Young Theodore 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

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by Mothman »

There's a nice article about Bridgewater on the Strib site today:
http://www.startribune.com/vikings-quar ... 305269651/
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by dead_poet »

Mothman wrote:There's a nice article about Bridgewater on the Strib site today:
http://www.startribune.com/vikings-quar ... 305269651/
I'll be anxious to see his chemistry with Wallace. I thought he made an interesting comment re: Kyle Rudolph in a separate piece.
"I think the biggest weapon we have right now is a healthy Kyle Rudolph," Bridgewater said. "He's like a new player out there."
When it comes to offensive weapons, Rudolph doesn't come to mind in my top-2 (Peterson, Wallace, though Teddy did say "right now" and "right now" Peterson is MIA). It's encouraging to think we actually may not have seen the best of Kyle Rudolph yet. If he can stay healthy (granted a bit "if"), with Norv at the helm he adds another element and size advantage in the passing game.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by Mothman »

dead_poet wrote: I'll be anxious to see his chemistry with Wallace. I thought he made an interesting comment re: Kyle Rudolph in a separate piece.
When it comes to offensive weapons, Rudolph doesn't come to mind in my top-2 (Peterson, Wallace, though Teddy did say "right now" and "right now" Peterson is MIA). It's encouraging to think we actually may not have seen the best of Kyle Rudolph yet. If he can stay healthy (granted a bit "if"), with Norv at the helm he adds another element and size advantage in the passing game.
Maybe he meant "biggest" in a literal sense. :)

I'm anxious to see what kind of chemistry Bridgewater develops with Wallace too. However, the player I'm most eager to see in the passing game this year is Patterson. i really want to see him improve and I want to see what adjustments, if any, Turner makes to the way he utilizes Patterson.

I'm pretty eager to see what Wright's role will be this year too. I thought he had his best season last year.
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by dead_poet »

Mothman wrote:Maybe he meant "biggest" in a literal sense. :)
I was going to mention that. Rudolph is pretty big, though he might look short if he stands next to Babs, which would be a fun photo.
I'm anxious to see what kind of chemistry Bridgewater develops with Wallace too. However, the player I'm most eager to see in the passing game this year is Patterson. i really want to see him improve and I want to see what adjustments, if any, Turner makes to the way he utilizes Patterson.
You're not alone, there. Patterson has a lot riding on this season. Hopefully both he and Turner can maximize his talents.
I'm pretty eager to see what Wright's role will be this year too. I thought he had his best season last year.
I thought so, too. He's been a good fourth-round selection by Spielman. Too bad his playing partner suffered a career-ending injury. Lots of mouths to feed and it's nice to see a talented and deep receiver corps. I'll also be interested to see if Diggs can earn some snaps on offense and at whose expense. Or will he wrangle the punt return job away from Sherels and cost Sherels his roster spot? At full strength this offense has potential to score a lot of points, particularly if Peterson is on the field and if the offensive line can improve even slightly.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by dead_poet »

An interesting read.

Projecting Teddy Bridgewater's Sophomore Season
Since 1991, Norv Turner has spent time with eight different NFL franchises, and has had 29 different quarterbacks attempt at least one pass in his system in the NFL. Using the information found at Pro Football Reference, I compiled detailed passing statistics for all 29 players during the years they played under Turner to see what, if any, trends might exist. First, here is a list of facts about quarterback performances in Turner's offense that I was able to glean from the database:
http://www.dailynorseman.com/2015/5/26/ ... ore-season
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
DK Sweets
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2908
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 8:46 am
Location: Missouri

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by DK Sweets »

Did that article ever answer its own question?
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by Mothman »

DK Sweets wrote:Did that article ever answer its own question?
:lol: I can see why you'd ask that.yes, the author said he thinks it's very likely that Bridgewater's performance will fall somewhere between his rookie season and the "Turner Ceiling QB" stat line he posted as the last chart in the article.
DK Sweets
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2908
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2013 8:46 am
Location: Missouri

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by DK Sweets »

Mothman wrote: :lol: I can see why you'd ask that.yes, the author said he thinks it's very likely that Bridgewater's performance will fall somewhere between his rookie season and the "Turner Ceiling QB" stat line he posted as the last chart in the article.
Wait - the author used 1900 words and a lot of stats to say that Teddy is likely to fall somewhere in between his own rookie performance and a veteran Pro-Bowl level?

:thumbsup: This has the DK Stamp of Approval™.
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by Mothman »

DK Sweets wrote:Wait - the author used 1900 words and a lot of stats to say that Teddy is likely to fall somewhere in between his own rookie performance and a veteran Pro-Bowl level?

:thumbsup: This has the DK Stamp of Approval™.
:rofl:
Cliff
Site Admin
Posts: 9489
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:51 pm
Location: Kentucky
x 432

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by Cliff »

Minnesota Vikings QB Teddy Bridgewater excited to have Kyle Rudolph back

http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/minn ... ack-060115
Blazing fast wide receiver Mike Wallace is a valuable addition to Teddy Bridgewater's passing arsenal, but that doesn't mean Minnesota Vikings quarterback is overlooking the impact tight end Kyle Rudolph is primed to have in 2015.
"I’ll tell you, what’s even a better addition is have Kyle Rudolph back healthy," Bridgewater told Matt Vensel of the Star-Tribune. "He’s like a whole new player on the team."

As a rookie last year, Bridgewater never got a real chance to see Rudolph at 100 percent. The tight end battled through sports hernia surgery, as well as knee and ankle injuries. Back in 2012, Rudolph was a Pro Bowler with 53 catches for 493 yards and nine touchdowns.
John_Viveiros
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2450
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2003 8:55 pm
Location: Olympia, Washington

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by John_Viveiros »

I don't know if I can take all the love the Vikes are getting now. Go through this list one by one, and see where our guys land...

I'm not telling! Don't give it away, just start at 50 and work your way up without spoiling for the next guy.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2330 ... 014/page/1
Vikings28
Starter
Posts: 154
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 2:48 pm

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by Vikings28 »

John_Viveiros wrote:I don't know if I can take all the love the Vikes are getting now. Go through this list one by one, and see where our guys land...

I'm not telling! Don't give it away, just start at 50 and work your way up without spoiling for the next guy.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2330 ... 014/page/1
Matt Miller was probably Teddy's biggest fan pre-draft. Had him ranked #1 all along and even compared him to Rodgers at one point during the college season. Still nice to see the love though.
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by dead_poet »

Adrian Peterson is Back: How Does This Help the Offense?

http://vikingsjournal.com/_/minnesota-v ... fense-r571
It turns out a strong running game does help the passing game but not quite in that way. While it’s true that Peterson did face an 8-man (or more) box more than most running backs—the third-most in 2012—it was on stunningly few carries. Only 34.5% of his carries were against that 8-man box, according to PFF (and only 30% of his carries, according to ESPN).

More importantly, an 8-man box is not interesting if it is against a heavy front with two tight ends and a fullback—with the five offensive linemen, that’s 8 blockers against 8 defenders, an advantage for Peterson and not a unique look the defense is giving because of Peterson’s talent, but the offense’s personnel.

It turns out that Peterson’s 8-man boxes were in sets with one wideout. In sets with one wide receiver or fewer, Peterson actually faced fewer 8-man boxes than league average: only 10 percent.

Defenses adjust to personnel much more than people, and they are not very likely to give the Vikings favorable passing looks, especially knowing how Teddy Bridgewater closed the season last year.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
mondry
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8455
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:53 pm

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by mondry »

dead_poet wrote:Adrian Peterson is Back: How Does This Help the Offense?

http://vikingsjournal.com/_/minnesota-v ... fense-r571
Yeah, I've been talking about this for years when people would complain about not being able to pass with 8 or even 9 in the box. If you yourself as an offense have 9 or 10 guys in the box (you have to count the quarterback) there's no advantage at all. Musgrave did this a lot with his cluster bunched formations and I'm not going to get into if that was worth it or not (like anything it had pros and cons) but that's the perfect example.

It also matters if 8 in the box is occurring on like 3rd down and 8 instead of say 1st and 10.

I've always wanted them to SPREAD the field instead of condense it with Peterson because I believe his true benefit would be for them to play the nickel defense on running downs, taking one of the run stopping LB's off the field in favor of a nickel corner back who will significantly less weight / tackling ability when it comes to stopping Peterson. Of course if they don't bring in the 3rd CB and continue to play a LB than the passing game has a mismatch so then we're truly talking about pick your poison.
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Young Theodore Bridgewater

Post by Mothman »

mondry wrote:Yeah, I've been talking about this for years when people would complain about not being able to pass with 8 or even 9 in the box. If you yourself as an offense have 9 or 10 guys in the box (you have to count the quarterback) there's no advantage at all. Musgrave did this a lot with his cluster bunched formations and I'm not going to get into if that was worth it or not (like anything it had pros and cons) but that's the perfect example.
It all depends on how the defense lines up. If the formation has a WR on the outside who the coaches believe can beat single coverage and the bunch formation isolates him against a defender, theoretically, that should be an advantage. It's not just a numbers game, it's a matchup game.
I've always wanted them to SPREAD the field instead of condense it with Peterson because I believe his true benefit would be for them to play the nickel defense on running downs, taking one of the run stopping LB's off the field in favor of a nickel corner back who will significantly less weight / tackling ability when it comes to stopping Peterson. Of course if they don't bring in the 3rd CB and continue to play a LB than the passing game has a mismatch so then we're truly talking about pick your poison.
Spreading the field has it's drawbacks too. There are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches, which is why I've always thought mixing it up is the best approach.
Post Reply