Knockin' on Valhalla's Door

[wcblack34]

Ah yes. The Stefon Diggs cryptic tweeting has begun. I'm so glad that's Buffalo's problem now. 

[SteelKing728]

Had Arizona not cut Sam Bradford prior to week 10 in 2018, and thus costing us a 3rd round comp pick in 2019, we could've had Maxx Crosby.

Bradford always found a way to really mess things up for us. I usually don't hate former players, but he's very much the exception.

Oh well.

[Heimdallr]

1 hour ago, SteelKing728 said:

Had Arizona not cut Sam Bradford prior to week 10 in 2018, and thus costing us a 3rd round comp pick in 2019, we could've had Maxx Crosby.

Bradford always found a way to really mess things up for us. I usually don't hate former players, but he's very much the exception.

Oh well.

I know most people didn't like signing Sam Bradford, and obviously it ultimately didn't work out, but I still believe it was a good decision at the time. When you look at the whole context at the time, it was worth taking the risk. 

Similarly, I think taking Tarvaris Jackson was worth the risk. 

Taking Christian Ponder however, was not. That was just flat out bad. 

[SemperFeist]

Trading for Bradford the player wasn’t a problem, the team just significantly overpaid. 

[Heimdallr]

5 minutes ago, SemperFeist said:

Trading for Bradford the player wasn’t a problem, the team just significantly overpaid. 

Wasn't it a 1st and a 3rd? That is hardly anything for a starting QB

[SemperFeist]

5 hours ago, Heimdallr said:

Wasn't it a 1st and a 3rd? That is hardly anything for a starting QB

1. Bradford wasn’t a starting QB. He lost the starting job in Philly.

2. Bradford was an unwanted commodity. There was no reason to give up a premium pick for him. 

3. After losing Bridgewater to injury, trading a 1st round pick for a QB who was constantly injured defied logic. 

4. Even at the time of the trade, the team (Spielman) readily admitted that Bradford wasn’t intended to be a long term player. Trading away a 1st round pick for a stop gap player is just a stupid use of resources. 

 

Spielman panic traded. Something that became all to common in August. 

Edited April 1, 2022 by SemperFeist

[Cearbhall]

Unlike Mr @SteelKing728, I like Sam Bradford. I don't fault him for his health or anything else that happened to the Vikings. He didn't mess anything up for the Vikings.

However, I hated the trade for Sam Bradford from the day it was announced. I thought at the time, and still think today, that the trade for Bradford was a terrible decision. Bradford came in and rolled off a nice string of wins to start the season after Shaun Hill started the first game. That was nice. Bradford did more than I would have expected. The Vikings, with their poor decision making, messed things up for the Vikings. Health was a known concern for Bradford before the team traded for him. It isn't Bradford's fault that his knee prevented the team from collecting a compensatory pick for him after his time in MN was complete.

I like Sam Bradford. I like Teddy Bridgewater and Case Keenum too. I always thought all of these men gave everything that could be expected and more to the Vikings when they were with the team. The team's leadership bungled the situation, not those QBs. It turns out the right answer was none of the above, which is what I would have favored when the team traded for Bradford. Nobody would have faulted the team for having a down year when their starting QB fell to a freak preseason injury.

The likely resultant record would have put the Vikings in good shape to draft a darn good QB the next year. Of course, the Vikings, under previous leadership, could have bungled that too leaving us with the misfortunate of hoping that Mitch Trubisky turned the corner in the coming season (for multiple seasons in a row).

I am so happy the team replaced their GM. With new leadership, I once again have real hope rather than forced or contrived hope.

Edited April 1, 2022 by Cearbhall

[swede700]

I have defended the Bradford decision, and always will every time it's brought up.  It was the right move to make and the price was the price at the time it was made.  Sure, they could have had a terrible year and been in a position to draft someone else in 2017...but, they also wouldn't likely have made the NFCC that next year either with that new guy (of course, ultimately, they didn't with Bradford either since he got injured).  But, that's all speculation.  

My belief is and always has been that going a full season with Shaun Hill (the older, but more accomplished, version of Sean Mannion) was never an option that would have been acceptable to anyone here or the other fans or the team in general.  

 

[SteelKing728]

I doubt Mahomes develops here like he did in and Watson still ends up as a garbage human being. We weren't out-tanking Chicago with Hill though.

We end up losing either way.

Maybe we should've made a better offer for Nick Foles that season!

 

Edited April 1, 2022 by SteelKing728

[AP_allday2869]

Imo, Minnesota goes to the Super Bowl with a healthy Bradford in 2017.

[vikingsrule]

4 hours ago, AP_allday2869 said:

Imo, Minnesota goes to the Super Bowl with a healthy Bradford in 2017.

Not behind that OL. Thought Keenum bailed them out often with his ability to escape pressure and throw the ball up. Bradford isn’t doing that and it was a nice compliment to the defense. 

[swede700]

 

[vikingsrule]

On 4/1/2022 at 11:47 AM, swede700 said:

I have defended the Bradford decision, and always will every time it's brought up.  It was the right move to make and the price was the price at the time it was made.  Sure, they could have had a terrible year and been in a position to draft someone else in 2017...but, they also wouldn't likely have made the NFCC that next year either with that new guy (of course, ultimately, they didn't with Bradford either since he got injured).  But, that's all speculation.  

My belief is and always has been that going a full season with Shaun Hill (the older, but more accomplished, version of Sean Mannion) was never an option that would have been acceptable to anyone here or the other fans or the team in general.  

 

There’s got to be an in between. Surely there were other options that didn’t cost a first round pick that could have better than Hill. I think it was a panic trade given the desire to have a competent team in the first year at US Bank stadium. It was foolish and short sighted and really defied logic. But Spielman has this tendency to throw away valuable picks at the start of the year in hopes of saving face. Didn’t they trade a second when Hunter was lost to acquire Ngakoue. 

[swede700]

5 minutes ago, vikingsrule said:

There’s got to be an in between. Surely there were other options that didn’t cost a first round pick that could have better than Hill. I think it was a panic trade given the desire to have a competent team in the first year at US Bank stadium. It was foolish and short sighted and really defied logic. But Spielman has this tendency to throw away valuable picks at the start of the year in hopes of saving face. Didn’t they trade a second when Hunter was lost to acquire Ngakoue. 

No, I believe that trade was made before Hunter was known to be out for the season (or even right before he got injured).  They thought it was just a twinge at that point and that only rest would be required.

But, on your point, at that time in the preseason there really weren't any other viable options, since it was right before the regular season.  Bradford was made expendable by Philadelphia because of Wentz' rapid development.  There wasn't anyone available off the street and most other teams already had their starters and backups set, so they weren't expendable.  

Edited April 5, 2022 by swede700

[Cearbhall]

4 hours ago, swede700 said:

No, I believe that trade was made before Hunter was known to be out for the season (or even right before he got injured).  They thought it was just a twinge at that point and that only rest would be required.

But, on your point, at that time in the preseason there really weren't any other viable options, since it was right before the regular season.  Bradford was made expendable by Philadelphia because of Wentz' rapid development.  There wasn't anyone available off the street and most other teams already had their starters and backups set, so they weren't expendable.  

They were publicly saying that Hunter's situation was a twinge. I doubt that is what they thought. Under coach Zimmer, the team had a habit of understating injuries in public comments.

As far as no other viable options, there are always other options. I would have went with one of the options that was much cheaper than what they gave up for Bradford. At the time, my inclination was to bring in Michael Vick and that isn't because I thought that Vick was any good at that point. It is because I didn't think that Shaun Hill could start for a full season. Likewise, the team could have scraped some other old guy off the retirement pile. None of them were likely to be good, but there are always plenty of guys that can throw a football.

Trading that much away for Bradford hoping to be good that year was a huge mistake and very short-sighted. In fact, the pick they gave the Eagles for Bradford came back to haunt them in the NFC championship game a year later when the player the Eagles drafted with that pick turned the game with a strip sack. After that, the game quickly became a blowout.  Who knows what would have happened if the Vikings instead had a player with that pick and scored the TD they were heading towards before the strip sack.