Options at QB

[Cliff]

The Vikings will almostly certainly roll with Hill to start the season. I honestly don't know after that. He can't be relied on to start an entire season I don't think, especially with this line. Whatever the plan is there should be an eye kept towards the idea that Teddy might not be able to come back and if he does might not be able to continue his progression. From a football point of view this is a huge setback.

Of course hope for the best, but I think they need to proceed as if he'll never be back.

[mansquatch]

Jim, TB is 23 years old. Do you really think the Vikings should spend a high to mid round pick on another QB when the OL looks the way it does? They signed Hill for this contingency and hoped, like all teams do, that their starting QB wouldn't go down. Does anyone think if this happened to Andy Dalton that the Bengals would just ride AJ McCarron at this stage in the season? My guess is they'd be out looking at all the guys we've listed just like we are.

It was one thing to nag on the approach when there was no apparent starter, but it is quite another when they've invested a high pick in a guy and are giving him his time as the Vikings are with TB. I just wish Spielman would figure out how to draft a WR so we can start investing picks in OL.

[dead_poet]

As much as it pains me, I agree. I do think much of their draft strategy will clarify during the month or weeks prior to the draft. Where is Teddy with his rehab? If it was a standard ACL I can understand not investing a high draft pick. Due to the severity, you almost have to look to the big What If. Even if he recovers, how detrimental will it be to his performance? He's facing a long road. You obviously don't plan for the draft now but it's a contingency and an approach that must be considered.

[Mothman]

Jim, TB is 23 years old. Do you really think the Vikings should spend a high to mid round pick on another QB when the OL looks the way it does?

Yes. As far as I'm concerned, they've mismanaged the depth chart at this position for almost a decade.

They signed Hill for this contingency and hoped, like all teams do, that their starting QB wouldn't go down. Does anyone think if this happened to Andy Dalton that the Bengals would just ride AJ McCarron at this stage in the season? My guess is they'd be out looking at all the guys we've listed just like we are.

Yes, I think they'd go with McCarron. That's why he's there. They'd probably seek another player for their depth chart but they drafted him with Dalton already on the roster and they've developed him to be their #2 QB.

It was one thing to nag on the approach when there was no apparent starter, but it is quite another when they've invested a high pick in a guy and are giving him his time as the Vikings are with TB.

... and as they did with Jackson, and Ponder...

QB is the most important position in football, a sport where a player can be lost for a season in a moment, as Bridgewater was yesterday. It's stupid for a team to put all of their eggs in one basket. It's short-sighted and I don't care what the conventional wisdom on the subject might say. The consequences will never be more obvious than they are right now and it's a lesson this team should have learned long ago because they keep stepping in the same hole but they don't learn from their mistakes.

At this point, they can't count on Bridgewater to be their QB of the future. That's just a harsh reality that must be faced. Hopefully he can fully recover and be all they want him to be but they have to proceed as if that might not happen. Then, if it does, they'll just be in a stronger situation.

[indianation65]

When I think of Sam Bradford, I think of Colt McCoy.

I think he's a Redskin now, but I don't know how far down he is.

I'm just thinkin' and reachin'...

Thoughts?

...wisdom ???

[Mothman]

As much as it pains me, I agree. I do think much of their draft strategy will clarify during the month or weeks prior to the draft. Where is Teddy with his rehab? If it was a standard ACL I can understand not investing a high draft pick. Due to the severity, you almost have to look to the big What If. Even if he recovers, how detrimental will it be to his performance? He's facing a long road. You obviously don't plan for the draft now but it's a contingency and an approach that must be considered.

Not only that but the "big What IF" in this case is twofold. There's the question of the injury (what if it does prove detrimental to his performance?) but there's also the big question mark that was looming over him already: can he take the next, necessary, steps in his development?

The Vikes can't lose sight of the fact that truly was necessary, it was something they needed to see from him this season. Early signs were positive but they were just that: early, preseason signs.

What a mess...

[Texas Vike]

Not only that but the "big What IF" in this case is twofold. There's the question of the injury (what if it does prove detrimental to his performance?) but there's also the big question mark that was looming over him already: can he take the next, necessary, steps in his development?

The Vikes can't lose sight of the fact that truly was necessary, it was something they needed to see from him this season. Early signs were positive but they were just that: early, preseason signs.

What a mess...

JIm, I agree with a fair bit of what you're saying, at least at a theoretical level. But the realist in me recognizes that there are other issues involved. 1. For example, Zimmer LOVES Teddy because of his disposition/temperament and he fully believes in him and his ability to become a solid NFL QB. 2. Let's stop with the AJ McCarron talk. The Bengals are not going to let him go for anything that we'd want the Vikings to pay. The only thing worth talking about related to him is that the Bengals have undertaken the kind of philosophy that you and I would like the Vikings to adopt. The position is so important that it merits two very good options--high draft picks even.

Lastly, it is worth recognizing that there are two separate ways to think about our current conundrum: 1) what we would do if we were Spielman 2) what are options that Spielman would realistically consider. I've seen far more of the former and not enough of the latter.

I liked Mettenberger at LSU. He has a cannon for an arm and he's tough to bring down. I think there may be some slight character concerns, but he'd be worth a look.

I agree with the Wisdom up thread too, Colt McCoy would be an option, but I think he's like McCarron for the Bengals. The Redskins place huge value on having a solid backup QB, and McCoy would be cost prohibitive.

[mansquatch]

This is the most volatile and difficult position to draft, also the most highly valued position in the draft. (talent dries up sooner vs. other positions, ie Linebacker) We would suddenly be treating high round picks like late round picks in order to maybe have a back up. This is further compounded by the fact that you will never know if that guy is going to pan out until the most undesirable scenario happens and your start goes down. Let's also not forget that for every Aaron Rogers there are 100 busts. In the mean time we are 100% guaranteed to be giving up the opportunity to draft at other positions of need. How is that risk/reward managed effectively in a way that also allows a GM to develop a competitive franchise?

An outside circumstance such as what we are experiencing might make the position sound vindicated, but what happened to TB is a statistical outlier IMO. I just don't see the value for the resources given the other issues. Also, lets consider that even in light of the Vikings NOT "properly" managing the QB position, they still haven't been able to address their OL woes. So now if we starting drafting backup QBs higher, what other position are we going to neglect?

This idea sounds great, but I don't see it as viable across multiple drafts, especially if you lack a franchise guy.

[Texas Vike]

This is the most volatile and difficult position to draft, also the most highly valued position in the draft. (talent dries up sooner vs. other positions, ie Linebacker) We would suddenly be treating high round picks like late round picks in order to maybe have a back up. This is further compounded by the fact that you will never know if that guy is going to pan out until the most undesirable scenario happens and your start goes down. Let's also not forget that for every Aaron Rogers there are 100 busts. In the mean time we are 100% guaranteed to be giving up the opportunity to draft at other positions of need. How is that risk/reward managed effectively in a way that also allows a GM to develop a competitive franchise?

An outside circumstance such as what we are experiencing might make the position sound vindicated, but what happened to TB is a statistical outlier IMO. I just don't see the value for the resources given the other issues. Also, lets consider that even in light of the Vikings NOT "properly" managing the QB position, they still haven't been able to address their OL woes. So now if we starting drafting backup QBs higher, what other position are we going to neglect?

This idea sounds great, but I don't see it as viable across multiple drafts, especially if you lack a franchise guy.

The hole in your argument is "multiple drafts". I am not arguing for investing in a QB by the 3rd round in every draft. You do it ONCE and you're good for at least five years. You have a truly VIABLE plan B at the single most important position for the team. That's a gimme.

[Mothman]

JIm, I agree with a fair bit of what you're saying, at least at a theoretical level. But the realist in me recognizes that there are other issues involved. 1. For example, Zimmer LOVES Teddy because of his disposition/temperament and he fully believes in him and his ability to become a solid NFL QB. 2. Let's stop with the AJ McCarron talk. The Bengals are not going to let him go for anything that we'd want the Vikings to pay. The only thing worth talking about related to him is that the Bengals have undertaken the kind of philosophy that you and I would like the Vikings to adopt. The position is so important that it merits two very good options--high draft picks even.

Lastly, it is worth recognizing that there are two separate ways to think about our current conundrum: 1) what we would do if we were Spielman 2) what are options that Spielman would realistically consider. I've seen far more of the former and not enough of the latter.

Good points. I see McCarron as more of an example than a realistic option, mianly because I doubt the bengals are interested in trading him. Murray is the option that intrigues me. He came out of the same draft as McCarron and I thought he had genuine potential. Unlike McCarron, he actually IS available now. In terms of option #1 (what we would do if we were Spielman?), I'd be taking a very hard look at him now and I'd call the Chiefs to inquire about their asking price.

In terms of what Spielman would realistically consider: I fear we're looking at a one year "rental" of a veteran with starting experience. As you said, Zimmer loves Bridgewater. Between that and Spielman's track record, I don't expect the now-familiar approach to change much.

[Mothman]

This is the most volatile and difficult position to draft, also the most highly valued position in the draft. (talent dries up sooner vs. other positions, ie Linebacker) We would suddenly be treating high round picks like late round picks in order to maybe have a back up. This is further compounded by the fact that you will never know if that guy is going to pan out until the most undesirable scenario happens and your start goes down. Let's also not forget that for every Aaron Rogers there are 100 busts. In the mean time we are 100% guaranteed to be giving up the opportunity to draft at other positions of need. How is that risk/reward managed effectively in a way that also allows a GM to develop a competitive franchise?

An outside circumstance such as what we are experiencing might make the position sound vindicated, but what happened to TB is a statistical outlier IMO. I just don't see the value for the resources given the other issues. Also, lets consider that even in light of the Vikings NOT "properly" managing the QB position, they still haven't been able to address their OL woes. So now if we starting drafting backup QBs higher, what other position are we going to neglect?

This idea sounds great, but I don't see it as viable across multiple drafts, especially if you lack a franchise guy.

Is a perpetually precarious situation at that position preferable?

It seems perfectly viable to me. They've spent the resources you're talking about on a punter, on busts like Yankey and Crichton, on developmental players like Clemmings, on Gerald Hodges, etc. They've spent them on McKinnon and Pruitt, despite already having Peterson and Rudolph. Why is it sensible to spend those resources on backups for RB and TE but not on a backup for the most important position in football? McCarron was a 5th round pick. Cousins was a 4th round pick. Who knows how Prescott will ultimately perform but the Cowboys got him late in the 4th round this year. Oakland took Cook earlier in that round. The Vikings took Beavers. That may prove to be a good pick but that's 2 years in a row they've spent a 4th round pick on a developmental, backup o-lineman. That's important but are you telling me it's more important than backup QB?

They've drafted backup, developmental DBs in R1 or R2 in each of the last two seasons! All of these choices are okay but doing the same at QB isn't?

I say neglect whatever position they have to neglect if it means creating a much better QB situation. They've drafted 28 players in the last 3 years. One of them was Bridgewater. They really couldn't afford to make one of the other 27 another QB? I just don't buy it.

[Norv Zimmer]

I agree. The silver lining to this whole situation is that hopefully it forces the Vikings to get some decent depth at QB for the foreseeable future. Best case scenario is they bring in a young guy like Murray, Mettenberger, Glennon, etc and he plays well this season. Then we'll have back-up options next year, trade bait, or a plan B if Teddy doesn't have a full recovery.

If we just roll with Hill as our starter and don't bring in anyone else, once we go 1-3 to start the year I'd rather tank the rest of it to grab a nice OL in next year's draft.

Even with Hill at QB I think we still win games. With our running game, defense and head coach I still think we succeed. Teddy didn't have a good season last year and we still won the division.

[dead_poet]

Even with Hill at QB I think we still win games. With our running game, defense and head coach I still think we succeed. Teddy didn't have a good season last year and we still won the division.

How do you define success?

I'm on record stating our SB ambitions are gone. No matter who is behind center now I can't fathom a deep playoff run, much less Super Bowl victory. 8-8 isn't bad, but my gut says we either get a WC or miss the playoffs entirely. We're not a 2-win team without Teddy but there's sure no way we're a legit contender without him. If we win the Super Bowl I'd call that one of the greatest coaching accomplishments in sports history.

[VikingsTommy]

What about Joe Webb?

Dual threat (guy can make things happen with his legs), knows the team/system well

Rather run with him than he likes of Sanchez or Hill

[dead_poet]

What about Joe Webb?

Dual threat (guy can make things happen with his legs), knows the team/system well

Rather run with him than he likes of Sanchez or Hill

Pretty sure Webb and Turner continuum never intersected. I'm also pretty sure he hasn't completed a pass since 2011.