Jump to content

The Return of the Face of the Vikings (Teddy Chronicles)


gopherwrestler

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, SemperFeist said:

What’s not possible about it? 

probably because he wouldn't sign a 1 year contract as a QB coming off his rookie contract with a decent history. There will be a team that will give him a 3 year contract..

 

You rarely see young QB's sign a "prove it" contract like that.

Most likely any signing will be a multi-year contract with a way out after the first year like we see with many free agents we sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, AP_allday2869 said:

My friend said we should start Sloter over Teddy and Keemun because even if Teddy gets cleared, Teddy was never that good to begin with, and that we might as well start giving Sloter that reps he needs to start for us in the future. Lol. 

Has to be trolling you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, whitehops said:

This is easy to say in hindsight but given how well teddy's recovery has seemed to go it might've been better to pick up his option. 

 

Very tough call to make in advance though, especially if the vikes were planning to re-sign Bradford.

I feel like it won't be that hard to resign him unless he comes in and lights it up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, gopherwrestler said:

probably because he wouldn't sign a 1 year contract as a QB coming off his rookie contract with a decent history. There will be a team that will give him a 3 year contract..

 

You rarely see young QB's sign a "prove it" contract like that.

Most likely any signing will be a multi-year contract with a way out after the first year like we see with many free agents we sign.

But how isn’t it possible in regards to the CBA, as Klomp suggested?

And what team is going to give a QB who’s coming off of a dislocated knee a 3 year deal. And even they do, it’s not going to be a contract with a very high cap number, or significant guaranteed money. So, why would Bridgewater do it? 

A one year contract, with a long term option attached to it gives the team some protection, but it also gives Bridgewater the option of long term security. 

And given how much QBs are making, Bridgewater isn’t going to need to do much to get the team to pick up his option. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, SemperFeist said:

But how isn’t it possible in regards to the CBA, as Klomp suggested?

My understanding of your idea was a 1+5 contract, where a team option after Year 1 would essentially lock in the final five years of the deal. I don't know about the NFL, but the NBA only allows a +1 on team option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SemperFeist said:

But how isn’t it possible in regards to the CBA, as Klomp suggested?

And what team is going to give a QB who’s coming off of a dislocated knee a 3 year deal. And even they do, it’s not going to be a contract with a very high cap number, or significant guaranteed money. So, why would Bridgewater do it? 

A one year contract, with a long term option attached to it gives the team some protection, but it also gives Bridgewater the option of long term security. 

And given how much QBs are making, Bridgewater isn’t going to need to do much to get the team to pick up his option. 

A lot of teams will. We just gave a RB a 3 year deal before surgery. Ankle surgeries are just as much of a threat as a knee to a QB. Very highly unlikely a team offers him a 1 year contract anywhere. Whats the risk to a 3 year contract with no guaranteed money after the first year? You give him a 3 year contact in hopes he doesn't get hurt and can produce. You now have 2 more years with a QB for a bargain price.

 

You're one year contact with an option is the same thing I am basically saying, except a capable starting QB would never sign that type of contact without big money in that first year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, gopherwrestler said:

A lot of teams will. We just gave a RB a 3 year deal before surgery. Ankle surgeries are just as much of a threat as a knee to a QB. Very highly unlikely a team offers him a 1 year contract anywhere. Whats the risk to a 3 year contract with no guaranteed money after the first year? You give him a 3 year contact in hopes he doesn't get hurt and can produce. You now have 2 more years with a QB for a bargain price.

 

You're one year contact with an option is the same thing I am basically saying, except a capable starting QB would never sign that type of contact without big money in that first year.

But they’re going to sign a 3 year contract with no guaranteed money? Ok. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SemperFeist said:

But they’re going to sign a 3 year contract with no guaranteed money? Ok. 

No there is guaranteed money involved, but you can offer a higher overall salary to him. If he plays well he will stick with the team and make more money.... Look what we have done with about every guy we have signed. Most players believe in their selves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...