Can a Case be made for Keenum...?

[Dolmonite26]

1 minute ago, Klomp said:

So because we haven't been blessed with great QB play it's okay to not strive for great QB play?

#logic bro

[Freakish Mind]

10 minutes ago, Klomp said:

So because we haven't been blessed with great QB play it's okay to not strive for great QB play?

It's ok to settle sometimes....You don't need a great QB to win.  His pocket awareness is what separates him from everyone else on our roster.   

 

It seems like some of you guys can't wait for him to fail, so you can come into this thread and throw it in our faces (pro Keenum guys)

 

[perrynoid]

2 hours ago, CriminalMind said:

If Case carry's us to a SuperBowl, then we could non-exclusive franchise tag him (we should have the space), instead of the long term deal.

Imagine getting 2 1st rounder's for Case... and if no one offers him a contract, we retain him at the tag number and we maintain flexibility (long term)

Could we use a different tag for Teddy?  What are our options for tagging players, and what do we get for them signing elsewhere?

 

Never mind, I figured I would not be my lazy self for once and find out for myself:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000785958/article/what-to-know-about-nfl-franchise-tag-designations

[Klomp]

7 minutes ago, Freakish Mind said:

It's ok to settle sometimes....You don't need a great QB to win.  His pocket awareness is what separates him from everyone else on our roster.   

It seems like some of you guys can't wait for him to fail, so you can come into this thread and throw it in our faces (pro Keenum guys)

Nope, we're all Vikings fans. I'm fairly certain we all want him to play well because that means the Vikings are winning. Don't confuse what we think will happen with what we want to happen.

[vike daddy]

20 minutes ago, Freakish Mind said:

It seems like some of you guys can't wait for him to fail, so you can come into this thread and throw it in our faces (pro Keenum guys)

please stop this. please stop making up rationales for others that don't exist.

there isn't one person on this board that wants Keenum to fail. nor would anyone come here and rub that in someone's cyber face.

[NorthCountryEvo]

34 minutes ago, Klomp said:

So because we haven't been blessed with great QB play it's okay to not strive for great QB play?

Of course we should strive for great QB play, but I get what he is saying. Every team wants a Tom Brady or an Aaron Rodgers. It's just a fact that not every team will have that. Of course we should want that, but you still have to be in some ways content when a QB is playing and performing well. Keenum is not special by any means, and while his play may be a product of the offensive scheme and the players around him, he is playing very well and we are winning games. He isn't causing us to lose games, and at the end of the day he is putting out respectable performances. This is why there has to be a legitimate conversation about if he should have any sort of long term future on the team. We have too many variables in play to not at least consider him as an option, what with the relative unknowns of Bridgewater and even Sloter. I am fully in the camp for TB coming back at least next year and being the guy, but it does absolutely make sense that Keenum could be an option as a starting QB for the rest of this season and beyond, because the team chemistry and obviously our record supports that he works with what we are doing. I also think what freakish mind was kind of getting at is that while we should hope, strive for, and expect the best out of our QB's, we also shouldn't be blind to the fact that we are currently blessed by not having a Kizer, Cutler, or (insert denver QB) as our QB outlook right now. I always fall back on this, but the Ravens won the super bowl with Trent Dilfer and the Bears won the super bowl with Jim McMahon. They rode elite defenses coupled with competent offenses and average (at best sometimes) QB's to the "promised lands" and our current team composition parallels fairly well with those structures. Sometimes you have to let the square peg go into the square hole instead of trying for the round hole.

[Dolmonite26]

Yes they won super bowls with "X garbage QB"...blankity blank blank outlier blank.

That's great and if that's the scenario we're hoping on cause there are no other options thats fine and I would throw full support behind him.  But the plain, simple, starring you right in the face truth is there's a better QB on the roster.

Playing your best players=increasing your odds of winning...not complicated.

[SemperFeist]

59 minutes ago, Freakish Mind said:

His pocket awareness is what separates him from everyone else on our roster.

I would very much disagree with this. Just because he hasn’t played in over a year, people seem to forget what Bridgewater was so good at. Bridgewater’s pocket awareness was a strength of his. And while Keenum’s pocket mobility is a strength of his, I would argue that his awareness isn’t. 

[perrynoid]

Could we examine yet another option: why not go after Cousins?  He has played very well this year, and just lit up our defense a few weeks ago, and last week should have won against NO.  He is playing behind a makeshift line, and not much for weapons.  He might not cost us much more than Teddy or Case.  What do ya'all think?

[NorthCountryEvo]

5 minutes ago, Dolmonite26 said:

Yes they won super bowls with "X garbage QB"...blankity blank blank outlier blank.

That's great and if that's the scenario we're hoping on cause there are no other options thats fine and I would throw full support behind him.  But the plain, simple, starring you right in the face truth is there's a better QB on the roster.

Playing your best players=increasing your odds of winning...not complicated.

I would agree, except at this point we cannot confirm that Teddy is a better QB. I want him to be, I think he could be, but I have also learned many times in life to not count your chickens before they hatch. You also have to take into account that Peyton Manning in his prime would be a worse fit in a option heavy offense compared to Mike Vick, even though Manning is easily the better QB. In reality, Teddy prior to his injury is probably a better fit than Keenum is, but right now, for all we know, Keenum could actually be the better fit.

 

Also, yes, those two teams are individual cases, but you can make plenty more of those cases. Kaepernick, Flacco, etc. They may not result in sustained success, but it is still an option. In many peoples eyes, one super bowl trophy is better than none. Not all teams can be the Pats and have year in and year out success. We should always shoot for that, but the Pats are actually more of an outlier than the amount of average QB led teams who have won the Super Bowl, at least in my opinion.

[Dolmonite26]

With Keenum there's a very clear case of expectation vs results.

He's a backup so expectations were low. Him coming in and displaying sheer competence while also posting some above average box scores has lead to the ludicrous conversation of wondering if he could be a QBoTF....come on now.

People are also shelling out excuses for clear examples of poor play or execution on his part. Don't prop up his good plays while ignoring the poor ones (yes I'm aware this applies in the inverse) 

[NorthCountryEvo]

5 minutes ago, perrynoid said:

Could we examine yet another option: why not go after Cousins?  He has played very well this year, and just lit up our defense a few weeks ago, and last week should have won against NO.  He is playing behind a makeshift line, and not much for weapons.  He might not cost us much more than Teddy or Case.  What do ya'all think?

With what has been purported as Cousin's asking price, I would think that we could possibly re-sign both Bridgewater and Keenum for a price in the same ballpark as just Cousins. I also just personally prefer to stay in house with players as much as possible.

[SemperFeist]

I think people are going to be shocked at what Cousins gets on the open market. 

[Dolmonite26]

5 minutes ago, perrynoid said:

Could we examine yet another option: why not go after Cousins?  He has played very well this year, and just lit up our defense a few weeks ago, and last week should have won against NO.  He is playing behind a makeshift line, and not much for weapons.  He might not cost us much more than Teddy or Case.  What do ya'all think?

Only like this option if we have verified that teddy isn't one.

[NorthCountryEvo]

3 minutes ago, Dolmonite26 said:

With Keenum there's a very clear case of expectation vs results.

He's a backup so expectations were low. Him coming in and displaying sheer competence while also posting some above average box scores has lead to the ludicrous conversation of wondering if he could be a QBoTF....come on now.

People are also shelling out excuses for clear examples of poor play or execution on his part. Don't prop up his good plays while ignoring the poor ones (yes I'm aware this applies in the inverse) 

It's always good to be critical of poor play, and Keenum definitely has his fair share. I just don't think that should automatically exclude him from the conversation as an option going forward. And to your point, I still don't think that he should be considered a QBotF in the classic sense, which is a guy who can hold down a starting spot in good standing for years and years.