The Teddy Bridgewater Thread

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

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

The Teddy Bridgewater Thread

Post by Mothman »

http://www.twincities.com/vikings/ci_29 ... onsistency
With Teddy Bridgewater in his second season as an NFL quarterback, this was supposed to be a season when he took a big jump.

It hasn't happened yet.

Yes, the Vikings are 5-2. However, the quarterback's statistics are similar to what they were last season.

Bridgewater's second season has been marred by inconsistency. That was the case at Chicago last Sunday, when he started out 11 of 22 for 81 yards with an interception before finishing 6 of 8 for 106 yards as the Vikings pulled out a 23-20 win.

"I think at times they've won despite him,'' said CBS analyst and former Vikings quarterback Rich Gannon. "I would also say we've got to be patient. So often we want to label these guys and after a year and a half say he's this type of player. ... But at the end of the day, I think he'd be the first to tell you he's got to play with more consistency.''

Bridgewater doesn't disagree. While he is pleased with his team's record, Bridgewater said Wednesday there are things he must do better.
More at the link.
UKno1VIKING
Transition Player
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:36 pm
Location: Bradford, UK
x 11

Re: Vikings: Teddy Bridgewater needs more consistency

Post by UKno1VIKING »

I think we were all looking for a significant improvement this year from Teddy, and so far he hasn't shown it. However, apart from the Wide Receiving unit becoming a very talented group, he hasnt had a right lot of help. With major losses in the O-line, it must be hard trying to progress as a young QB when the pressure is constantly in your face. I'm not making excuses for the lad, he's the first to admit that he hasn't been good enough. But with that attitude and with big Philly and Sulli back next year to help keep him upright, i'm happy to give him another year to progress before i give up on him.
He does seem to have an excellent attitude which is probably the attribute i like the most about him. Plus, his awareness and elusiveness are both excellent. Those sack numbers could be much higher if you had someone else under centre.
Plus his composure is generally sound. Especially when getting clobbered, he shakes it off, no fuss, and gets stuck in again.
I really want the lad to succeed, hopefully the tough spots he's been in this year, will help him progress to the type of player he can be. Until then, if he can play well enough to complement our excellent defense and we keep winning football games, then that will do me for now.
J. Kapp 11
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9771
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
x 1857

Re: Vikings: Teddy Bridgewater needs more consistency

Post by J. Kapp 11 »

Yes, we are all looking for Bridgewater to improve significantly.

I hope we all remember that it really takes about two years worth of starts to determine a quarterback's future probability of success.

Here's a nice article that looks at how long it takes the best quarterbacks to identify themselves as top-tier players. The author looked at the top 42 quarterbacks to enter the league since 1970, using the metric of relative Adjusted Net Yards per Attempt (i.e., ANY/A relative to league average). A relative ANY/A of 1 would be average.
Conclusion

I looked at the best 42 quarterbacks to enter the league since 1970. Then I divided each quarterback’s career into sets of 16 starts. Just four of those quarterbacks produced below-average passing numbers in each of their first two sets of 16 starts: three former first overall picks (Bradshaw, Aikman, Testaverde, and Brees). If a quarterback is below-average through two years worth of starts — say, Ryan Tannehill — then it seems highly unlikely that such a player will turn into a franchise quarterback absent extenuating circumstances. In the case of Bradshaw/Aikman/Testaverde, the extenuating circumstances were landing with terrible teams; for Brees, well, he also landed with the worst team in the league: The Chargers went 1-15 the year before he arrived, and Brees was the first pick in the second round.
It's amateur analysis, but it's pretty sound thinking. Based on the best 42 QBs over the past 45 years, two years seems to be the measuring stick. If you're not above average by two full years, you're likely never going to be. Teddy has 20 starts. So over his next 12 (really the next 9, which finishes out this season), we need to see Bridgewater develop the consistency he needs to achieve long-term success for the Vikings. It's too early to call him a bust, but it's not to early to start looking down the road.
Image
Go ahead. I dare you.
Underestimate this man.
Just Me
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6101
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 8:41 pm

Re: Vikings: Teddy Bridgewater needs more consistency

Post by Just Me »

J. Kapp 11 wrote:Yes, we are all looking for Bridgewater to improve significantly.

I hope we all remember that it really takes about two years worth of starts to determine a quarterback's future probability of success.

Here's a nice article that looks at how long it takes the best quarterbacks to identify themselves as top-tier players. The author looked at the top 42 quarterbacks to enter the league since 1970, using the metric of relative Adjusted Net Yards per Attempt (i.e., ANY/A relative to league average). A relative ANY/A of 1 would be average.
It's amateur analysis, but it's pretty sound thinking. Based on the best 42 QBs over the past 45 years, two years seems to be the measuring stick. If you're not above average by two full years, you're likely never going to be. Teddy has 20 starts. So over his next 12 (really the next 9, which finishes out this season), we need to see Bridgewater develop the consistency he needs to achieve long-term success for the Vikings. It's too early to call him a bust, but it's not to early to start looking down the road.
Totally agree. I had always referred to Bridgewater as a possible Ponder 2.0 (worst case scenario), and I think Ponder was an easy 'mark' for the copmparison as both were first round picks. In looking at Teddy's performance, a better comparison (if one assumes he won't take the 'next step') is probably Tarvaris Jackson. Jackson could put together a good game, he just couldn't do it with the kind of consistency you need to be successful in the NFL.

I'm not saying Bridgewater will be a "Jackson," and in fact, I think he is 1000% better in 'crunch time' than Jackson ever was. But, I remember a few good games from Jackson (mixed in with some bad games) and I was always left scratching my head as to why he could be so good one week and so terrible then next (in Bridgewater's case the comparison might be the 1st and 2nd half of a game, for example.)

In any case, I'm still optimistic Bridgewater can be 'the guy' but I don't want that to be the Viking's only option available in a year or two...
I've told people a million times not to exaggerate!
losperros
Commissioner
Posts: 10041
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Location: Burbank, California

Re: Vikings: Teddy Bridgewater needs more consistency

Post by losperros »

Inconsistency is definitely an issue for Teddy. We see it from game to game. Sometimes we see the hot/cold dynamic inside the same game. So there are times when Bridgewater looks bad. But there are also times when he looks damn good. So what's the deal? How do the Vikings get the good version of Bridgewater all the time?

Bridgewater appears calm but I think he needs to work on retaining his focus. That would help his consistency a lot, in my view. And I'd love to see him develop better accuracy on his longer passes. His decision making also needs work occasionally (more inconsistency issues). However, Teddy studies the game and works hard, so I'm hoping everything I mentioned will improve.

I've been critical of some of the moves made by Norv Turner regarding the offense and the players. I'm not completely convinced that some offensive restructuring wouldn't improve Bridgewater's game. No, I'm not saying this is all Norv's fault, though I think Turner can help his QB work through some of the bumps by improving his own job.

I also wonder just how good Bridgewater has to be. Does he have to be a *great* quarterback? *Good* QBs win Super Bowls too and not just supermen like Tom Brady or Peyton Manning or Aaron Rodgers.

On another note, secure the OL and I'll bet the entire offense would be better, including the passing game.
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Vikings: Teddy Bridgewater needs more consistency

Post by Mothman »

losperros wrote:I also wonder just how good Bridgewater has to be. Does he have to be a *great* quarterback? *Good* QBs win Super Bowls too and not just supermen like Tom Brady or Peyton Manning or Aaron Rodgers.

On another note, secure the OL and I'll bet the entire offense would be better, including the passing game.
Sure, it would help all of the skill position players.

I don't think Bridgewater has to become a great quarterback. As you pointed out, good QBs have won the Super Bowl too. I think he has to get a LOT better though. 20 games into his career, he averages 1 TD throw per game. That's not going to cut it in the long term, especially when he also averages .85 INTs per game. It's not just about the numbers though, which never paint a complete picture. It's about the inconsistency mentioned in the article. I think there are a lot of ways we could answer your question about how good he has to be but for me, he has to at least be good enough to force teams away from a "let's make Teddy beat us" strategy. That needs to become an unappealing strategy for Vikings opponents, a losing approach.

I don't care if he's a "Ponder" or a "Jackson", both of whom could put together a good game now and then, just like Bridgewater. Neither of those QBs ever developed consistency or became good enough that they represented a big problem for opposing defenses rather than a good strategic option (as in "Stop Peterson, force the Vikings QB to beat you and you'll have an excellent chance to win).

Comparisons to Ponder and Jackson are still far too easily made. Bridgewater needs to put more distance between himself and those disappointing predecessors before he becomes the next member of that group. He needs to become more accurate, more consistent and above all, more productive.
J. Kapp 11
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9771
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
x 1857

Re: Vikings: Teddy Bridgewater needs more consistency

Post by J. Kapp 11 »

Mothman wrote: Sure, it would help all of the skill position players.

I don't think Bridgewater has to become a great quarterback. As you pointed out, good QBs have won the Super Bowl too. I think he has to get a LOT better though. 20 games into his career, he averages 1 TD throw per game. That's not going to cut it in the long term, especially when he also averages .85 INTs per game. It's not just about the numbers though, which never paint a complete picture. It's about the inconsistency mentioned in the article. I think there are a lot of ways we could answer your question about how good he has to be but for me, he has to at least be good enough to force teams away from a "let's make Teddy beat us" strategy. That needs to become an unappealing strategy for Vikings opponents, a losing approach.

I don't care if he's a "Ponder" or a "Jackson", both of whom could put together a good game now and then, just like Bridgewater. Neither of those QBs ever developed consistency or became good enough that they represented a big problem for opposing defenses rather than a good strategic option (as in "Stop Peterson, force the Vikings QB to beat you and you'll have an excellent chance to win).

Comparisons to Ponder and Jackson are still far too easily made. Bridgewater needs to put more distance between himself and those disappointing predecessors before he becomes the next member of that group. He needs to become more accurate, more consistent and above all, more productive.
A lot of analysts point to 20 starts as sort of the benchmark. That being said, it's about what the guy does AFTER 20 starts. So Teddy's play for the remainder of this season is very important to how the league ends up viewing him.

Of course, what we (the fans) think isn't all that relevant. My guess is that Vikings brass sticks with Teddy for a long time, even if he continues to be inconsistent. They really like him, and I totally understand why. If he's as hard a worker as he's purported to be, then he'd be easy to like. Of course, there have been many diligent, hard workers in this league who didn't end up being franchise quarterbacks. I'm truly hoping we have ours, but I'm not ready to call him that yet.
Image
Go ahead. I dare you.
Underestimate this man.
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Vikings: Teddy Bridgewater needs more consistency

Post by Mothman »

J. Kapp 11 wrote:A lot of analysts point to 20 starts as sort of the benchmark. That being said, it's about what the guy does AFTER 20 starts. So Teddy's play for the remainder of this season is very important to how the league ends up viewing him.
Agreed.
Of course, what we (the fans) think isn't all that relevant. My guess is that Vikings brass sticks with Teddy for a long time, even if he continues to be inconsistent. They really like him, and I totally understand why. If he's as hard a worker as he's purported to be, then he'd be easy to like. Of course, there have been many diligent, hard workers in this league who didn't end up being franchise quarterbacks. I'm truly hoping we have ours, but I'm not ready to call him that yet.
Nor am I but I haven't given up hope. I'm a little discouraged right now though. It doesn't help that the two times I've seen him play in person he's been pretty ineffective for the first 3 quarters of each game.

I think the Vikes will stick with him as their starter for at least another year. How much more or less time he gets beyond that will probably be tied to both his performance and their win/loss record. I think you're right to point to the rest of this season as significant for him.
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
x 117

Re: Vikings: Teddy Bridgewater needs more consistency

Post by mansquatch »

For your consumption, some select year 1 and year 2 stats from various top QBs currently playing in the league. I also included good old Check Down Charlie Ponder to show the other side of greatness... Not a complete analysis, but it is a swath of hard data. Full disclosure, I used ratios to level set Babyface to full year numbers vs. the rest of the data set. These are denoted as "Annualized Year 1" and "Annualized Year 2" respectively.

Dalton Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Started Immediately
Year 1 516 300 58.14% 3,398 6.59 20 13
Year 2 528 329 62.31% 3,669 6.95 27 16

Brees Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Sat 1 Year
Year 1 526 325 61.79% 3,284 6.24 17 16
Year 2 356 205 57.58% 2,108 5.92 11 15

Rivers Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Sat 2 years
Year 1 460 284 61.74% 3,388 7.37 22 9
Year 2 460 277 60.22% 3,152 6.85 21 15

Manning Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Started Immediately
Year 1 575 326 56.70% 3,398 5.91 26 28
Year 2 533 331 62.10% 3,669 6.88 26 15

Brady Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Sat 1 year
Year 1 413 264 63.92% 2,843 6.88 18 12
Year 2 601 373 62.06% 3,764 6.26 28 14

Rogers Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Sat 3 years
Year 1 536 341 63.62% 4,038 7.53 28 13
Year 2 541 350 64.70% 4,434 8.20 30 7

Babyface Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Started Immediately
Year 1 402 259 64.43% 2,919 7.26 14 12
Year 2 211 136 64.45% 1,526 7.23 6 5
Annualize Year 1 536 345 64.43% 3,892 7.26 19 16
Annualize Year 2 482 311 64.45% 3,488 7.23 14 11

Ponder Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Sat 1/2 year
Year 1 483 300 62.11% 2,935 6.08 18 12
Year 2 239 152 63.60% 1,648 6.90 7 9


Observations:
1.) In terms of completion %, Babyface is tops in this data set for year 1 and year 2. Not shabby at all.
2.) For Yards per attempt, Baby face is only under Rivers and Rogers. Not shabby either. Over a yard higher than Ponder's 2012 performance. (let the comparisons between those two die a deserved death...)
3.) Scoring is where Babyface loses pace with the pack. His TD numbers are compareable to Brees, Dalton, and Year 1 Brady. Year 2 Brady blows him away.
4.) Babyface is by all indications in the midst of sophmore slump. All of the guys on this list (not Ponder) other than Rivers and Brees did better in Year 2 than Year 1. Rivers and Brees slipped. Dalton was marginally better.

Comments:
An interesting tidbit in here is that most of these guys are fairly similar in the yardage and completion stats. The major difference maker in this data set is the scoring and the INTs. Babyface is doing OK on INTs (on pace to improve by 1), but his scoring is at this point what is really holding him out of the club stat wise. Obviously when you watch the games there is more to it than that, but the above is what is shown by the data.

Now some of the guys above have/ had better weapons to throw to. Rivers, Brees, Dalton all had a HOF pass catcher. Manning did as well. Rogers early on had a deep and talented WR group. Brady is an exception here. That is part of it, but not all IMO.

It is worth noting that Dalton, Rivers, and Brees all had much better third years after medioce second year campaigns. So I can see a case to let Teddy toss the ball around in year 3.

I'm not sure where Teddy is at. I'm sure the OL woes and pass catcher issues are part of the problem, but are they the difference between being on pace for 14 TDs vs. the 20-28 that everyone else on here produced in year 2? I'm not sure I find that persuasive. Long way to an already known conclusion, but TB needs to make more plays for the Vikings. The defense is good enough that he probably doesn't need 28TDs, but if he can give them 20-24, they should be a serious playoff contender.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Vikings: Teddy Bridgewater needs more consistency

Post by Mothman »

mansquatch wrote:For your consumption, some select year 1 and year 2 stats from various top QBs currently playing in the league. I also included good old Check Down Charlie Ponder to show the other side of greatness... Not a complete analysis, but it is a swath of hard data. Full disclosure, I used ratios to level set Babyface to full year numbers vs. the rest of the data set. These are denoted as "Annualized Year 1" and "Annualized Year 2" respectively.

Dalton Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Started Immediately
Year 1 516 300 58.14% 3,398 6.59 20 13
Year 2 528 329 62.31% 3,669 6.95 27 16

Brees Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Sat 1 Year
Year 1 526 325 61.79% 3,284 6.24 17 16
Year 2 356 205 57.58% 2,108 5.92 11 15

Rivers Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Sat 2 years
Year 1 460 284 61.74% 3,388 7.37 22 9
Year 2 460 277 60.22% 3,152 6.85 21 15

Manning Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Started Immediately
Year 1 575 326 56.70% 3,398 5.91 26 28
Year 2 533 331 62.10% 3,669 6.88 26 15

Brady Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Sat 1 year
Year 1 413 264 63.92% 2,843 6.88 18 12
Year 2 601 373 62.06% 3,764 6.26 28 14

Rogers Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Sat 3 years
Year 1 536 341 63.62% 4,038 7.53 28 13
Year 2 541 350 64.70% 4,434 8.20 30 7

Babyface Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Started Immediately
Year 1 402 259 64.43% 2,919 7.26 14 12
Year 2 211 136 64.45% 1,526 7.23 6 5
Annualize Year 1 536 345 64.43% 3,892 7.26 19 16
Annualize Year 2 482 311 64.45% 3,488 7.23 14 11

Ponder Att Comp Comp % Yds Y/A TD INT Sat 1/2 year
Year 1 483 300 62.11% 2,935 6.08 18 12
Year 2 239 152 63.60% 1,648 6.90 7 9


Observations:
1.) In terms of completion %, Babyface is tops in this data set for year 1 and year 2. Not shabby at all.
2.) For Yards per attempt, Baby face is only under Rivers and Rogers. Not shabby either. Over a yard higher than Ponder's 2012 performance. (let the comparisons between those two die a deserved death...)
3.) Scoring is where Babyface loses pace with the pack. His TD numbers are compareable to Brees, Dalton, and Year 1 Brady. Year 2 Brady blows him away.
4.) Babyface is by all indications in the midst of sophmore slump. All of the guys on this list (not Ponder) other than Rivers and Brees did better in Year 2 than Year 1. Rivers and Brees slipped. Dalton was marginally better.

Comments:
An interesting tidbit in here is that most of these guys are fairly similar in the yardage and completion stats. The major difference maker in this data set is the scoring and the INTs. Babyface is doing OK on INTs (on pace to improve by 1), but his scoring is at this point what is really holding him out of the club stat wise. Obviously when you watch the games there is more to it than that, but the above is what is shown by the data.

Now some of the guys above have/ had better weapons to throw to. Rivers, Brees, Dalton all had a HOF pass catcher. Manning did as well. Rogers early on had a deep and talented WR group. Brady is an exception here. That is part of it, but not all IMO.

It is worth noting that Dalton, Rivers, and Brees all had much better third years after medioce second year campaigns. So I can see a case to let Teddy toss the ball around in year 3.

I'm not sure where Teddy is at. I'm sure the OL woes and pass catcher issues are part of the problem, but are they the difference between being on pace for 14 TDs vs. the 20-28 that everyone else on here produced in year 2? I'm not sure I find that persuasive. Long way to an already known conclusion, but TB needs to make more plays for the Vikings. The defense is good enough that he probably doesn't need 28TDs, but if he can give them 20-24, they should be a serious playoff contender.
That would require him to average 1.5-2 TD passes the remainder of the season. That's not unattainable but it will require an improved level of play and they'll actually be facing some tougher competition.

Thanks for the data although you accidentally posted Ponder's second and third year numbers, not his first and second year numbers, which means you didn't need to qualify your comment in Point #4 with "not Ponder". He performed better in most key categories in his second season.
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
x 117

Re: Vikings: Teddy Bridgewater needs more consistency

Post by mansquatch »

I purposely skipped Ponder's first year since that was a partial season, I should have qualified that in my header, apologies.

For me the big take away was the scoring. He is doing fine for completions, yards, and Y/A. Even his INT numbers are mostly in line. The lack of points is where we are feeling the pain.

I did neglect to include two other items that could reduce his TD numbers: One is playing with a large lead as we saw against Detroit at home where the goal is eat up clock and not run up points. Another is that on the Vikings there is probably a larger overall potential for the rushing offense to score than on most other teams. However, as I said previously, I do not think these things bridge the gap between his current trend and 24-28 TDs.

To pile on, another issue is that the quality of opponent is going to continue to increase as the season goes on, thus his games to "catch up on TDs" have for the most part already happened. I still think if Teddy gets to 24 we are in good shape given the quality of our defense.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Vikings: Teddy Bridgewater needs more consistency

Post by Mothman »

mansquatch wrote:I purposely skipped Ponder's first year since that was a partial season, I should have qualified that in my header, apologies.
No problem. It's just that it skews things a bit, especially when comparing him to Bridgewater, who also played a partial season in his first year.
For me the big take away was the scoring. He is doing fine for completions, yards, and Y/A. Even his INT numbers are mostly in line. The lack of points is where we are feeling the pain.


Yes, and that's big.
I did neglect to include two other items that could reduce his TD numbers: One is playing with a large lead as we saw against Detroit at home where the goal is eat up clock and not run up points.
Another is that on the Vikings there is probably a larger overall potential for the rushing offense to score than on most other teams. However, as I said previously, I do not think these things bridge the gap between his current trend and 24-28 TDs.
I don't either and all of these potentially limiting factors make the comparisons to Ponder more relevant, in my opinion, since he faced many of the same factors and since Bridgewater was drafted to upgrade the position after his predecessor flamed out.
To pile on, another issue is that the quality of opponent is going to continue to increase as the season goes on, thus his games to "catch up on TDs" have for the most part already happened. I still think if Teddy gets to 24 we are in good shape given the quality of our defense.
I do too but I think it would be a rather stunning (and welcome!) development if he gets there.

We'll see what happens. At the end of the season, I'd much rather be talking about his big step forward over the last 9 games than how much more time they should give him. :)
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
x 117

Re: Vikings: Teddy Bridgewater needs more consistency

Post by mansquatch »

Jim, in my mind if you say Ponder faced the same issues, then TB is even more of an improvement. TB is already statistically better than Ponder IMO. So if they faced the same issues, the it is case closed. Of course this point is really silly. Ponder was TERRIBLE. So being better than him isn't the same as being good enough to win a Playoff Game, let alone a championship.

The latter questions are the ones that matter to me. So it comes back to scoring. Can TB start becoming a threat in the red zone, especially against tougher defenses? He's shown flashes, he put together some drives in that Denver game near the end.

This is preposterous to some extent, because TB is far more polished passer, but right now his game is reminiscent of Tim Tebow in the sense that Tebow would be horrible in the first 3 quarters, then it would be Tebow time and he would suddenly transform into a game winning beast. TB is doing a similar act right now.

So really it is a long way to what we already know. We need to start seeing 4 quarters of 2 minute Teddy.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Vikings: Teddy Bridgewater needs more consistency

Post by Mothman »

mansquatch wrote:Jim, in my mind if you say Ponder faced the same issues, then TB is even more of an improvement. TB is already statistically better than Ponder IMO. So if they faced the same issues, the it is case closed. Of course this point is really silly. Ponder was TERRIBLE. So being better than him isn't the same as being good enough to win a Playoff Game, let alone a championship. The latter questions are the ones that matter to me.
Exactly! The point isn't to be marginally better than Ponder in most statistical categories, it's to become a much better QB for the Vikings. I think comparing the two makes sense to see if the Vikings are getting the kind of improvement they were seeking at the position.

However, if Ponder was "TERRIBLE", what does that make 2015 Bridgewater? If the projection you posted held up he'd finish with 11 more completions on one less attempt, 550 more yards but just one fewer INT and 4 fewer TDs than Ponder had in his second season. The yardage is better, the TDs worse and the rest is pretty similar.
So it comes back to scoring. Can TB start becoming a threat in the red zone, especially against tougher defenses? He's shown flashes, he put together some drives in that Denver game near the end.


I wouldn't call those flashes of red zone scoring potential though. One of those late drives went about 40 yards, stalled in the red zone and ended in a FG and on the other drive, Bridgewater directed them to about midfield where Peterson turned a 4th and 1 into a 48 yard burst for a TD.
This is preposterous to some extent, because TB is far more polished passer, but right now his game is reminiscent of Tim Tebow in the sense that Tebow would be horrible in the first 3 quarters, then it would be Tebow time and he would suddenly transform into a game winning beast. TB is doing a similar act right now.

So really it is a long way to what we already know. We need to start seeing 4 quarters of 2 minute Teddy.
Yes... he, and the passing game as a whole, have to become a more significant threat to opposing defenses. I shudder to think what the Vikes passing numbers might look like now if injuries hadn't given Diggs a chance to get on the field and start making plays.
PurpleMustReign
Starting Wide Receiver
Posts: 19150
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:48 pm
Location: Crystal, MN
x 114
Contact:

Re: Vikings: Teddy Bridgewater needs more consistency

Post by PurpleMustReign »

Mothman wrote: Exactly! The point isn't to be marginally better than Ponder in most statistical categories, it's to become a much better QB for the Vikings. I think comparing the two makes sense to see if the Vikings are getting the kind of improvement they were seeking at the position.

However, if Ponder was "TERRIBLE", what does that make 2015 Bridgewater? If the projection you posted held up he'd finish with 11 more completions on one less attempt, 550 more yards but just one fewer INT and 4 fewer TDs than Ponder had in his second season. The yardage is better, the TDs worse and the rest is pretty similar.


I wouldn't call those flashes of red zone scoring potential though. One of those late drives went about 40 yards, stalled in the red zone and ended in a FG and on the other drive, Bridgewater directed them to about midfield where Peterson turned a 4th and 1 into a 48 yard burst for a TD.
Yes... he, and the passing game as a whole, have to become a more significant threat to opposing defenses. I shudder to think what the Vikes passing numbers might look like now if injuries hadn't given Diggs a chance to get on the field and start making plays.
To me, the difference between Ponder and Bridgewater is part perception and part reality. Ponder, who also had some terrible Offensive Lines, would panic and when he got hit he would just run or dump the ball short. I also never really felt comfortable with him as the QB... he just never seemed like he was going to lead the Vikings to a win. Does that make sense? It was more of a feeling for me. With Teddy, I am surprised that hs stats are as bad as they are, probably because the Vikings are winning. In his second year, he has more 4th Quarter comeback wins than Ponder has had in his whole career. He is struggling for sure... but I just have a more comfortable feeling with Teddy as the QB than I ever did with Ponder.
I wonder what would happen if AD had to sit a game this season... Would Teddy succeed or look worse?
The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." ‪#‎SKOL2018
Locked