Vikings Message Board.Com

Speilman didnt "roll the dice" by getting Bradford...he found a player possibly better then what he had in Teddy. Any of the QBs in the draft this coming year are not likely better then Bradford.

what Spielman has done, is crap the bed for a number of years in a row by ignoring the fundamental needs at OL, perpetuating his hopeless attachment to Kalil (failed draft pick), using another draft pick on someone worse (Clemmings), and tilting at the impossible dream that Sully with herniated discs would somehow get cured at Lourdes and ever come back at a functional level.

What kind of gamble is it when you create something with NO chance of winning it all?

chicagopurple wrote:Speilman didnt "roll the dice" by getting Bradford...he found a player possibly better then what he had in Teddy. Any of the QBs in the draft this coming year are not likely better then Bradford.

what Spielman has done, is crap the bed for a number of years in a row by ignoring the fundamental needs at OL, perpetuating his hopeless attachment to Kalil (failed draft pick), using another draft pick on someone worse (Clemmings), and tilting at the impossible dream that Sully with herniated discs would somehow get cured at Lourdes and ever come back at a functional level.

What kind of gamble is it when you create something with NO chance of winning it all?

trading those picks was rolling the dice IMO.

the picks for Patterson? rolling the dice.

drafting Barr so high? rolling the dice. hunter? beavers in the 4th? clemmings at all?

etc.

maybe we disagree on terms. but surely you cannot suggest that any of the adjustments made on offense has been effective or more than being uber conservative at best?

i mean out side of playing CP84 finally, and throwing in a few wildcat formations....nada.

i understand the injuries and talent dearth on o-line....what i don't understand is the fetal position reaction to it. maybe i do understand it, i just don't respect it as a fan.

One thing it seems everyone agrees on is that the offensive line is terrible and has been terrible for years. I don't think anyone suspects that given that weakness up front, this team has the potential to be a top offense.

Being able to move the ball, change field position, knock in some field goals, and score 1 or 2 TDs and game is high end of what this personnel group is capable of.

From there, there is plenty to disagree about, but when we're debating everything else, we're talking about marginal differences that make the difference between winning and losing games, between being ranked 32nd and 28th, etc. That's significant in terms of real on the field results. Its not that significant in terms of stats.

In other words, its a given that nothings going to work at a highly impressive level, Norv or Shurmur, Bridgewater or Bradford, etc, but the differences in what the various coaches, players, systems can get out of the limited opportunities amounts to a whole lot...and this offense is a lot worse than last years.

I miss Norv, I miss Teddy, I miss winning.

fiestavike wrote:
I miss Norv, I miss Teddy, I miss winning.

I do not miss Norv.....not sure if I miss Teddy.....I do miss winning

fiestavike wrote:One thing it seems everyone agrees on is that the offensive line is terrible and has been terrible for years. I don't think anyone suspects that given that weakness up front, this team has the potential to be a top offense.

Being able to move the ball, change field position, knock in some field goals, and score 1 or 2 TDs and game is high end of what this personnel group is capable of.

From there, there is plenty to disagree about, but when we're debating everything else, we're talking about marginal differences that make the difference between winning and losing games, between being ranked 32nd and 28th, etc. That's significant in terms of real on the field results. Its not that significant in terms of stats.

In other words, its a given that nothings going to work at a highly impressive level, Norv or Shurmur, Bridgewater or Bradford, etc, but the differences in what the various coaches, players, systems can get out of the limited opportunities amounts to a whole lot...and this offense is a lot worse than last years.

I miss Norv, I miss Teddy, I miss winning.

Why do you miss a massive downgrade at QB?

PacificNorseWest wrote:

Im for real. What is it, that people are using to rationalize Bradford being anything but a boon to your QB production, because it certanly isnt anything on the field.

Jordysghost wrote: Im for real. What is it, that people are using to rationalize Bradford being anything but a boon to your QB production, because it certanly isnt anything on the field.

He's looking just as good, if not better, with all of the injuries than Teddy did with everyone healthy.
But I guess some people just bought into Teddy?

I miss TB's mobility, which is exacerbated by the o-line situation.
But I was pretty stoked to get Bradford....the guy can sling it.
I'm a bit surprised at how bad he moves...or basically doesn't move.
If this line had any competance this offense would be rolling pretty good IMO.
Middle of the pack i'd guess.

Demi wrote: He's looking just as good, if not better, with all of the injuries than Teddy did with everyone healthy.
But I guess some people just bought into Teddy?

Yea, he is out producing Bridgewater by a mile.

Nunin wrote:I miss TB's mobility, which is exacerbated by the o-line situation.
But I was pretty stoked to get Bradford....the guy can sling it.
I'm a bit surprised at how bad he moves...or basically doesn't move.
If this line had any competance this offense would be rolling pretty good IMO.
Middle of the pack i'd guess.

Id say Bradford quite obviously makes up for any mobility difference between him and Bridgewater, with his far super ior arm strength, decision making, release, and pocket awareness.

All in all, you would almost certainly have more sacks allowed with Bridgewater.

I think some people are creating a false narrative in their minds with Teddy gone...He wasnt great, ever. He was mobile but mostly ran around then threw it out of bounds...leading us to praise him for not throwing INTs (yawn). He showed NO skill at meaningful downfield passing. His second year he appeared to have regressed a bit rather then improve. Teddy was nothing but a great big "Maybe".....not a savior, not our next Tarkenton....just a Maybe......