Mike Zimmer: Time for Teddy Bridgewater to 'take charge'

[Mothman]

This Ben Goessling article was just posted today and it's somewhat along the same lines as what I was writing about in the "PHP's mock offseason" thread:

Mike Zimmer: Time for Teddy Bridgewater to 'take charge'

Still, there were not-infrequent calls from Zimmer to his quarterback throughout the season -- to play freer, to not worry so much about making a mistake, to be more assertive about what he wanted in the game plan. Both Zimmer and Spielman repeated those themes at the NFL combine this week, and Zimmer's final comment about his quarterback in Indianapolis came close to being a mission statement.

"At the end of the day, if I come back next year, if I"m still here, what I want to say is, 'Man, Teddy really took over this offense. He was really in charge of everything he did here. He took charge of the league,'" Zimmer said Thursday. "Whatever that means. If it's getting us in the right place, if it's throwing the ball more, if it's throwing the ball less. Just taking charge of this thing. It's going to be his baby eventually."

"Teddy is a tremendous kid. He’s a big-time pleaser. He knows we don’t want to turn the ball over," Zimmer said. "But sometimes I think he has that subconscious thing in his mind, where he doesn’t want to hurt the team, where there are times when he can help the team.

"I told him one time during the season, ‘Teddy, I know you know I don’t want you to throw interceptions and I know you don’t want to turn the ball over. But we play pretty good defense, and if, you know, a ball gets tipped or something, don’t worry about it. Just go out and play and be yourself.’ And I think that’s when he plays the best, when he just goes out and plays.”

It's time for Bridgewater to play a less timid brand of football.

In fact, reading between the lines of Zimmer's comments, I get the impression he realizes next year is absolutely crucial for Bridgewater. I think the first paragraph quoted above is a message to his QB that the intent is for the offense to eventually be "his baby" but at this point next year, if Zimmer can't say Bridgewater really took charge of things in 2016, the Vikes might be paying extra attention to the QBs at the combine. YMMV.

[losperros]

Interesting read. I sure do agree with Zimmer's statements.

OTOH, Zimmer's points are especially well taken if it really is going to be Bridgewater's team. I don't think it is currently. And some of the reasons aren't because of Bridgewater.

[mondry]

That's all well and good from Zimmer and obviously can't fault the logic behind it but if they really want Teddy to make it his baby then they need to protect him better first and foremost and create an environment that allows him to take a bit more risk when a positive outcome is more likely to happen than a negative one.

Secondly, you can't run AD on 68% of first downs, force Teddy under center on everything but 3rd down, keep all the TE's and extra blockers in to block, and then complain that it's not Teddy's baby in his SECOND YEAR as a pro.

Our protection was so bad that all you have to do is look at the two games against Seattle, Norv played it so safe and conservative in the playoff game (and for good reason, just re-watch the first game against them for a reminder) that Teddy never even got a shot to be the man, well until the very end of the game where he literally drove down the field with ease to set up the game winning field goal. He sure looked like "the man" on that drive!

How about we get the man some help and not make the focus of the team on a power running adrian peterson game plan every single week and see how he does!

[Mothman]

Interesting:

The Browns’ $100,000 study told them to take Teddy Bridgewater. They took Johnny Manziel.

[losperros]

I'm not sure the Browns should kick themselves for taking Manziel. After all he was considered to be a future star by many teams. Manziel's biggest problems in college had to do with off-field issues, yet the guy knew how to win football games on the field. I imagine he probably promised the Browns that he would focus on the game. Instead Manziel did a ridiculous crash and burn act.

Anyway, I'm glad the Vikings didn't get him.

[PurpleKoolaid]

That's all well and good from Zimmer and obviously can't fault the logic behind it but if they really want Teddy to make it his baby then they need to protect him better first and foremost and create an environment that allows him to take a bit more risk when a positive outcome is more likely to happen than a negative one.

Secondly, you can't run AD on 68% of first downs, force Teddy under center on everything but 3rd down, keep all the TE's and extra blockers in to block, and then complain that it's not Teddy's baby in his SECOND YEAR as a pro.

Our protection was so bad that all you have to do is look at the two games against Seattle, Norv played it so safe and conservative in the playoff game (and for good reason, just re-watch the first game against them for a reminder) that Teddy never even got a shot to be the man, well until the very end of the game where he literally drove down the field with ease to set up the game winning field goal. He sure looked like "the man" on that drive!

How about we get the man some help and not make the focus of the team on a power running adrian peterson game plan every single week and see how he does!

^
this

[S197]

Interesting:

The Browns’ $100,000 study told them to take Teddy Bridgewater. They took Johnny Manziel.

Factory of sadness.

[Jordysghost]

I'm not sure the Browns should kick themselves for taking Manziel. After all he was considered to be a future star by many teams. Manziel's biggest problems in college had to do with off-field issues, yet the guy knew how to win football games on the field. I imagine he probably promised the Browns that he would focus on the game. Instead Manziel did a ridiculous crash and burn act.

Anyway, I'm glad the Vikings didn't get him.

I respectfully disagree. I was hoping they would take Bridgewater so you guys wouldn't and the Browns took a player I never was enamored with, I heard they actually wrote down Bridgewater, then wrote Manziel over it.

[HardcoreVikesFan]

I believed that the team should have taken Teddy Bridgewater eighth overall that year - that is how much I believe in Teddy.

I am very happy that we were able to get him. I shudder to think just how pathetic this team would have been if we took the ole Billy Manziel. I hope the team would have had the foresight to take Derek Carr instead of Manziel if Cleveland did take Teddy.

[fiestavike]

I believed that the team should have taken Teddy Bridgewater eighth overall that year - that is how much I believe in Teddy.

I am very happy that we were able to get him. I shudder to think just how pathetic this team would have been if we took the ole Billy Manziel. I hope the team would have had the foresight to take Derek Carr instead of Manziel if Cleveland did take Teddy.

Billy might have done better than Johnny.

[mansquatch]

I brought this up in the FA thread, but it is probably more appropriately in here:

With regards to the Risk Aversion of the TB: Is it Teddy being risk adverse or is the coaching asking him to be risk adverse? My sense is that it is a mixture of the two, but I'm not sure at what ratio.

We have quotes from Zimmer talking about how the lack of turnovers really helped the team which is a point towards conservative. We also have him giving a presser saying TB needs to take more risk, which was one of the things that started this thread.

My guess on the situation is that it is an evolving process for both sides. I also think the state of the OL played a significant role in their risk posture. It felt like they took more risk with the passing game in 2014 than they did in 2015.

Anyways, curious what others think. Have fun.

[fiestavike]

I brought this up in the FA thread, but it is probably more appropriately in here:

With regards to the Risk Aversion of the TB: Is it Teddy being risk adverse or is the coaching asking him to be risk adverse? My sense is that it is a mixture of the two, but I'm not sure at what ratio.

We have quotes from Zimmer talking about how the lack of turnovers really helped the team which is a point towards conservative. We also have him giving a presser saying TB needs to take more risk, which was one of the things that started this thread.

My guess on the situation is that it is an evolving process for both sides. I also think the state of the OL played a significant role in their risk posture. It felt like they took more risk with the passing game in 2014 than they did in 2015.

Anyways, curious what others think. Have fun.

Combination of factors. The "contradiction" in Zimmer's remarks, I think, is because they want him to do better on the few aggressive play calls they were making each game, but they were quite happy with how he managed the offense outside of those few plays.

[Mothman]

I brought this up in the FA thread, but it is probably more appropriately in here:

With regards to the Risk Aversion of the TB: Is it Teddy being risk adverse or is the coaching asking him to be risk adverse? My sense is that it is a mixture of the two, but I'm not sure at what ratio.

We have quotes from Zimmer talking about how the lack of turnovers really helped the team which is a point towards conservative. We also have him giving a presser saying TB needs to take more risk, which was one of the things that started this thread.

It's Bridgewater. I think comments we've heard from Mike Zimmer, Rick Spielman and (if I remember correctly, Norv Turner) answer the question pretty clearly. They've all said they want him to "cut it loose", be more aggressive, etc.. Perhaps this quote from Zimmer will make it clear:

"Teddy is a tremendous kid. He’s a big-time pleaser. He knows we don’t want to turn the ball over," Zimmer said. "But sometimes I think he has that subconscious thing in his mind, where he doesn’t want to hurt the team, where there are times when he can help the team.

"I told him one time during the season, ‘Teddy, I know you know I don’t want you to throw interceptions and I know you don’t want to turn the ball over. But we play pretty good defense, and if, you know, a ball gets tipped or something, don’t worry about it. Just go out and play and be yourself.’ And I think that’s when he plays the best, when he just goes out and plays.”

My guess on the situation is that it is an evolving process for both sides. I also think the state of the OL played a significant role in their risk posture. It felt like they took more risk with the passing game in 2014 than they did in 2015.

The OL has proven to be a convenient excuse while also being a legitimate reason for some of the offense's bigger problems. In other words, while OL performance undoubtedly influenced strategy and play calling, Bridgewater's risk averse play is most apparent when he actually has time. It goes beyond offensive strategy. It's visible in his performance, his choices.

[losperros]

The OL has proven to be a convenient excuse while also being a legitimate reason for some of the offense's bigger problems. In other words, while OL performance undoubtedly influenced strategy and play calling, Bridgewater's risk averse is most apparent when he actually has time. It goes beyond offensive strategy. It's visible in his performance, his choices.

As I've said before, I think the OL improving will help every skill player on the field. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that Peterson was burdened by bad blocking on running downs as much as Teddy was on passing plays. OTOH, there were times when the blocking gave AD an opening and he usually took advantage of it big time. Unfortunately, Bridgewater didn't always make good use out of the times when the pass blocking was there. His inconsistency in throwing and decision making were evident even under the best situations.

The OL simply must improve. That's extremely important. However, if Bridgewater improves his game at the same time, that's when the Vikings will see impressive progress in the passing game.

[dead_poet]

As the #Vikings try to make U.S. Bank Stadium home, their passing game could see a boost from playing indoors:

http://es.pn/234CjWQ

Bridgewater has completed 70.6 percent of his passes in five career indoor games, throwing for 1,290 yards and posting a passer rating of 95.1. In three indoor games last season, he had a 101.6 passer rating and threw for 825 yards and three touchdowns against one interception. In 24 games outdoors, he completed 63.6 percent of his passes, with a passer rating of 85.2. With game-time temperatures of 20 degrees or below, he has never thrown for more than 209 yards.