Vikings Need A Plan B at QB

[Skoltastic_Voyage]

Mothman, I don't even know if I believe that AD is the cause or even a contributing factor for our lack of a passing attack for a decade. I'm just saying he has been the only member of the offense still playing since the passing game has fallen. I agree that AD has been our most dangerous offensive weapon since he was drafted, but maybe building around AD has significantly hurt the passing game long term. Partly because of AD and his skill set and partly because focusing on the run inherently means we're not focusing on the passing game. I wasn't trying to suggest it's all because of AD. Some of my suggestions point to Spielman. The league sure favors QBs and WRs now and doesn't really help out power running games at all - that's at play here, too.

Other constants over the past decade on offense have been a revolving door of QBs, a lack of quality WR threats, and changing the OC every 3ish years. Those could very well be the answer, too.

Favre and AD played really well together. It was great. It also seems to be an anomaly of what happens when we get an MVP/HOF veteran QB with a heart full of revenge to join our team. You're right that it seems AD helped Favre have one of his best statistical years in the league. Maybe Favre lifted AD that year, too, by audibling out of blitzes and calling the right play at the line (most of the time to the dismay of Coach Childress). If you're suggesting we just find another QB like Favre to plug into our offense - I'm all for it. Let's do that.

While I've been typing this response, it just occurred to me that maybe the problem isn't necessarily that AD negatively impacts the passing game (with his skill set and the GM personnel moves), but maybe the issue is that he negatively impacts us developing young QBs. We definitely haven't had any success with that yet. The best we've seen is the last 5 games of the season last year where Teddy had the 2nd highest QB rating in the league all while AD was out.

I have been kicking around that same thought for a while. Because Teddy never gets real experience he never gets better because it's always in AD's hands, take it out of AD's hands and you have a qb that completes ~20 throws a game (and not enough NFL level play experience to improve). We have been tanking quiet a few QB's lately... Now here's the counter to both of these... Just because he isn't asked to be the center of the offense doesn't mean he shouldn't play like it. If he was a good QB we probably would see at least average production out of him not.. whatever the hell we're getting. And Cassel really tore it up in Dallas right?

I was critical of Teddy earlier in the season and then we had the lions games which gave me hope but I'm out of hope now. He either sinks or swims and we replace him. If he doesn't find himself soon we should be the market for a new QB.

[dead_poet]

[He either sinks or swims and we replace him. If he doesn't find himself soon we're should be the market for a new QB.

Except he will face zero competition in training camp next year even if he finishes out the year at his current pace. I mean, that's the reality. We might as well get onboard now. I would be beyond shocked if they spent a high-round draft pick on a quarterback and/or acquired somebody that could be considered competition. It'll take a poor 2016 before that's a legitimate possibility.

[Mothman]

Mothman, I don't even know if I believe that AD is the cause or even a contributing factor for our lack of a passing attack for a decade. I'm just saying he has been the only member of the offense still playing since the passing game has fallen. I agree that AD has been our most dangerous offensive weapon since he was drafted, but maybe building around AD has significantly hurt the passing game long term. Partly because of AD and his skill set and partly because focusing on the run inherently means we're not focusing on the passing game. I wasn't trying to suggest it's all because of AD. Some of my suggestions point to Spielman. The league sure favors QBs and WRs now and doesn't really help out power running games at all - that's at play here, too.

Other constants over the past decade on offense have been a revolving door of QBs, a lack of quality WR threats, and changing the OC every 3ish years. Those could very well be the answer, too.

Favre and AD played really well together. It was great. It also seems to be an anomaly of what happens when we get an MVP/HOF veteran QB with a heart full of revenge to join our team. You're right that it seems AD helped Favre have one of his best statistical years in the league. Maybe Favre lifted AD that year, too, by audibling out of blitzes and calling the right play at the line (most of the time to the dismay of Coach Childress). If you're suggesting we just find another QB like Favre to plug into our offense - I'm all for it. Let's do that.

While I've been typing this response, it just occurred to me that maybe the problem isn't necessarily that AD negatively impacts the passing game (with his skill set and the GM personnel moves), but maybe the issue is that he negatively impacts us developing young QBs. We definitely haven't had any success with that yet. The best we've seen is the last 5 games of the season last year where Teddy had the 2nd highest QB rating in the league all while AD was out.

I understand you're exploring the possibility but I think if anything, Peterson is more a victim of the failure to build a good passing game than a detriment to building one. I think you're much, much closer to the answer when you start looking at the other issues you mentioned: a revolving door of QBs, a lack of quality WR threats, 3 coaching changes over the course of Peterson's Vikings career. In his 9 seasons with the team, at least 9 or 10 different QBs have started games for them.

I think Spielman and the Wilfs are the constants to look at more closely over the same time period.

[Mothman]

Except he will face zero competition in training camp next year even if he finishes out the year at his current pace. I mean, that's the reality. We might as well get onboard now. I would be beyond shocked if they spent a high-round draft pick on a quarterback and/or acquired somebody that could be considered competition. It'll take a poor 2016 before that's a legitimate possibility.

Almost certainly...

[mansquatch]

Yeah there is no way they pull him after this season. Spielman believes in 3 years on QBs and this is year 2.

It is worth mentioning that TB has yet to play a season in which his OL wasn't one of the worst in football. Purely speculation on my part, but that might be getting him a bit of a pass on some of the issues.

I still think it is hard to judge Teddy right now. The numbers suck, but is it just him? Right now I feel like we've spent all of this FA and Draft Equity on WR and all we've ended up doing is put the cart before the horse since we've yet to really hit on a QB prospect and our OL is a complete disaster. Great, we've got a lot of team speed. Doesn't mean crap if the QB can't survive long enough to find the guy and deliver the pass.

I wonder if the protection is worse this season vs. last season with all of Kalil's issues. I think this season is worse, but by how much?

[losperros]

This insistence that Peterson is holding Bridgewater back seems born out of fan denial, a desperate need to find anyone but Bridgewater himself to hold responsible for his poor performance.

Not so fast, Jim. After all, Peterson is the one that designs and calls the plays, does all the pass blocking, throws the ball, and makes the catches.

Seriously, Peterson's job is to be the RB and he does it well. I'd love to see all the other players on offense do their jobs so capably.

On that note, have you seen Andrew Krammer's article on this subject. Pretty good stuff. Here's a sample:

The fact is the Vikings have a problematic passing game and rely heavily on Peterson, perhaps too heavily, as tight end Kyle Rudolph said Monday. They’ve shown they can’t win without him involved, as they’re 8-0 when he has at least 19 carries and 0-4 when he has 16 or fewer.

And the issue has only come to light when the Vikings fall in an early hole. They’re one of the best closing teams in football because of Peterson, but they haven’t been able to claw back from anything more than the 14-3 deficit they faced in Detroit; either because they’re not capable as a run-driven team, or because Turner hasn’t stayed committed enough to Peterson in those situations to find out.

http://www.1500espn.com/vikings-2/2015/ ... e-carries/

[mansquatch]

I do not think AP holds back TB, but I do think AP is less than perfect.

Consider: His pass protection is (and always has been) pathetic. He doesn't always just take the yard that are there and that can hurt the team in down/ distance. These are things that really hold AP back, not TB. If AP could clean up these things he'd probably have 1000+ more yards on the ground by now since he'd get more draw plays and more receiving yards just by being a factor on 3rd and long.

Whatever though, AP isn't what is hurting our offense.

[Mothman]

Not so fast, Jim. After all, Peterson is the one that designs and calls the plays, does all the pass blocking, throws the ball, and makes the catches.

Seriously, Peterson's job is to be the RB and he does it well. I'd love to see all the other players on offense do their jobs so capably.

On that note, have you seen Andrew Krammer's article on this subject. Pretty good stuff. Here's a sample:
http://www.1500espn.com/vikings-2/2015/ ... e-carries/

Thanks for the link, Craig. Krammer nails it regarding this year's Vikings ("They’ve shown they can’t win without him involved") and personally, I've thought all season that Turner doesn't stay committed enough to Peterson when the Vikes are trailing by much so I agree with him about that too. The whole article was a good read.

[mansquatch]

I think you are spinning in circles on this a bit Jim. This team wins in two ways:

The defense prevents you from scoring more than ~18 points. The offense (mostly the rushing attack) is able to do enough to score more than ~18 points. A part of the former is the latter not committing critical mistakes with much regularity. More often than not, this formula has worked. We have all had trepidation this season because the offense seemed barely able to hold up it's end of the bargain and really AP was the only part that was working. Nothing earth shattering there.

For me this season has been about the PF/PA and where, incrementally, we could see the biggest improvement. It is my contention that it is probably easier to get more PF than PA when our PA is sitting at 17-18 per game. Put another way, it is a lot harder to go from 18 to 15 PA than it is to go from 18 to 21 PF. I think just a healthy OL talent could get them to 21 BTW, more talent might be 22 or 23. At this point more than that requires Teddy to get better which is seeming less and less likely, but it isn't out of the realm of possibility. (yet.)

That last part is probably a good debate topic for this thread since we are talking about replacing TB: To put it into specific questions:

How many more points (PF) can the offense reasonably expect to score with Sullivan and Loadholt healthy?

In addition to the above, how many more points (PF) can the offense reasonably expect to score by adding 1-2 new OL players with more talent than those currently on the roster?

I think for the first question the answer is 3. For the 2nd one, I'm not sure. At that point you have to ask who is the weakest link (Harris or Fusco, likely) and can we expect improvement via replacement. This one I'm not as certain about so it is hard to estimate. I do think greater athleticism will help in the long run.

Now on top of this, do we or do we not expect a statistical improvement from Teddy if the OL is healthy and/or more talented?

If the answer to this last one is no, the let's find a new QB. However, I find it HIGHLY unlikely that with better protection we WILL NOT see incremental improvement from TB. The question for me is more whether the improvement is enough to win a championship with the rest of the roster?

No right or wrong answers here, just trying to be specific on the OL/QB relationship and what/how much improvement we could expect. Another question is probably how much is needed and is that possible? Why/Why not?

For this last one I think we need to be at 24PF if we can continue along at 18PA. It is probably also worth contemplating that the relationship between PF/PA is likely not linear, meaning that if you get over some threshhold on PF/PA then one or the other will improve at a greater pace since you are more dominant on the other side of the ball.

[dead_poet]

Now on top of this, do we or do we not expect a statistical improvement from Teddy if the OL is healthy and/or more talented?

If the answer to this last one is no, the let's find a new QB. However, I find it HIGHLY unlikely that with better protection we WILL NOT see incremental improvement from TB.

Here's my actual worry: this season will be so detrimental to Teddy that even IF the offensive line is improved next season that it won't make a difference. Teddy wouldn't be the first quarterback that gets FUBARed early in his career only to flame out as a result (and as a result of his own shortcomings).

I suppose if there's a "silver lining" (if you can call it that) it's that this QB class is poor so maybe it'll be OK that we don't look to this draft for a replacement/competition. If Teddy proves ineffective next season hopefully there will be a better class of QBs to choose from in the 2017 class.

[mansquatch]

I suppose if there's a "silver lining" (if you can call it that) it's that this QB class is poor so maybe it'll be OK that we don't look to this draft for a replacement/competition. If Teddy proves ineffective next season hopefully there will be a better class of QBs to choose from in the 2017 class.

The only bad thing there is that the Defense and AP are probably good enough to get 9 wins unless the injury bug hits. Maybe you should pray for AP to have another ACL in week 1. Then we can "suck for luck" so to speak.

Then again, given NFL QBs the three crap jobs this year will be the next Brady/Manning/Favres and all go in the 3rd round. UGH...

[dead_poet]

The only bad thing there is that the Defense and AP are probably good enough to get 9 wins unless the injury bug hits. Maybe you should pray for AP to have another ACL in week 1. Then we can "suck for luck" so to speak.

I understand what you're going for but I'm not physically capable of rooting for the Vikings to lose. Nor would I wish that on any player, much less AD.

[chicagopurple]

not a personal fan of AP anymore, but wishing any injury is pretty low.....

[Mothman]

I think you are spinning in circles on this a bit Jim.

How so?

This team wins in two ways:

The defense prevents you from scoring more than ~18 points. The offense (mostly the rushing attack) is able to do enough to score more than ~18 points. A part of the former is the latter not committing critical mistakes with much regularity. More often than not, this formula has worked. We have all had trepidation this season because the offense seemed barely able to hold up it's end of the bargain and really AP was the only part that was working. Nothing earth shattering there.

For me this season has been about the PF/PA and where, incrementally, we could see the biggest improvement. It is my contention that it is probably easier to get more PF than PA when our PA is sitting at 17-18 per game. Put another way, it is a lot harder to go from 18 to 15 PA than it is to go from 18 to 21 PF. I think just a healthy OL talent could get them to 21 BTW, more talent might be 22 or 23. At this point more than that requires Teddy to get better which is seeming less and less likely, but it isn't out of the realm of possibility. (yet.)

That last part is probably a good debate topic for this thread since we are talking about replacing TB: To put it into specific questions:

How many more points (PF) can the offense reasonably expect to score with Sullivan and Loadholt healthy?

In addition to the above, how many more points (PF) can the offense reasonably expect to score by adding 1-2 new OL players with more talent than those currently on the roster?

I think for the first question the answer is 3. For the 2nd one, I'm not sure. At that point you have to ask who is the weakest link (Harris or Fusco, likely) and can we expect improvement via replacement. This one I'm not as certain about so it is hard to estimate. I do think greater athleticism will help in the long run.

Now on top of this, do we or do we not expect a statistical improvement from Teddy if the OL is healthy and/or more talented?

If the answer to this last one is no, the let's find a new QB. However, I find it HIGHLY unlikely that with better protection we WILL NOT see incremental improvement from TB. The question for me is more whether the improvement is enough to win a championship with the rest of the roster?

No right or wrong answers here, just trying to be specific on the OL/QB relationship and what/how much improvement we could expect. Another question is probably how much is needed and is that possible? Why/Why not?

For this last one I think we need to be at 24PF if we can continue along at 18PA. It is probably also worth contemplating that the relationship between PF/PA is likely not linear, meaning that if you get over some threshhold on PF/PA then one or the other will improve at a greater pace since you are more dominant on the other side of the ball.

Interesting post. Thanks!

It's worth noting that they're now giving up more than 18 ppg on average (they're at 19.3 now). I never believed they would sustain that 17-18 PA stat once they played better teams anyway.

I understand your basic premise: they've won with defense and the running game, one complementing the other. The passing game has been more of a punctuation mark to that strategy, though not unimportant. There's also a relationship between the performance of each unit.

My take on your questions: I don't know if Sullivan and Loadholt returning would add up to any more points at all so I'd just have to say "unknown". I don't know how to put a number on it.

I don't know how many additional points an improved Ol with 1-2 new starts and Sullivan and Loadholt would be worth either but I definitely think that would add up to more. I also think it could lead to incremental improvement Bridgewater but in my view, they need a LOT more than incremental improvement from Bridgewater.

Ultimately, for me, this "Plan B" subject isn't simply about replacing Bridgewater, it's about being better prepared to play and win without him. Whether that's due poor performance and a lack of development on his part or just injury, I think the team has to work harder to develop talent and depth at QB.

[chicagopurple]

should not every team have a viable plan B? It seems a primary responsibility of the GM/coach.