Can a Case be made for Keenum...?

[swede700]

13 minutes ago, vikingsrule said:

At the same time, there is a lot more history on Keenum and if the second half of the Redskins game is a sign to come, the hot hand may soon be fading.

In the last three games, Keenum  has 6 Tds and 4 ints and about 260 yds/game. Solid numbers for sure but how "hot" is he really?

How much of a risk is there in Teddy producing a 1.5/1 TD/Int ratio and about 260 per game? Not really asking Teddy to do much if Keenum's recent success is is the barometer.

Outside of those 2 ints (which everyone can say were awful), he was 10-13 for 116 yds in the 2nd half.  That's still awfully good.  

[CriminalMind]

2 hours ago, disaacs said:

I don't believe there has been any confirmed fact that the front office views Bridgewater as the starter.  That may be their hope, but I'm not sure it's necessarily their concrete view at the current time.  It's their job to be objective in that point.    

I agree.

Management has been hush on this for a while, and its very likely they will stay silent on this, likely until the offseason.

[vike daddy]

Keenum said on the Dan Patrick Show that he’s approaching this week as if he’s starting against the Rams on Sunday.

Keenum:  “In my own head, I for sure am. That’s how I’ve approached it, that’s how I’ve answered it. I don’t know how else to answer it. That’s how I have to approach every week.” 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/11/14/case-keenum-in-my-head-im-sure-im-the-starter/

[CriminalMind]

1 hour ago, boombap said:

I also think there is a very real fear that rollercoaster Case is going to cost us a playoff game. He can't make those mistakes against the eagles or saints if we hope to host a superbowl. I do tho k he starts this week but if he doesn't show he can hang with the NFC elite I think the switch is made so we enter the play-off race with the higher upside QB.

I agree Case can't make those mistakes in the playoffs, but that should not be the turning point for sending Teddy in ahead of him.

I still not going to say that Teddy is a higher upside QB, not yet at least.

Case and the Vikings are on a 5 game winning streak, the risk with putting in Teddy, is that he is rusty and can produce even lower then his previous play.

We don't have the real luxury of letting Teddy struggle to find his game (in live action).

An extra 1 loss (by Teddy, compared to Case) likely costs us a bye week, and we only host a wild card game

An extra 2 losses (by Teddy, compared to Case) likely costs us any home playoff games in the wild card, divisional and conference rounds.

If they are bent on seeing Bridgewater play, I think home vs Cinny or home vs Chi

 

 

[Klomp]

25 minutes ago, CriminalMind said:

Case and the Vikings are on a 5 game winning streak, the risk with putting in Teddy, is that he is rusty and can produce even lower then his previous play.

We don't have the real luxury of letting Teddy struggle to find his game (in live action).

Why are we assuming that putting Teddy in automatically means he's rusty and will lead us to a loss, while Case is guaranteed to keep winning?

[wcblack34]

Case has been about what you can expect. He's been great against bad defenses. He's been average against average defenses, and he's been bad against very good defenses. While there is certainly something to be said about chemistry and riding the hot hand, there is also something to be said for history. And that history says that he will play poorly in the playoffs against good defenses.

 

He has a chance to prove his detractors wrong this week, but I certainly don't see him turning in a world-beating performance. What I want to see is him not make bone-headed interceptions. Those two INT's at Washington were putrid. 

[swede700]

42 minutes ago, Klomp said:

Why are we assuming that putting Teddy in automatically means he's rusty and will lead us to a loss, while Case is guaranteed to keep winning?

Why should anyone assume that putting Teddy in automatically means he's going to be better than what he was the last time he played in regular season game?  It's because history tells us that rusty is generally how players come back after an extended absence.  It's certainly not a guarantee, but I'd probably say, more often than not, that is the case...even moreso that he hasn't had a training camp to work it off.  

[SteelKing728]

Very neat way to go about things. We are in a very interesting situation...

[Klomp]

1 hour ago, disaacs said:

Why should anyone assume that putting Teddy in automatically means he's going to be better than what he was the last time he played in regular season game?  It's because history tells us that rusty is generally how players come back after an extended absence.  It's certainly not a guarantee, but I'd probably say, more often than not, that is the case...even moreso that he hasn't had a training camp to work it off.  

I never said he's going to be better. I don't think he has to be. 

Keenum hasn't exactly been lighting it up either. Only three games with multiple TDs. Only one of those didn't include an INT. Those same three games are also his only three games over 240 yards.

[Klomp]

2 hours ago, CriminalMind said:

I still not going to say that Teddy is a higher upside QB, not yet at least.

Case and the Vikings are on a 5 game winning streak, the risk with putting in Teddy, is that he is rusty and can produce even lower then his previous play.

That's downside, not upside.

I don't disagree that Teddy has a lower downside, a lower floor. But I don't know why you'd say the upside is lower. Case hasn't really been manufacturing most of this production on his own. It's largely a result of great OL play and great weapons around him.

[BWG VIKE]

There really is no wrong answer in the initial decison. 

Teddy earned the right to lead this team and had everyone thinking big things before a freak injury. Now if coaches believe hes back to full health he should still have that opportunity. 

Keenum has played well enough to start if we need him to but he was brought in to be our backup and should go back to back up duties all the while giving us confidence that we can compete if our starter goes down.

I stand behind either decision

[swede700]

1 minute ago, BWG VIKE said:

There really is no wrong answer in the initial decison. 

There actually is a wrong answer...it's whatever the decision is and it goes poorly.  

[vikingsrule]

2 hours ago, CriminalMind said:

I agree Case can't make those mistakes in the playoffs, but that should not be the turning point for sending Teddy in ahead of him.

I still not going to say that Teddy is a higher upside QB, not yet at least.

Case and the Vikings are on a 5 game winning streak, the risk with putting in Teddy, is that he is rusty and can produce even lower then his previous play.

We don't have the real luxury of letting Teddy struggle to find his game (in live action).

An extra 1 loss (by Teddy, compared to Case) likely costs us a bye week, and we only host a wild card game

An extra 2 losses (by Teddy, compared to Case) likely costs us any home playoff games in the wild card, divisional and conference rounds.

If they are bent on seeing Bridgewater play, I think home vs Cinny or home vs Chi

 

 

 

Does a 5 game winning streak really matter in the grand scheme of things? Obviously we've got to win games but it's not like this streak is going to make it as so far as the playoffs. Most of the teams we've beaten during this streak are below .500, again not really a good indicator of how this team will handle against good teams. This streak will at some point come to an end and id rather it end because it takes a game or two for Teddy to shake off the rest than as a result of the wheels coming off for Keenum.

 Keenum's 1.5/1 TD/Int ratio this past month isn't exactly great.  He's not hurting the team but I don't think his play is necessarily driving this winning streak. 

[swede700]

Does it really matter what's driving the winning streak? 

That's the same logic as saying, "Hey our company has been making money hand over fist under this CEO, our stock price has never been higher, and it's right before year-end, but I like this guy over here better...he was the interim CEO before we hired this guy and has been out of the company for a few years and we've changed our company philosophy, but I think we can give him a few months and see and he'll figure it out...our shareholders will understand and stick with us, even if our share price tanks."  

[vikingsrule]

1 minute ago, disaacs said:

Does it really matter what's driving the winning streak?  

If you're evaluating a change at the QB position, I think so. Does putting in a new QB change the dynamic of what's been successful. I don't think putting Teddy in changes much for the offense but I'd argue that Keenum is probably a better deep ball passer until Teddy proves otherwise.