Vikings Message Board.Com

John_Viveiros wrote:My opinion, not shared with many of you, is that Bradford will give us better passing stats, but Teddy will produce more victories (throwing the ball away, avoiding sacks, checking off to running plays), so I'll take Teddy.

I'm not sure he did a great job avoiding sacks before he was injured. That was mostly on the line, but its the same line Sam inherited. So i'm not sure the two can be judged separately on that. And Sam is known as a Checkdown Charlie. So i'm not quite sure what you're getting at there?

Right now the best QB if they were all fit is Bradford. It's not even close.
However, i do feel in our current situation that Teddy is the future. He can become a very good QB for many years to come.

UKno1VIKING wrote: I'm not sure he did a great job avoiding sacks before he was injured. That was mostly on the line, but its the same line Sam inherited. So i'm not sure the two can be judged separately on that. And Sam is known as a Checkdown Charlie. So i'm not quite sure what you're getting at there?

Right now the best QB if they were all fit is Bradford. It's not even close.
However, i do feel in our current situation that Teddy is the future. He can become a very good QB for many years to come.

You don't think if Bradfords knees was better and Teddy wasn't rusty they still aren't even close?

UKno1VIKING wrote: I'm not sure he did a great job avoiding sacks before he was injured. That was mostly on the line, but its the same line Sam inherited. So i'm not sure the two can be judged separately on that. And Sam is known as a Checkdown Charlie. So i'm not quite sure what you're getting at there?

Right now the best QB if they were all fit is Bradford. It's not even close.
However, i do feel in our current situation that Teddy is the future. He can become a very good QB for many years to come.

I think Teddy had better pocket awareness than Sam, by a long shot. But there's no objective way to measure that. I wonder how Teddy would pay in an offense that wasn't the Norv/Adrian run first and try to convert the resulting this and long type of offense. You could see that it did wonders (for one game at least) for Bradford.

John_Viveiros wrote: I think Teddy had better pocket awareness than Sam, by a long shot. But there's no objective way to measure that. I wonder how Teddy would pay in an offense that wasn't the Norv/Adrian run first and try to convert the resulting this and long type of offense. You could see that it did wonders (for one game at least) for Bradford.

And half of last season, Bradford had Shurmur.

I'm not sure Teddy had better pocket presence, he certainly left it a lot quicker. That's not a bad thing for a mobile QB for sure, but seeing as Teddy took 9 more sacks in '15 compared to Bradford in '16, if anything Teddy may need to improve that part of his game.

Well, there's 10 more regular season games, plus 3 more for the teams fortunate enough to get to the Big 'Un. Plus a couple of weeks between conference championship game to Super Bowl. So about 14 or 15 weeks all told. A lot of recuperating/or seasoning/or more injuries can occur. A lot. Hopefully we can "maintain" through the next few games. The Vikings story has a lot of chapters yet to be written for this year. And despite the 81% vote for Bradford in the poll, and my bias :O, I wish the best for Teddy and Case.

Dang I wish Mr. Cook were healthy. He made all our QB's better.

I don't think it matters. This Vikings team is built in such a way that you don't need a super star QB to run and win. With the defense playing the way they do, what you need at QB is someone who won't make stupid mistakes and turn the ball over. Someone who can dump it off yet still throw downfield at time to keep the defense honest. We have a good group of WR's that if one goes down another seems to step up and play well. In other words, we have a TEAM. Not Sam Bradford and the Vikings. Not Case Keenum and the Vikings. My bet is that even Sloter, if given a week or two with the first team would be able to win. Now, he might need help reading the defense.........but making the throws and play, I believe he could do it.

We don't have the fall off that other teams do when their top QB goes down. Think about it. Your sitting here discussing which one of 4 would do a better job. Not that one guy is head and shoulders above the others.

Point to be made. 2 first round picks, 1st and 32nd, and 2 undrafted players.

PurpleMustReign wrote:Bradford. And it's not even close.

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk

Agree x 100

Honestly i wouldnt Monday them drafting
another QB in day 2 next year

I voted for Bradford on the assumtion
of all being healthy...i have serious
concerns on the health

Teddy has the highest upside and is already better then Bradford according to the stats. Of course you go with Teddy and hope he becomes an elite QB (top 5).

I'd put Teddy in that 16-18 range amongst NFL Starters. Bradford I'd rate around 22-24. Case is in the 30's and Sloter, IDK.

I'd pick Teddy. Bradford WAS 100% in the first game. It took a zero contact injury to knock him out for the year potentially.

IrishViking wrote:I'd pick Teddy. Bradford WAS 100% in the first game. It took a zero contact injury to knock him out for the year potentially.

To be fair it took a zero contact injury to knock Teddy out for more than a year ...

Cliff wrote: To be fair it took a zero contact injury to knock Teddy out for more than a year ...

I was thinking the same thing! And I took the OP's question to mean 100% healthy, no lingering knee issues, etc.

Thaumaturgist wrote: I was thinking the same thing! And I took the OP's question to mean 100% healthy, no lingering knee issues, etc.

Yeah but that happened in practice. I was taking OPs questions to mean a mystical land where only games counted.

I don't think there is any reason to believe Sam Bradford will ever be (consistently) healthy again, but even if we could get a hypothetical guarantee of health, I still think I would choose Teddy. There are a LOT of reasons a QB may fail or succeed, but for me the biggest factor is "Do you give 100%"? Sam Bradford, in my opinion, is the co-worker that we've all had who is good enough to put in 80% effort and look good. I don't know if we can win a Super Bowl like that.

The way that he was more than willing to take a 4 yard gain on 3rd & 7 last season in hopes that his playmaker would, ya know, make a play was not redeeming to me. I want my QB to make a play, too, not just facilitate...and I don't care what he told Zimmer, it ws obvious he gave up on the Chicago game. It's not heroic to try to stay in the game when you know you can't give effort, it's selfish and irresponsible.

I don't know if Teddy can elevate his play, but I know that you can win with a weak passing attack if the QB manages the game well, and I truly believe Teddy elevated the play of his teammates and in turn made plays himself.

To my eyes, it's clear Sam is the better thrower and Teddy is the better field general. We just have to decide who is the better overall QB.

I don't think either side of the Teddy/Sam debate has a better case than the other, but for my preference, it's Teddy all the way.


EDIT: I realize Teddy has no guarantee of returning healthy long term, either, but I think his chance is significantly higher.

At this stage they are both injury riddled. It's a huge question mark. When healthy, Bradford is the superior QB. But there are long term questions. However same goes with Teddy. Bradford is the one to start no doubt but when it comes to contract time, I dont have a clue