn't have AD to take any of the pressure off either, I don't agree at all he would have a 'Statistical seizure' Aaron has had a good O line with the Packers like twice in his tenure here.

Mothman wrote:
You've spent the last few days posting responses like "you are an oaf", "your knowledge of football is 0" and "You don't have the foggiest idea what happens on a football field." Those replies were petulant, not rational.

Unless they are true.

I am probably in the wrong to say these things anyway. Silence it preferable, I think.

Either way, its unprofitable to continue in a discussion not based in knowledge and not directed toward truth.

fiestavike wrote:

Either way, its unprofitable to continue in a discussion not based in knowledge and not directed toward truth.

Then, why are you? Everyone else is talking about Teddy's factual on field production, strengths and weaknesses, and possible fixes at the QB position, the only one who's ability it to support their opinion is so lacking they have to start name calling and insults is you.

This thread is getting way off topic...