Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
J. Kapp 11
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6992
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm

Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by J. Kapp 11 » Mon May 01, 2017 4:58 pm

From Tom Pelissero via Twitter
#Vikings informed Teddy Bridgewater they’re declining his option, source said. No setback. No nerve issue. Just can’t injury-guarantee him.

2:03 pm • 1 May 2017
Understand the Vikings not picking up the option, but sad for TB. He's a good guy who deserved better.
0 x
Image
Go ahead. I dare you.
Underestimate this man.

User avatar
S197
Fenrir
Posts: 11367
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Hawaii

Re: Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by S197 » Mon May 01, 2017 6:13 pm

Wonder what he means by "no setback." Great to hear there is no nerve damage.
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37407
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by Mothman » Mon May 01, 2017 6:44 pm

S197 wrote:Wonder what he means by "no setback."
I just took it to mean this decision isn't due to a new development or an as-yet-unreported setback in Bridgewater's recovery.
0 x

User avatar
808vikingsfan
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3445
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 5:45 pm
Location: Hawaii

Re: Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by 808vikingsfan » Mon May 01, 2017 6:58 pm

S197 wrote:Wonder what he means by "no setback." Great to hear there is no nerve damage.

Could be related to the tweet that Peter King posted earlier today.
Image



He later edited his post to this
Image
0 x
Joined: Aug 2006
Deleted: Sept 12 2014
Reborn: Sept 17 2014

RFIP
Veteran
Posts: 212
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2016 8:02 pm

Re: Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by RFIP » Mon May 01, 2017 7:26 pm

Why does no one seem to understand what is REALLY going on here?

If TB is on PUP all season, which is a REAL possibility, then this year becomes voided and the Vikings have until NEXT May to pick up his 5th 9would then be SIXTH) year option.

I mean this has been reported everywhere, how has it not found its way to this board???

Plain and simple I think the Vikings are playing both ends against the middle and are going to get caught without ANY QB because Sam ain't signing ANY long term deal where the rug can be pulled out from under him again BUT, that said, Bridgewater is FAR from gone in Minny as of right now.
0 x

User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5751
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Great White North

Re: Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by VikingLord » Tue May 02, 2017 12:06 am

RFIP wrote:Why does no one seem to understand what is REALLY going on here?

If TB is on PUP all season, which is a REAL possibility, then this year becomes voided and the Vikings have until NEXT May to pick up his 5th 9would then be SIXTH) year option.

I mean this has been reported everywhere, how has it not found its way to this board???

Plain and simple I think the Vikings are playing both ends against the middle and are going to get caught without ANY QB because Sam ain't signing ANY long term deal where the rug can be pulled out from under him again BUT, that said, Bridgewater is FAR from gone in Minny as of right now.
If Teddy isn't ready to take snaps and perform football movements by this summer, odds that he'll ever play again drop dramatically in my view. I don't think the Vikings are playing around here at all - I think Bridgewater's injury was simply too severe for him to recover to the degree necessary to play football.
0 x

PurpleKoolaid
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8371
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:52 pm

Re: Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by PurpleKoolaid » Tue May 02, 2017 1:45 am

I think Teddy can overcome it as soon as anyone. But do the Vikes want to say goodbye to Sam anytime soon? I think we go 8-8 again, and if we do, I want Teddy to be qb, BUT HE HAS TO SHOW HE IS READDY. oTHERWISE, EXTEND sb now AND BUT THIS ALL TO REST. Im not going to lie, im pull for Teddy, but i will be happy with SB if they make up their minds right away. Its not like he is a rookie.
0 x

mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3501
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN

Re: Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by mansquatch » Tue May 02, 2017 8:40 am

I think they'll sit on it until next year. If they are stuck on SB they'll Franchise him and pay him big ticket money. This situation stinks, but RIGHT NOW, their best move is to be patient.
0 x
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi

User avatar
chicagopurple
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1269
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 am

Re: Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by chicagopurple » Tue May 02, 2017 8:55 am

Latest news out is that Teddy has nerve damage, and much like Sharif, this is not something that will heal. What a crappy way to end a career that never really had a chance to shine.
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37407
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by Mothman » Tue May 02, 2017 9:05 am

There are conflicting reports about the nerve damage but Tom pelissero (who is pretty reliable0 is still reporting that Bridgewater didn't suffer nerve damage.

The info about the nerve damage seems to stem froma report by peter King that was changed shortly after it was originally posted. It appears King may have simply made a mistake and corrected it.

Ben Goessling has written a good piece about Bridgewater's situation for ESPN. It ends with this:

http://www.espn.com/blog/minnesota-viki ... -has-to-go
And if Bridgewater does return to the active roster sometime this fall, his contract would expire in March. He'd undoubtedly be looking to start in 2018, meaning the Vikings would have to decide if they'd seen enough to pick him over Bradford (provided they hadn't already signed Bradford at that point). Essentially, while there remains a path for Bridgewater to start for the Vikings again, the team isn't currently pointed in that direction. Something would have to change to get it there.

That's why Monday's decision was at once prudent and unsurprising. Cheery statements about Bridgewater's recovery are one thing; in the uncharitable world of the NFL, eight-figure financial commitments are another. It's possible the 24-year-old quarterback will still earn one of those from the Vikings, but he's going to have to meet a heavy burden of proof to make that happen.
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37407
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by Mothman » Tue May 02, 2017 9:15 am

RFIP wrote:Why does no one seem to understand what is REALLY going on here?

If TB is on PUP all season, which is a REAL possibility, then this year becomes voided and the Vikings have until NEXT May to pick up his 5th 9would then be SIXTH) year option.

I mean this has been reported everywhere, how has it not found its way to this board???
It's been discussed here. There are probably just people who didn't see that discussion.
Plain and simple I think the Vikings are playing both ends against the middle and are going to get caught without ANY QB because Sam ain't signing ANY long term deal where the rug can be pulled out from under him again BUT, that said, Bridgewater is FAR from gone in Minny as of right now.
It's hard to tell if the Vikings comments about Bridgewater are primarily intended to be encouraging and supportive or if they indicate a genuine belief he can still be their starter down the road. I suspect Bradford's fate is in his own hands or, more precisely, that it hinges mainly on his performance this year. If he stays healthy and plays well enough to convince the Vikings he should remain their starter going forward, the job will likely be his, with a lucrative extension and an assurance that he is the starter. If he feels too threatened by Bridgewater (or any other young QB) at that point to sign, good luck to him elsewhere. A starting QB needs to be able to handle competition.
0 x

Nunin
Pro Bowl Elite Player
Posts: 567
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2016 12:40 am

Re: Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by Nunin » Tue May 02, 2017 9:24 am

As of now, when each is fully healthy, I find SB to be the superior QB by a decent margin. It's especially obvious when running a system like like Turner's.
The conundrum is that, IMO, TB was miscast in Norv's system...like most of the offense was.
TB has lots of potential for growth and would be a stud in the type of system Shurmur looks to be employing. SB will be good in it also...just older and less likely to scare teams with his feet, although he can get out and move the chains.
-
It'd be a tough choice if TB makes a full recovery. Neither would want to play second fiddle given the need for starters leaguewide.
Personally, if I'm calling the shots...., I let TB go just because I don't think I could trust that knee going forward...especially as a starting QB who has so little overall experience in the league vs Bradford.
0 x

AlldayPotter
Backup
Posts: 74
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 12:17 pm

Re: Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by AlldayPotter » Tue May 02, 2017 9:37 am

What is it looking like for QBs next year in draft? Better than this years?

If sam does well and goes 10-6 or better than we should extend him, otherwise if we play poorly we should look to draft QB next year.

Sucks for Teddy, but we can't sit and wait forever
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37407
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by Mothman » Tue May 02, 2017 10:11 am

AlldayPotter wrote:What is it looking like for QBs next year in draft? Better than this years?
As I understand it, at this point next year's draft is being viewed as a deep draft for the QB position.
If sam does well and goes 10-6 or better than we should extend him, otherwise if we play poorly we should look to draft QB next year.
I think they should draft one anyway!
0 x

mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3501
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN

Re: Vikings decline 5th-year option on Bridgewater

Post by mansquatch » Tue May 02, 2017 10:31 am

Just going to throw this log on the fire...

Premise #1: SB has a better arm than TB.

Premise #2: TB has far better mobility than SB.

So... assuming both are healthy in 2018, who do we want?

To me the mobility adds an ability to produce something from nothing. It also helps offset some protection issues.

However... a QB in the NFL is a passer first. Can TB do enough of what SB can do with his arm to be viable? This latter question is not that dissimilar to the one we were asking before TB got hurt coming out of 2015. Basically the question was, could TB throw 10 more TDs, maybe 500 more yards and keep his INT numbers down? If yes, we felt we had a chance to contend.

SB actually did produce those numbers, more or less, last year despite all the OL woes and sabotaged drives.

Teddy is 24. SB is 29.

Do we go for the guy who has done what we hoped for and hope with better protection he does more? Or do we go for the guy we hope can do what we need, plus has legs?

Keep in mind, this scenario can change dramatically as information is learned. Teddy's health, Sam's play this year, etc.

Given what we know today, I think the most likely scenario is that SB is the starter going forward. This is mostly based on the fact that TB had a potentially career ending injury and we just do not have any tangible reason to believe he isn't done beyond hope. I hope he does come back and makes this decision a hard one. It would be a great feel good story and great for Teddy, but it just doesn't feel like a likely outcome.
0 x
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi

Post Reply