Big Decision for the Vikings at QB

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
33,680
Reaction score
8,914
Location
Madison, WI
I tried posting this in "other teams discussion", but I have a feeling it will just get buried by the Forum bot. Mods, if you don't feel this belongs in this section, you won't offend me if you delete it. However, since the Vikings are division rivals and maybe one of their 3 QB's could end up on our roster, thought it worthy to discuss.

I am intrigued by the decision facing the Vikings at QB. They have 3 QB's that could be starters in the NFL. Who will the Vikings keep and why? Or, do they let all 3 walk and try to sign a guy like Alex Smith if he is released by the Chiefs?

I would rank the probabilities as follows:
  1. Stick with Keenum (55%): He took them pretty far in 2017, so why mess with something that worked.
  2. Hand the job back over to Teddy (25%): If Teddy can come all the way back from his injury and stay healthy, he is probably the best QB of the 3, but that injury has to be a pretty big concern.
  3. Dump all three and sign a top FA QB (15%): The Vikings have the cap space to do this. They may just be one solid QB away from getting to the SB. But still risky bringing a completely new guy into the system.
  4. Go back to Bradford (5%): While Bradford wasn't a bad option, his injury history, age and the fact that he wasn't able to consistently win, leads me to believe they let him walk. For the right price, I would be fine with him as the Packers #2.
The Vikings decision will probably hinge on how good they think their system made Keenum and vice versa. While their offense wasn't a juggernaut, #10 in PPG is good and Keenum had a pretty good year, but would Teddy, Sam or another QB make their offense just that much better?
 

rmontro

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2017
Messages
4,857
Reaction score
1,452
Just going off impulse, I would say keep Keenum and Bridgewater, let Bradford go.
I kind of like the suggestion of Bradford for Packers backup, if that's feasible.
 
OP
OP
Pokerbrat2000

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
33,680
Reaction score
8,914
Location
Madison, WI
Just going off impulse, I would say keep Keenum and Bridgewater, let Bradford go.
I kind of like the suggestion of Bradford for Packers backup, if that's feasible.

I think Bradford could be a relatively cheap option for the Packers, but I wouldn't be opposed to Bridgewater over Hundley either. Guessing Teddy will want to go somewhere that he has a shot at starting though.

Keenum will command the most money of the 3.
 

swhitset

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 28, 2015
Messages
4,381
Reaction score
1,259
I think Bradford could be a relatively cheap option for the Packers, but I wouldn't be opposed to Bridgewater over Hundley either. Guessing Teddy will want to go somewhere that he has a shot at starting though.

Keenum will command the most money of the 3.
I would be surprised if Bradford came as cheaply as is being suggested. There are always teams looking for a starter... and the Vikings were willing to give up a first rounder for him a year ago.... I agree that his age and injury history make him a bad risk... but it seems that there is always a team desperate enough to take such a risk.
 
OP
OP
Pokerbrat2000

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
33,680
Reaction score
8,914
Location
Madison, WI
I would be surprised if Bradford came as cheaply as is being suggested. There are always teams looking for a starter... and the Vikings were willing to give up a first rounder for him a year ago.... I agree that his age and injury history make him a bad risk... but it seems that there is always a team desperate enough to take such a risk.

Vikings obtained him 2 seasons ago, but yes, he is probably going to be in the "Jay Cutler" kind of money, which I don't see the Packers paying for a backup. Because of his injuries and average abilities, he may also be a guy that is hanging around in August/September waiting for a team to suffer an injury.
 

swhitset

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 28, 2015
Messages
4,381
Reaction score
1,259
Vikings obtained him 2 seasons ago, but yes, he is probably going to be in the "Jay Cutler" kind of money, which I don't see the Packers paying for a backup. Because of his injuries and average abilities, he may also be a guy that is hanging around in August/September waiting for a team to suffer an injury.
Yeah I was aware of the timing lol... I was being liberal with the timing since the trade happened in sept of 2016 .... that was a little less than 1 1/2 years ago and it was at the beginning of the last season ( since this season has not officially ended yet lol).
 

Sanguine camper

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 14, 2014
Messages
2,161
Reaction score
733
Teddy is just a game manager. His second year numbers were very pedestrian. Keenum may have hit his ceiling and not be capable of lifting a team to the SB. Bradford is a statue but has great accuracy and a big arm. He would thrive behind a solid o line. For the sake of the Packers, I hope Teddy is the man.
 

Poppa San

* Team Owner *
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
13,245
Reaction score
3,057
Location
20 miles from Lambeau
I tried posting this in "other teams discussion", but I have a feeling it will just get buried by the Forum bot.
Probably correct. As to speaking of other teams in this forum because of that, I have never made an issue of it. In fact, we already have an existing Viking thread which discusses many of these same issues. I'll merge them for you.

Edit: I changed my mind on the merge unless this leaves off as a QB discussion and turns into a general Vikings bashing thread.
 
Joined
Aug 16, 2014
Messages
15,905
Reaction score
6,830
I'm not sure we can afford Sam Bradford. I'd love to have him but would he play for the veteran minimum? :cautious: Seriously though I don't know that he could swallow his pride from what he's been making to what we would pay him. I might be wrong and it WOULD be great having a solid veteran that can air it out with some long range accuracy
 

PackerDNA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 8, 2014
Messages
6,793
Reaction score
1,723
I think Bradford will get a good offer and chance to start somewhere. Would like to have him, but I don't see it being feasible.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Vikings obtained him 2 seasons ago, but yes, he is probably going to be in the "Jay Cutler" kind of money, which I don't see the Packers paying for a backup.

There's absolutely no way the Packers should pay that kind of money for a backup quarterback.
 

bigbubbatd

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2015
Messages
1,679
Reaction score
166
I just don't see it with Bridgewater. They deactivated him the last game. He wasn't special before the injury so he likely isn't going to be special now. Bradford just has too many injury concerns meaning it is keenum or cousins for Minnesota. With how Zimmer wouldn't commit to Keenum most of the season i just wonder if they go outside for a guy like cousins
 

azrsx05

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
610
Reaction score
77
All of this just means Packers have options to sign a veteran QB. If they stick to Hundley or another rookie. They should have learned their lesson by now
 
OP
OP
Pokerbrat2000

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
33,680
Reaction score
8,914
Location
Madison, WI
If I am Zygi, I go all in on a QB. With their defense, Cook back from injury and a decent WR and TE, they would be hard to stop.
 
OP
OP
Pokerbrat2000

Pokerbrat2000

Opinions are like A-holes, we all have one.
Joined
Oct 30, 2012
Messages
33,680
Reaction score
8,914
Location
Madison, WI
They must have super faith in a 22yo Patrick Mahomes! Smith was good for chiefs but at 33, they must see him winding down soon.

Considering he is 5 months younger than Rodgers, I hope someone at his age isn't "winding down soon". From what I have read, they really like what they have seen out of Mahomes and trading Smith freed up the cap space they needed to get better. If I was a Chiefs fan, I would be a bit worried about Mahomes lack of experience, but I guess you have to get your feet wet eventually.
 

XPack

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
3,702
Reaction score
567
Location
Garden State
Considering he is 5 months younger than Rodgers, I hope someone at his age isn't "winding down soon". From what I have read, they really like what they have seen out of Mahomes and trading Smith freed up the cap space they needed to get better. If I was a Chiefs fan, I would be a bit worried about Mahomes lack of experience, but I guess you have to get your feet wet eventually.

Strengthening your team by getting rid of a good QB is a paradox :confused: If Patrick doesn't come good, they are stuck in limbo and probably will get to Bradford.

Or maybe we can trade them Hundley ;)
 

RepStar15

"We're going to relentlessly chase perfection."
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
1,469
Reaction score
277
Location
Cranston, RI
I think the Vikings have to stay with Keenum, Right? I mean, Bridgewater could be a massive question mark. I do not think they have the ability to pay both Keenum and Bridgewater this year, but am not sure about their cap situation.Sam Bradford is a second string QB, that is really a fact at this point. We have to worry about locking up Rodgers as far as our cap situation is concerned, but if we do that and have room, I would not mind bringing a guy like that in here. Hundley has to go. Everybody knows that.
 

ExpatPacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
1,840
Reaction score
236
Location
A Galaxy Far, Far Away
Which leaves Cousins without team..........could he end up in Minnesota? Interesting prospect to say the least.

Hmmmm, I could see that happening. That'd be a big plus for Minnesota. That would definitely make Bradford expendable. If the Packers can get him for a reasonable price I'd be all over it.
 

Members online

Top