mansquatch wrote: ↑
Wed Jan 22, 2020 10:23 am
I think you guys are taking the Bardford trade way out of context. They had Sean Hill at QB and nobody else when they made that transaction. They didn't know if Teddy would ever play another snap. The impetus of that move was to try and salvage the 2016 season that they were going into with a roster that was a missed kick from winning a playoff game. Hindsight is 20/20, we ended up starting 8 different players at Tackle due to concentration of injuries at the position, Norv Turner got exposed as not really being the OC we needed, and Blair Walsh went full headcase. In Retrospect tanking the season might have been better for the Franchise in the long run, but I find it hard to fault the GM for making that trade.
Also Bradford was never put in a situation where he could excel in 2016. That the worst OL situation in Vikings history with aforementioned 8 starters at Tackle. That year was so bad that I think fans still have a hangover from it. I would remind people of his one and only game in 2017 where he completely lit up the Saints. Then his knees sabotaged him. Always felt bad for that guy, he had a legendary arm and great attitude. His body wouldn't hold up.
It's not hard to fault Spielman for that trade. The context is being considered:
— As you said, they had Sean Hill at QB. That's not a point in Spielman's favor. It's damning that the team's primary backup was a player he had so little confidence in that he immediately made a costly trade to "salvage" the season rather than going with Hill. In short: either the Vikings made a terrible choice in making Hill the #2 in the first place or they made a rash decision to trade for Bradford (or both!).
— The roster was a missed kick from winning a wildcard playoff game. They weren't a missed kick from the Super Bowl. There was little reason to believe they were getting to the latter with Bridgewater in 2016 and even less to think they could trade for a guy with Bradford's history, have him start immediately and get there.
— Yes, they suffered OL injuries but that line was awful from the start (and had been in need of work for years).
— Bradford's knees "sabotaged him" and nobody wanted to see that happen but it doesn't require hindsight to see he was an injury risk, especially behind a problematic line. His injury history was well known. Shouldn't that have weighed heavily into a team's decision to spend a first round pick on a QB for the third time in 6 years?
This trade was the aftermath of one of the two examples of crazy bad luck the Vikings have had on Offense during the Zimmer era. (The other one was Sparano's death.)
True... but it's hard to see that as a mitigating factor in Spielman's favor. It's an unfortunate reality in the NFL that players can be injured and miss an entire season or more at any time. That's why depth is important. Why were the Vikings completely unprepared (at least in their own estimation) for that possibility at QB?
It's clear that Spielman panicked in the wake of Bridgewater's injury and that he was unprepared for that eventuality. It's not atypical for the Vikings over the last 13 years to lack decent depth at QB or to have serious OL issues. Indeed, I'd argue that these tend to be trademarks of Spielman era Vikings teams.
Another fun topic is the Offensive Coaching hires. Talk about Bi-Polar disorder...
I think that's because there doesn't appear to be a clear, unifying vision for the team at work. I don't think Spielman's ever had one and Zimmer obviously came to MN to be a head coach, run his defense and hope he could find an OC that would run the offense well enough for him to basically forget about it.