Sam Bradford's a Viking

[Texas Vike]

KC and Foles? Bucs aand Glennon?

I've got nothin'.

My guesses too.

McCarron is another likely candidate.

I honestly didn't think they'd take this course of action, so that SI piece that DP posted was super insightful to get an inside glimpse into how the Ricker dealt with the situation.

[chicagopurple]

SO, I waited a few days for my head to stop spinning before dropping a line here.
I have come to conclude that, on the field, it has yet to be remotely proven that we lost anything by swapping Teddy for Bradford. Both have yet to perform up to expectations, both have shown limited downfield games, both have been hampered by crappy OLs.
Bradford was expensive but only due to the urgent timing of our need. Thats not his fault, its Spielmans fault for having NO foresight.

QB seems to have possibly worked its way out for this year. The OL remains a giant gaping, purulent hole.....again Spielmans fault for a blind lack of judgement.....Loadhold and Sully (esp Sully) were highly likely to not return or at least never make it through a season. I cannot believe he didnt take a swing a landing more OL starters (oh I dont know, how about a Pro-Bowl cast off from GB maybe....nah.....we're good!...NOT).

If things go bad at QB this year I suspect it will not be Bradfords fault but rather the OL and Spielman

[PurpleMustReign]

KC and Foles? Bucs aand Glennon?

I've got nothin'.

Favre???

[Purple Martin]

lol

[cogitator]

I've gone through the usual thing football fans go through when your team does something, uh, odd. The 5 stages of grief - Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression and Acceptance.

So I'm now at the Acceptance stage, I think giving up a first round pick for a serviceable qb is not the worst thing to ever happen, I can live with it.

[PurpleHalo]

SO, I waited a few days for my head to stop spinning before dropping a line here.
I have come to conclude that, on the field, it has yet to be remotely proven that we lost anything by swapping Teddy for Bradford. Both have yet to perform up to expectations, both have shown limited downfield games, both have been hampered by crappy OLs.
Bradford was expensive but only due to the urgent timing of our need. Thats not his fault, its Spielmans fault for having NO foresight.

QB seems to have possibly worked its way out for this year. The OL remains a giant gaping, purulent hole.....again Spielmans fault for a blind lack of judgement.....Loadhold and Sully (esp Sully) were highly likely to not return or at least never make it through a season. I cannot believe he didnt take a swing a landing more OL starters (oh I dont know, how about a Pro-Bowl cast off from GB maybe....nah.....we're good!...NOT).

If things go bad at QB this year I suspect it will not be Bradfords fault but rather the OL and Spielman

It's very unlikely the Vikings would have been able to afford Sitton. The Bears gave him 10m guranteed. Combine that with the 7m the Vikings took on with Bradford. They were at about 5m in space before they released Sullivan, not sure how much relief that gave them. But doubtful it was enough to add Bradford and Sitton.

[Jordysghost]

This is where I always get stuck with you. See, since 2009 you've had the benefit of having one of he best QBs in football. His GM designed his offense to have multiple great receivers and despite what you think about his O-line, his sacks have usually been because he was waiting to make a play, not because his line was practically useless 30% of the time.

You have been conditioned to believe that statistics tell the whole story. You seemingly have little foundation for putting statistics into perspective, because for years you have had the best QB in the league and the numbers have said so as well. But truly, you have no idea what it's like to have a QB trying to cover the faults of an atrocious O-line, a WR corps where a 5th round rookie is the leader, and a RB who struggles with receiving and pass protection.

For some of us, it feels like you struggle to contextualize, and it's increasingly frustrating.

For what it's worth, I don't know if I agree or disagree with you that Bradford can at least be as good as Bridgewater would have been this year, but I find your argument to be poopie.

Oh PLEASE, what a load of delusional garbage, Rodgers didn't start holding on to the ball trying to make a play with any consistancy until around 2010, he has and has always had one of the quickest releases and fastest anticipation in the league, those 08, 09, and probably even 11 lines? They were WORSE then your current line, YOUR tryng to tell me that my teams O lines weren't that terrible and it was all Rodgers, and honestly, you don't have the slightest damn clue what you are talking about, if those O lines were protecting anyone besides Rodgers, with his mobility, lightning fast release and great decision making, they would likely have given up just under 70 sacks a year in those days. Bridgewater on the 08 or 09 Packers? Can you say record for sacks taken in a year?

Here we go again with the excuse making, Teddy has never had to carry the load like Rodgers did in his first few years as a starter, NEVER. Don't tell me 'I don't know what its like' because I do, except the biggest difference? Teddy has AD, something Rodgers never had. You act as if Rodgers teams have been so much better then Teddys early in his career but there is litterally nothing to suggest that is the case. Worse O line, worse RBs, and WRs that likely weren't much greater then Wallace, Diggs, and Wright, but produced on account of their star QB.

Now I don't expect Bridgewater to produce or carry his team like Rodgers did as a youngin, that is an unfair expectation, but don't claim that he is in a situation worse then Rodgers ever had to deal with because that simply is wrong on every level. You clearly have absolutely no idea what you are talking about in regards to what situation Rodgers had to put up with in comparison to Bridgewater, the basis of your excuse is O line but Rodgers has had O lines far worse then the one Bridgewater has.

I have no problem contextualizing statistics, but in this situation, I think it is pretty clear that you aren't worried about actually 'contextualizing' Bridgewaters production, and more worried about finding and clinging to any excuse you can for his mediocre play, lots of young QBs have had to deal with bad O lines, not many had a top 10 D and HOF RB to bail them out, but Bridgewater's production is still what it is, mediocre.

[Cliff]

I recommend going back and watching the Eagles 3rd preseason game. I thought Bradford looked sharp.

Sent using tapatalk. Typos should be expected.

[RFIP]

SO, I waited a few days for my head to stop spinning before dropping a line here.
I have come to conclude that, on the field, it has yet to be remotely proven that we lost anything by swapping Teddy for Bradford. Both have yet to perform up to expectations, both have shown limited downfield games, both have been hampered by crappy OLs.
Bradford was expensive but only due to the urgent timing of our need. Thats not his fault, its Spielmans fault for having NO foresight.

QB seems to have possibly worked its way out for this year. The OL remains a giant gaping, purulent hole.....again Spielmans fault for a blind lack of judgement.....Loadhold and Sully (esp Sully) were highly likely to not return or at least never make it through a season. I cannot believe he didnt take a swing a landing more OL starters (oh I dont know, how about a Pro-Bowl cast off from GB maybe....nah.....we're good!...NOT).

If things go bad at QB this year I suspect it will not be Bradfords fault but rather the OL and Spielman

This is by far the best team Sam has ever played for. I simply cannot wait till he gets comfortable in the offense because he is going to be outstanding in it.

I've seen every throw he's ever made since his first start at OU. He's been saddled by crap "weapons" since 2010...even then GM Billy Devaney has made that statement saying; "we failed Sam, we never put play makers around him.."

I'm hopeful he'll start this week at Tennessee but only he knows when he is comfortable enough to take the reigns.

Looking forward to this season!

[Maelstrom88]

This is by far the best team Sam has ever played for. I simply cannot wait till he gets comfortable in the offense because he is going to be outstanding in it.

I've seen every throw he's ever made since his first start at OU. He's been saddled by crap "weapons" since 2010...even then GM Billy Devaney has made that statement saying; "we failed Sam, we never put play makers around him.."

I'm hopeful he'll start this week at Tennessee but only he knows when he is comfortable enough to take the reigns.

Looking forward to this season!

Welcome! Are you Sam's friend? I am from STL (pre L.A. Rams fan) and I can confirm Billy definitely failed Sam. I am intrigued to see how he does with the Vikings. I think if they can protect him he is capable of having his best season yet.

[petev_sj]

I recommend going back and watching the Eagles 3rd preseason game. I thought Bradford looked sharp.

Sent using tapatalk. Typos should be expected.

Bradford has always been known for his pin point accuracy. Some of the windows the kid can fit the ball into was Montana-esques. I just cross my fingers that Bradford has finally developed that situational aware that Franchise QBs have. It's great you can keep your eyes down field but a true franchise QB is also aware of what is happening to his left and his right side.

If Bradford looks good with this O line, what excuses will the Teddy fanboys on this forum have then?

[Jordysghost]

Bradford has always been known for his pin point accuracy. Some of the windows the kid can fit the ball into was Montana-esques. I just cross my fingers that Bradford has finally developed that situational aware that Franchise QBs have. It's great you can keep your eyes down field but a true franchise QB is also aware of what is happening to his left and his right side.

If Bradford looks good with this O line, what excuses will the Teddy fanboys on this forum have then?

I would imagine they would pin it on a massive enlightenment at the OL position, and the bards would sing legends of the terrible O line of '15 that sabotaged Teddy the Magnificent's surely awesome would be season.

[petev_sj]

I recommend going back and watching the Eagles 3rd preseason game. I thought Bradford looked sharp.

Sent using tapatalk. Typos should be expected.

Great breakdown of Bradford's 3rd preseason game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qirRKzmq2FE

Obvious Bradford fan boy is obvious but the guy makes some great points and observation. BTW, how come we don't have someone in this forum breakdown film that this guy?

[jackal]

Mothman

I assume you meant he'll need a pocket that doesn't collapse to be effective.

I call it the horseshoe method.. everyone drops back a step or two(and angle a small pocket
or horseshoe and the tackles just force the rusher outside a let them run a wide circle. I am sure
there is a different name for it but the quarterback moves up
and throws the ball or throws it out of bounds. This method would allow four receivers at once
it accepts the rush will get there, it just gives enough time for the wide outs to run to there cut
or break.

[mansquatch]

I decided to sit on this one for a few days to think about it before wading in on here. I look at it as this:

Cons:
Injury History
High Cost (any solution other than Hill was going to be expensive)

Pros:
Arm Strength
Signed through 2017 (If TB isn't ready to go next September)
Experience

Other points:
Going into this year if you were sober you realized that on offense how far we would go would come down to whether or not the PPG went up by 4-7 points. This basically came down to two things: 1.) Can the OL protect and 2.) Can TB turn into a 25TD / 12 INT QB vs. a 14TD / 9INT QB. It seemed highly doubtful that Hill would have been able to give us 25/12. Bradford has a chance to do this. So in that respect the change is now we wonder if Bradford can do instead of Bridgewater.

I'm not sure how mobile or immobile Bradford is, but I get the sense that he is not as elusive and TB, so again, the OL is a major issue. Not new, but probably a more acute problem that it was with TB. This is the same as Hill although probably not as bad. In addition, I think there is a factor of how long it takes Sam to get a handle on the offense and develop chemistry with his pass catchers. The latter item is likely the biggest challenge in the short term. I doubt he is ready on Sunday, but can he be ready for the home opener?

An open question for me is that Bradford has never been a winner in the NFL. It seems that we are betting a lot of marbles that this had more to do with the teams he played on than Bradford himself. He is going to have to show us that is not the case.

Another under-rated pro of this move is the team morale. The Leadership just showed the roster that they want to win are not going to just throw this season to the side because the QB went down. I have to think that will help with player retention over the long run. Imagine if you are Chad Greenway when TB went down, just heartbreaking. In that respect I suspect this move was a huge boost to locker room morale.

If they make a run at the SB, the 1st round pick will be a cheap cost. If they flounder this will likely overshadow a good amount of the mostly great work Spielman has done. (Unfairly IMO, his hands are all over the majority of the young players on our roster.) Whether it works out or not, I love that they had the guts to do this. It is a high risk/high reward move, but they are doing it at the right time. They have a legitimate, if imperfect, window with this roster. TB going down closes that window. Now it is potentially open again, albeit at a steep cost. I just have to admire how ballsy this is.