Krauser Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 I think Teddy would’ve been at least a good starting QB. His game did have some limitations, but he was very young, and the needle was pointing up, especially in that 3rd preseason where we were all hoping he’d make strides. Probably he never would’ve been a Wilson or Brees level elite QB, but I think he could’ve been in the mix with Ryan or Rivers at that next level, and still clearly a franchise QB. Also importantly, if Bridgewater doesn’t get injured, the Vikings keep their 2017 1st round pick, and have a chance to take Ryan Ramczyk (who fell to the Saints at 32), among others. They save $18M against the cap for Bradford in 2017 and have the chance to load up their roster with short term vets or bring in another more expensive UFA that might helped for that playoff run. And then they have a healthy and presumably more mature Bridgewater in the playoffs, instead of Keenum, and I doubt Teddy throws the INT that turned the Saints game around, or the pick 6 that turned the Eagles game around. Would that have been enough? I don’t know if they could’ve beaten the Patriots. Their offense was always going to be more conservative, and if Pederson hadn’t schemed the Eagles to 40 points, they wouldn’t have beaten NE. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric dunn Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 5 hours ago, gopherwrestler said: Hardest part with the QB position is if we kept our 2017 pick, probably the best QB we would have drafted was Kizer, instead we traded it for some hope with Bradford..... who also gets hurt.... you could say we would have done way way worse with Hill as QB I guess and drafted Mahomes, but no team is going to just “tank”. We were close to win now, our OLine was destroyed and the next year we made it to the NFCCG with Keenum. Vikings have weird luck, good and bad. There was really no choice but to trade for Bradford. With Teddy going down, we couldnt just ride with Hill all year. People say oh that was a terrible trade, but what other options did he have? Just like the Cousins deal, what other choice did he have? Resign Case (who everyone knew was not THE GUY)? Resign Teddy(who hadnt played in two years)? Resign Bradford(who's knee was also wrecked)? With a team that has SB potential you couldnt just risk it with one of them & couldnt draft a guy early and expect him to be the guy. So regardless of what the opinions are on Cousins, he was the best option at the time. And looking back, the case can still be made that MIN made the right choice. So thats why i think MIN needs to draft a QB early next year to be prepared for whatever happens next. Which im not sure they will, but they should. Next years QB class looks pretty good as of right now. If they can find a true franchise QB (hard to find) that alone will keep the team contenders for a long time. IF they can develop a guy like Mahomes, Watson, or Baker then they can be competitive for years to come, regardless of if the defense is top 5 or not. As long as Zim is around, the defense will be good enough to compete with the NFL's best. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krauser Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 3 minutes ago, Eric dunn said: There was really no choice but to trade for Bradford. With Teddy going down, we couldnt just ride with Hill all year. People say oh that was a terrible trade, but what other options did he have? Not trade for Bradford, finish 5-11 with Hill (which would've been no fun to watch, but what can you do?), and be in position to draft Mahomes or Watson. The Vikings might've won the division with either of those QBs last year. The Bradford trade only made sense if Bradford wasn't going to suffer a career ending injury the following year. But of course he did. If he hadn't, the Vikings probably win 14 games in 2017 (winning at least the Lions game, and maybe the Panthers or Steelers game), beat the Saints more comfortably, and host the NFCCG as a heavy favorite over the Eagles with Foles. 4 minutes ago, Eric dunn said: Just like the Cousins deal, what other choice did he have? No other good ones, unless you think drafting Lamar Jackson would've been better (I don't). Tanking 2018 and drafting the 2nd or 3rd QB in 2019 (Haskins?) might've produced a better QB than Cousins in the long run, but the earliest you could expect the rookie to win a playoff game would be 2020, and the defense will be aging out of its peak window by that point. I'm not a big fan of Cousins but he's a legitimate starter, and he's been durable. The Cousins signing isn't the problem right now, though you have to wonder how much further along the team would be if Teddy had stayed healthy, or if they'd tanked 2016 after his injury and drafted a rookie QB in what turned out to be a stacked class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric dunn Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 The thought of adding a Justin Herbert or Tua or Fromm to this team next year is very exciting. Sure the Vikings wont be drafting early enough for these guys. But realistically, what teams drafting early will be looking for QB's next year? CIN prob, maybe TB? Alot of the teams that should be drafting early, already have young QB's (ARZ, MIA, NYG, OAK, WASH, BUF, DEN, NYJ). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric dunn Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 1 minute ago, Krauser said: Not trade for Bradford, finish 5-11 with Hill (which would've been no fun to watch, but what can you do?), and be in position to draft Mahomes or Watson. The Vikings might've won the division with either of those QBs last year. The Bradford trade only made sense if Bradford wasn't going to suffer a career ending injury the following year. But of course he did. If he hadn't, the Vikings probably win 14 games in 2017 (winning at least the Lions game, and maybe the Panthers or Steelers game), beat the Saints more comfortably, and host the NFCCG as a heavy favorite over the Eagles with Foles. No other good ones, unless you think drafting Lamar Jackson would've been better (I don't). Tanking 2018 and drafting the 2nd or 3rd QB in 2019 (Haskins?) might've produced a better QB than Cousins in the long run, but the earliest you could expect the rookie to win a playoff game would be 2020, and the defense will be aging out of its peak window by that point. I'm not a big fan of Cousins but he's a legitimate starter, and he's been durable. The Cousins signing isn't the problem right now, though you have to wonder how much further along the team would be if Teddy had stayed healthy, or if they'd tanked 2016 after his injury and drafted a rookie QB in what turned out to be a stacked class. You can say that rolling with Hill & going 5-11 was the best option, and YES it was the best option. BUT there is no way Rick & Zim were willing to throw a season away just to possibly draft a QB early. Rick had to do something to give the team & fans & coaches hope, even if it was the slightest glimpse of hope. I didnt like the trade at the time, but i had to admit that it gave us a chance! Hill gave us NO chance, period. And no i dont believe rolling with Jackson was a better option, even though i was a huge fan of his. Also i dont believe a rookie Haskins or Jones or Lock on this team gives us a better chance to win a SB next year or the year after that for that matter. Kirk Cousins as good or bad as he may be, gives the Vikings the best chance to win a SB in 2019-2020. Regardless of how low that chance is. Just like Bradford gave the best chance for MIN when they traded for him, even though the chances were also slim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cearbhall Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 Yeah, trading for Bradford was a terrible mistake. I said it at the time and nothing since then changed my mind. There were definitely better options and rolling with Hill was just one of the better options. Other QBs off the scrap heap that didn't cost a draft pick would have also been better options. Mike Vick is a name I remember considering at the time. That isn't to say that I think that Vick would have been any good. Signing him would have been a better option for the team though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric dunn Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 Bottom line in my opinion, unless Kirk Cousins makes or wins the SB next year. The Vikings need to take or trade up for a top QB next year. Then you have a good backup & the future set. AND you don’t have to pay Kirk his 2nd contract, which will probably be huge. Then you have flexibility to resign guys and/or bring in free agents at positions of need because of that big chunk of cap space. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikesfan89 Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 31 minutes ago, Cearbhall said: Yeah, trading for Bradford was a terrible mistake. I said it at the time and nothing since then changed my mind. There were definitely better options and rolling with Hill was just one of the better options. Other QBs off the scrap heap that didn't cost a draft pick would have also been better options. Mike Vick is a name I remember considering at the time. That isn't to say that I think that Vick would have been any good. Signing him would have been a better option for the team though. Would you say the same thing if we gave up a late first round pick? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted May 2, 2019 Share Posted May 2, 2019 No one said the Bradford trade was a mistake as the team headed into the bye week that year. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted May 2, 2019 Author Share Posted May 2, 2019 (edited) 14 minutes ago, SemperFeist said: No one said the Bradford trade was a mistake as the team headed into the bye week that year. And I've never said it was a mistake ever. Even knowing what I know now, I'd still approve of the move. It was the right move to make at the time. Anyway, back on topic, I think if Cousins performs the same as he has, which is some good and some bad, they have to look at drafting a QB in the first 2 rounds next year. That's just a consequence of the situation. They have to prepare themselves in case they have to let him go after the 2020 season. If he has an outstanding season, then they can decide to keep him around for a couple of more years while the new QB continues to develop or let him go, ala the Chargers and Brees (although certainly Cousins is a lot older than Brees was) and move on with the new QB. At least then, they'd give themselves a choice. Edited May 2, 2019 by swede700 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 3, 2019 Share Posted May 3, 2019 18 hours ago, Eric dunn said: Bottom line in my opinion, unless Kirk Cousins makes or wins the SB next year. The Vikings need to take or trade up for a top QB next year. Then you have a good backup & the future set. AND you don’t have to pay Kirk his 2nd contract, which will probably be huge. Then you have flexibility to resign guys and/or bring in free agents at positions of need because of that big chunk of cap space. Even if he has an all-time great season that culminates in a championship, I'm not going to give Cousins a 2nd contract for more money. If he wants more rings he stays for a team friendlier contract. If he wants more money, he leaves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingsrule Posted May 3, 2019 Share Posted May 3, 2019 20 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said: Even if he has an all-time great season that culminates in a championship, I'm not going to give Cousins a 2nd contract for more money. If he wants more rings he stays for a team friendlier contract. If he wants more money, he leaves. Except that will never happen. Teams don't let super bowl winning QBs at their peak just walk. They'd bring back Cousins and make the cap work as they have the past year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDBrocks Posted May 3, 2019 Share Posted May 3, 2019 1 hour ago, Virginia Viking said: Even if he has an all-time great season that culminates in a championship, I'm not going to give Cousins a 2nd contract for more money. If he wants more rings he stays for a team friendlier contract. If he wants more money, he leaves. This is not an opinion based on any kind of logic or reason. Super Bowl winning QBs don't take team friendly deals outside of Brady (because the team pays him in other ways and because his wife makes twice as much as he does). How would you justify letting go of the only QB to win a championship for the Vikings? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 3, 2019 Share Posted May 3, 2019 1 hour ago, JDBrocks said: This is not an opinion based on any kind of logic or reason. Super Bowl winning QBs don't take team friendly deals outside of Brady (because the team pays him in other ways and because his wife makes twice as much as he does). How would you justify letting go of the only QB to win a championship for the Vikings? Would he be significantly more important to the Vikings then Brad Johnson was to the Bucs when they won? Or, Dilfer when the Ravens won their first? Maybe somewhat more important, but significantly more? No. The Vikings are building a non-QB centric team...despite the contract they gave Cousins. Cousins isn't close to becoming Cam Newton in his MVP year taking the Panthers to the Super Bowl, or Aaron Rodgers of 2011 when the Green Bay won. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDBrocks Posted May 3, 2019 Share Posted May 3, 2019 2 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said: Would he be significantly more important to the Vikings then Brad Johnson was to the Bucs when they won? Or, Dilfer when the Ravens won their first? Maybe somewhat more important, but significantly more? No. The Vikings are building a non-QB centric team...despite the contract they gave Cousins. Cousins isn't close to becoming Cam Newton in his MVP year taking the Panthers to the Super Bowl, or Aaron Rodgers of 2011 when the Green Bay won. In your scenario, yes absolutely. He had an all time great season in your scenario above. You pay for that production. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.