Can a Case be made for Keenum...?

[vike daddy]

The Vikings' Keenum has played just two games, but only Tom Brady has a higher Total QBR thus far in 2017. Not bad for Sam Bradford's backup. On Sunday, the Bucs dialed up a blitz on 14 of Keenum's dropbacks — only two QBs faced a blitz more times in Week 3 — and he made them pay. His most valuable play of the day — a 17-yard touchdown pass to Stefon Diggs in the final minute of the first half — was one of three scores Keenum produced versus five or more pass-rushers. 

http://www.vikings.com/news/article-1/Lunchbreak-Case-Keenum-Ranked-as-ESPNs-Top-QB-in-Week-3/f04efb46-12a1-4aae-ae91-9ca0c4a4800e?sf116835981=1

[Guest]

Before we go crazy and anoint Keenum as the QBOF, let him string together some games where he plays consistently well!  He's had a bad game and he's had a good game.  At this point there is really nothing to talk about other than to say..."Wow, Keenum really played well against the Bucs!  Wonder how he will perform against the Lions?"

[swede700]

I'm not sure anyone is anointing Keenum as the QBOTF.  

[vike daddy]

i'm pretty sure no one is.

[vikingsrule]

I think Keenum is good for 3-4 games per year. Anything more, you have to be concerned. Let's not forget how bad he looked on the road. I'm okay playing Keenum against Detroit in MN to give Bradford three weeks rest.

[Klomp]

A case as the starter? No.
A case to stay as the backup? Absolutely.

[Snake Plissken]

2 hours ago, Virginia Viking said:

Before we go crazy and anoint Keenum as the QBOF, let him string together some games where he plays consistently well!  He's had a bad game and he's had a good game.  At this point there is really nothing to talk about other than to say..."Wow, Keenum really played well against the Bucs!  Wonder how he will perform against the Lions?"

Welcome.  This universe is a lot different from Bizarro.

[vike daddy]

Keenum: “I’m trying to see things through Sam’s eyes, which, we’re both trying to see things through Pat Shurmur's eyes. So with that, I think that brings continuity, that brings chemistry, that brings some similarities that help the offense move forward seamlessly.”

“I’d like to think that I always have confidence and that I’m always confident in myself. I’m very confident in this team. I’m very confident in my offensive line, my receivers, backs, all those guys. That’s something that I’ve developed and I’ve tried to continue to cultivate as the weeks have gone by, but any time you’re successful, I think it helps build confidence.”

http://www.vikings.com/news/article-1/Case-Keenum-Sharing-Perspective-of-Offense-with-Bradford-Shurmur-Brings-Continuity-/de3362f1-481b-451a-b8fc-1b697ea42efe?sf117282724=1

[Kparty15]

On 9/26/2017 at 9:53 AM, SemperFeist said:

Bridgewater’s contract isn’t going to toll. 

The team will have to make a decision at the end of the year between Bradford and Bridgewater. An extension for Keenum shouldn’t be an issue. 

Umm. What?  The CBA states that if a player on the last year of their contract misses the first 6 games of the season then their contract will roll to the next year.

 

Teddy Bridgewater’s contract IS going to toll to 2018.  It has been confirmed by Ian Rapoport.

http://www.dailynorseman.com/platform/amp/2017/5/3/15537330/more-teddy-bridgewater-option-clarification

[NorthCountryEvo]

Cautious optimism is my norm, and it’s no different here. Keenum has the ability, but sustained success is something we have yet to really see in his career. I still think what we should be hoping for is as close to a .500 W/L record from the games he starts to have him be considered a relative success as a backup for us. Of course, it is a team game, and he might not be the deciding factor in wins and losses, but as a single point of failure, it is more than likely that his performance will directly be linked to our wins and losses during his starting tenure.

[Cearbhall]

1 hour ago, Kparty15 said:

Umm. What?  The CBA states that if a player on the last year of their contract misses the first 6 games of the season then their contract will roll to the next year.

But what you say the CBA states isn't actually what it states. This is what the CBA states: "the player’s contract will be tolled if he is still physically unable to perform his football services as of the sixth regular season game."

Being on the PUP list means that a player was not physically able to perform his football services through camp and as of week one of the regular season. While a player can't come of the PUP before six weeks, being on the PUP does not automatically qualify a player as not being able to physically perform his duties as of the sixth regular season game.

If Teddy can pass a physical as of the sixth game and the team tries to toll his contract you can bet that there will be a grievance. None of us know how that may turn out. i really hope that it doesn't come to that. If either Teddy can't pass a physical as of the sixth regular season game or the Vikings don't try to toll the contract when he can pass the physical the ugliness can be avoided. 

Getting into a battle of the legalese with your franchise QB would be a very poor look and sad state of affairs for the Vikings. In fact, getting into that battle is likely an admission that Teddy is not your franchise QB.

[swede700]

10 hours ago, Cearbhall said:

But what you say the CBA states isn't actually what it states. This is what the CBA states: "the player’s contract will be tolled if he is still physically unable to perform his football services as of the sixth regular season game."

Being on the PUP list means that a player was not physically able to perform his football services through camp and as of week one of the regular season. While a player can't come of the PUP before six weeks, being on the PUP does not automatically qualify a player as not being able to physically perform his duties as of the sixth regular season game.

I'm not sure a court would agree with you, although I understand that's what Teddy's lawyers would argue.  Since it's a collectively bargained term, it doesn't really matter whether in reality that Teddy could pass a physical as of the 6th regular season game...by virtue of the fact that he is on the PUP, I believe that automatically deems him as physically unable to perform as of the 6th regular season game.  

Either way though, I don't see either side taking it to court.  I do believe that the contract would toll, but the Vikings may rip up the last year of the deal and give him a little extra cash (somewhere between what he makes now and what he would have made under the 5th year option), but make it a short 1 or 2 year deal.

[vikingsrule]

Keenum is a free agent next year. I wonder what his value will be if he keeps performing well. I could see him being a stop gap starter elsewhere versus coming back to Mn to be the backup to Bradford or Teddy.

[SemperFeist]

After the 6th game the Vikings either need to activate Bridgewater to the 53-man roster, or they need to put him on IR. 

If he passes a physical, he won’t be placed on IR, which means his contract won’t toll. 

[Kparty15]

10 hours ago, Cearbhall said:

But what you say the CBA states isn't actually what it states. This is what the CBA states: "the player’s contract will be tolled if he is still physically unable to perform his football services as of the sixth regular season game."

Being on the PUP list means that a player was not physically able to perform his football services through camp and as of week one of the regular season. While a player can't come of the PUP before six weeks, being on the PUP does not automatically qualify a player as not being able to physically perform his duties as of the sixth regular season game.

If Teddy can pass a physical as of the sixth game and the team tries to toll his contract you can bet that there will be a grievance. None of us know how that may turn out. i really hope that it doesn't come to that. If either Teddy can't pass a physical as of the sixth regular season game or the Vikings don't try to toll the contract when he can pass the physical the ugliness can be avoided. 

Getting into a battle of the legalese with your franchise QB would be a very poor look and sad state of affairs for the Vikings. In fact, getting into that battle is likely an admission that Teddy is not your franchise QB.

 

Where are you coming up with this?  I haven’t read anywhere that a player can try to pass a physical to avoid a tolling contract.

“Section 2. Physically Unable to Perform Perform:  Any player placed on a Physically Unable to Perform list (“PUP”) will be paid his full Paragraph 5 Salary while on such list. His contract will not be tolled for the period he is on PUP, except in the last year of his contract, when the player’s contract will be tolled if he is still physically unable to perform his football services as of the sixth regular season game.”

 

Top of page 128:

https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/collective-bargaining-agreement-2011-2020.pdf

 

My interpretation is that if player is stuck on the Physically Unable to Perform list then they still technically are Physically Unable to Perform any football services whether they are healthy or not because being placed on the list would restrict them from being able to go physically go on to the field to play or even practice with the team until after week 6 according to the PUP rules.  It’s not a matter of health as much as it is a matter of physically not being allowed to perform football services until after week 6 which would include the 6th game of the season for us.