Vikings Message Board.Com

VikingPaul73 wrote: OK I don't hesitate to criticize Slick Rick for what I think are some busts (won't get into those specifics in a positive thread). But since I do that I have to give him credit for finding this diamond in the rough....and late round pick and Packers castoff. Nice nice pickup.

Rick, or the ex-Browns OC who was on the Browns when they signed him off the Packers practice squad last year? Have a feeling Norv had quite a bit of input on bringing him here. Thank goodness Rick has some competent help...remember a lot of picking Harrison was the coaching staff working with him in the senior bowl too! Maybe his draft/free agent strategy will work a bit better working with competent coaching!

Demi wrote: Rick, or the ex-Browns OC who was on the Browns when they signed him off the Packers practice squad last year? Have a feeling Norv had quite a bit of input on bringing him here. Thank goodness Rick has some competent help...remember a lot of picking Harrison was the coaching staff working with him in the senior bowl too! Maybe his draft/free agent strategy will work a bit better working with competent coaching!

It's almost like GM's and coaching staffs should be expected to complement each other with talent evaluation. It's all part of the process. I hope they continue to hit on these guys going forward.

Demi wrote: Rick, or the ex-Browns OC who was on the Browns when they signed him off the Packers practice squad last year? Have a feeling Norv had quite a bit of input on bringing him here. Thank goodness Rick has some competent help...remember a lot of picking Harrison was the coaching staff working with him in the senior bowl too! Maybe his draft/free agent strategy will work a bit better working with competent coaching!

Yeah that's what coaches are suppose to do. It's not like Spielman just goes out and plucks guys out of a crowd without consulting anyone. If they fit the offense/defense, then he will look into signing them.

saint33 wrote:
why easily? Bridgewater threw for more yards, the same number of TDs (counting the Charles Johnson fumble). Carr had a better completion percentage and didn't throw a meaningless INT on the last play of the game.

I think it's a pretty even battle, depends who's fans rally more and vote for em

Not sure how happy the Raider fans are after the win. They just dropped from 1st to 5th in the draft so they may not vote.

Doesn't mean much, but without the fumble and hail mary INT, Teddy's rating would be 145.4.

maembe wrote:Is it bad that I get really annoyed when things that have no impact on the game negatively affect Teddy's stats (the fumble td and hail mary int)? Even if it has no bearing on how well Teddy actually played, I really want the people who didn't watch the game to be impressed with his stats.

HAHA your a F-ing bad-A

maembe wrote:Is it bad that I get really annoyed when things that have no impact on the game negatively affect Teddy's stats (the fumble td and hail mary int)? Even if it has no bearing on how well Teddy actually played, I really want the people who didn't watch the game to be impressed with his stats.

Teddy had a very good game. I would not worry about the stat sheet or the concern that you have that people that did not watch the game might be thrown off by the meaningless int. he threw into the endzone. It happens all of the time in football going for the "Hail Mary".
Maybe those that did not watch the game will be impressed more by his 300 yd game not seeing that his 5 yd. pass converted into 87 of those yards in an overtime when in the regular time he would have ended up with 213.

Purple bruise wrote: Teddy had a very good game. I would not worry about the stat sheet or the concern that you have that people that did not watch the game might be thrown off by the meaningless int. he threw into the endzone. It happens all of the time in football going for the "Hail Mary".
Maybe those that did not watch the game will be impressed more by his 300 yd game not seeing that his 5 yd. pass converted into 87 of those yards in an overtime when in the regular time he would have ended up with 213.

Not taking anything away from Teddy but that wasn't even a 5 yard pass as it was behind the line of scrimmage. Those type of plays really skew passing yard stats. I think they should have another category/stat for actual passing yards (line of scrimmage to where it was caught) which they can already determine because they have a YAC stat (yards after catch). After the ball is caught any yards gained after the catch are technically gained by the receiver (on the ground, not through the air), and have nothing to do with the qb. IMO, passing yards should be just that, yards gained through the air and would be a better indicator of how good a qb is at 'passing' rather than just the total passing yards stat used today.

Purple Reign wrote: Not taking anything away from Teddy but that wasn't even a 5 yard pass as it was behind the line of scrimmage. Those type of plays really skew passing yard stats. I think they should have another category/stat for actual passing yards (line of scrimmage to where it was caught) which they can already determine because they have a YAC stat (yards after catch). After the ball is caught any yards gained after the catch are technically gained by the receiver (on the ground, not through the air), and have nothing to do with the qb. IMO, passing yards should be just that, yards gained through the air and would be a better indicator of how good a qb is at 'passing' rather than just the total passing yards stat used today.

I wouldn't say YAC has nothing to do with the QB. Ball placement plays a critical part in YAC. Also, if a QB read the defense and the YAC is a result of the read, shouldn't the QB get some credit for the result?

If you don't give the YAC to the QB, do you also take away the TDs if it wasn't caught in the endzone?

Purple Reign wrote: Not taking anything away from Teddy but that wasn't even a 5 yard pass as it was behind the line of scrimmage. Those type of plays really skew passing yard stats. I think they should have another category/stat for actual passing yards (line of scrimmage to where it was caught) which they can already determine because they have a YAC stat (yards after catch). After the ball is caught any yards gained after the catch are technically gained by the receiver (on the ground, not through the air), and have nothing to do with the qb. IMO, passing yards should be just that, yards gained through the air and would be a better indicator of how good a qb is at 'passing' rather than just the total passing yards stat used today.

That system would completely negate pre-snap QB reads like what Teddy did on that last play. According to Ben Goessling, the play called for a longer pass but Teddy saw the pressure and knew if he could get the pass in the hands of a guy who could get past the first line of defense that we'd have a great chance at a huge play - so he audibled to the bubble screen.

Teddy could have kept the original play and threw the ball further in the air downfield which would net him more yards in your suggested system, but he made the right call by audibling to a shorter throw (in terms of the LOS) against that defense.

Purple Reign wrote: Not taking anything away from Teddy but that wasn't even a 5 yard pass as it was behind the line of scrimmage. Those type of plays really skew passing yard stats. I think they should have another category/stat for actual passing yards (line of scrimmage to where it was caught) which they can already determine because they have a YAC stat (yards after catch). After the ball is caught any yards gained after the catch are technically gained by the receiver (on the ground, not through the air), and have nothing to do with the qb. IMO, passing yards should be just that, yards gained through the air and would be a better indicator of how good a qb is at 'passing' rather than just the total passing yards stat used today.

I'm not saying it applies to Teddy on the last play yesterday (because that is a good example where the WR made a play essentially on his own), but it's ludicrous to say that any yardage gained after the catch has nothing to with the QB. Great quarterbacks lead their receivers - they find the open receiver, and get the ball in their hands with open field in front of them. Pro Football Focus has a stat for it, called 'yards in air'. So far this season, Colin Kaepernick leads the NFL in % of his passing yardage that has come in the air, prior to YAC. Brian Hoyer is 2nd. Aaron Rodgers is 17th, 3 spots lower than Austin Davis. Derek Carr is 11th, 2 spots before Tom Brady. Ryan Fitzpatrick is 5th.

What you're saying has merit in certain situations, a lot of college offenses with a strong scheme and ample playmakers inflate quarterback passing yardage and completion percentage by using short passes near the line of scrimmage, allowing the playmakers to make yardage after the catch. But to say any yardage gained after the catch has nothing to do with the QB? I don't agree with that at all.

For those that trust PFF (including week 14):

PFF's top-rated QBs since week 8 (Vikings at Tampa):
1. Brees
2. Rodgers
3. Brady
4. Big Ben
5. Tannehill
6. Palmer
7. Luck
8. Bridgewater

808vikingsfan wrote:For those that trust PFF (including week 14):

I assume that those are based off of their "grades". I don't trust them. Much too subjective, IMO.

I trust their quantifiable 'signature stats', such as the one I referenced above (yards in air %). The raw data they provide, which is tangible, and is not made up by a human judgement, I love those numbers.

Not a fan of PFF grading though.

a few from twitter:

Krauser @Krauserrific

Bridgewater continues to improve.
Since the back-to-back INTs in Buffalo:
135/213 (63.4%) for 1460 yards (6.9 YPA), 10 TD, 3 INT, PR 93.2

Krauser‏@Krauserrific

Bridgewater's passer rating on the season now up to 82.4, highest by a qualifying Vikings starter since Favre 2009.

Ryan Boser
‏@Ryan_Boser

23 seconds was way too much time for Teddy.

Here's what I like:

Bridgewater's completion percentage and yards per attempt numbers against Tampa Bay, Washington, Chicago and Green Bay were:

TB—57.1%; 5.7 ypa
WA—61.9%; 6.4 ypa
CHI—64.3%; 5.6 ypa
GB—56.8%; 5.7 ypa

In the last two games:

CAR—71.4%; 6.6 ypa
NYJ—70.4%; 11.4 ypa

When those two stats are rising together, that's a great sign.

Mothman wrote:Here's what I like:

Bridgewater's completion percentage and yards per attempt numbers against Tampa Bay, Washington, Chicago and Green Bay were:

TB—57.1%; 5.7 ypa
WA—61.9%; 6.4 ypa
CHI—64.3%; 5.6 ypa
GB—56.8%; 5.7 ypa

In the last two games:

CAR—71.4%; 6.6 ypa
NYJ—70.4%; 11.4 ypa

When those two stats are rising together, that's a great sign.

Agreed. I think it's also fair to say his passes have more...ooompf, shall we say, on them as compared to earlier in the season. That coupled with quicker decision making, and I think we're seeing a quarterbacks improving game to game (for the most part).