The Teddy Bridgewater Thread

[SouthNYfan]

1 minute ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Your reading comprehension is faulty. At no point in any post did I say that he should be signed.  Beyond that your claim of firsthand knowledge is BS. You have general and historical understanding of his injury and noithing more.  Dismissed!

 

Professional experience with not only the same knee injury he suffered, combined with a decade professional experience rehabbing high level athletes from various sports injuries is more than "general and historical understanding".

 

Dismissed?

 

Good one.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

 

...Vikes have NOBODY under contract post 2017.......taking in health priority.......Keenum gets a nice deal.........Teddy gets an incentive laden deal as a backup and Sam is the odd man out.......plenty out there about how much Zim likes Teddy...................

[Hapless Bills Fan]

12 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

OK 26CornerBlitz.  Here is what you said earlier in the thread

You assert that he's a rhythm passer who can read D and gets the ball out with timing and anticipation.

 

Yet in his 2 years playing, he took tons of sacks - near bottom of the league tons of sacks; he did not throw many TDs - like near bottom of the league numbers of passing TDs; and he did not generate many passing yards - like near bottom of the league numbers of passing yards.

 

Now many good young passers do 1 or 2 of those things - like pass for a lot of yards but fail near the red zone.  or pass for a lot of yards but take lots of sacks too, 'cuz they hang onto the ball too long.  Or pass for a lot of yards but throw lots of picks 'cuz they get fooled.  Or pass for "meh" yards overall but throw lots of TDs cuz they throw deep and hit paydirt sometimes.

 

But if a young guy who's a good pocket passer, reads D, and gets the ball out on time to have league-bottoming stats in sacks, TDs, and passing yards suggests that he was not doing those things well.  What reveals this potential to you?

 

 

12 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

Are you aware of the OL issues with the Vikings when he was playing that led to a number of the sacks he took? I am

 

So in 2016 the Vikes IR'd Khalil, switched their 2nd year RT to LT where he did a convincing windmill act, and fixed their OL so that Bradford could function?

Look, I'm totally on board with the notion that a young QB's best friend is a stout OL and a great run game and that any QB can look better with both.

 

But the question is what you saw in Bridgewater's play that would indicate he's a rhythm passer who can read D and gets the ball out with timing and anticipation?

Those are all qualities which enable a QB to get the ball out quickly and avoid sacks, even behind a mediocre OL.  Even if none of the sacks are Bridgewater's fault for holding the ball taking longer to make his read and pull the trigger, we still have not many TDs thrown and not many passing yards - near the bottom of the league for both.

 

So what exactly did you see that justifies your description of him as a rhythm passer who can read D and get the ball out with timing and anticipation at the NFL level, to make him worth the admitted injury risk to the Bills or any team that signs him?

12 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

They are they experts and it's up to them not you or me. 

 

That doesn't answer the question.  The question was, are you happy with the Bills track record in signing and drafting players with known injuries?

Examples include signing Chris Williams, an OL with significant injury history with 2 teams, to a 4 year contract with $5.5M guaranteed and (per cap impact) injury guarantees and drafting Shaq Lawson in the 1st round with known shoulder concerns, who then had shoulder surgery in May and missed most of his rookie season.

 

Because if you're "all in" for trusting the experts, it's fair to ask what the track record of those experts may be.

 

 

[26CornerBlitz]

2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

 

So in 2016 the Vikes IR'd Khalil, switched their 2nd year RT to LT where he did a convincing windmill act, and fixed their OL so that Bradford could function?

Look, I'm totally on board with the notion that a young QB's best friend is a stout OL and a great run game and that any QB can look better with both.

 

But the question is what you saw in Bridgewater's play that would indicate he's a rhythm passer who can read D and gets the ball out with timing and anticipation?

Those are all qualities which enable a QB to get the ball out quickly and avoid sacks, even behind a mediocre OL.  Even if none of the sacks are Bridgewater's fault for holding the ball taking longer to make his read and pull the trigger, we still have not many TDs thrown and not many passing yards - near the bottom of the league for both.

 

So what exactly did you see that justifies your description of him as a rhythm passer who can read D and get the ball out with timing and anticipation at the NFL level, to make him worth the admitted injury risk to the Bills or any team that signs him?

 

That doesn't answer the question.  The question was, are you happy with the Bills track record in signing and drafting players with known injuries?

Examples include signing Chris Williams, an OL with significant injury history with 2 teams, to a 4 year contract with $5.5M guaranteed and (per cap impact) injury guarantees and drafting Shaq Lawson in the 1st round with known shoulder concerns, who then had shoulder surgery in May and missed most of his rookie season.

 

Because if you're "all in" for trusting the experts, it's fair to ask what the track record of those experts may be.

 

You admitted that you haven't watched him any more than a couple of times. You need to watch more before you ask questions that you demand answers to. Get gamepass to give you the access you need to see for yourself.

 

With regard to any previous injuries, you want to look at a few previous cases to point to as if there's some widespread issue.  Be my guest if that's your position. Typical Bills' fan overreaction to isolated cases. 

[ILBillsfan]

On ‎1‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 8:23 PM, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

It is because Bridgewater plays within the structure and design of an offense with the ball coming out on time in 3, 5, and 7 step drops.  All things that Tyrod struggles with. 

 

 

Yet his stats don't back up your expert analysis, so show us versus your NFL expert opinion because stats show he is no better.

[26CornerBlitz]

16 minutes ago, ILBillsfan said:

 

Yet his stats don't back up your expert analysis, so show us versus your NFL expert opinion because stats show he is no better.

 

Stats don't have a thing to do with what I posted there. Watch then post.  Until then. Shhhh. 

Edited January 20, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz

[Chicken Boo]

On 1/18/2018 at 1:54 PM, Rigotz said:

why is nobody talking about Teddy Bridgewater?

 

 

 

Because he sucks.  

 

Who gets excited about the prospect of a 3,000 yard 14TD guy at QB?

 

Why IS anyone talking about Bridgewater, is the question?  Tyrod is a better option.

 

Is it Florence Nightingale effect from the leg injury?  What has Teddy ever done to make people clamour for him?   Is there a highlight reel somewhere?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

6 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

You admitted that you haven't watched him any more than a couple of times. You need to watch more before you ask questions that you demand answers to. Get gamepass to give you the access you need to see for yourself.

 

With regard to any previous injuries, you want to look at a few previous cases to point to as if there's some widespread issue.  Be my guest if that's your position. Typical Bills' fan overreaction to isolated cases. 

 

Dude, please.  I'm not the one arguing for him.  I have no interest in him.  This is a message board and you have expressed a viewpoint.  It's entirely appropriate to ask you the basis for holding that viewpoint.  Unless you got nothing.

 

C'mon, if you can tell us that Bridgewater is rhythm passer who can read D and gets the ball out with timing and anticipation and might be a good QB for us to look at despite the injury risk posed by his knee, you really should be able to support that viewpoint.

 

On my second question, I'll take that as a "yes, 26CornerBlitz is satisfied with the Bills track record signing injured players and content with whatever they decide".

Thanks.

1 hour ago, Chicken Boo said:

Who gets excited about the prospect of a 3,000 yard 14TD guy at QB?

Is it Florence Nightingale effect from the leg injury?  What has Teddy ever done to make people clamour for him?   Is there a highlight reel somewhere?

 

That's basically the question I'm asking.

5 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

Stats don't have a thing to do with what I posted there. Watch then post.  Until then. Shhhh. 

 

You really should be able to do better than this to support what you posted.  A couple of games that showed promise.  A highlight film.  If the stats don't tell the story (though usually, when a guy can read a defense, take 3, 5, and 7 step drops, and get the ball out with timing and anticipation, it shows up in the stat line somewhere), fine - what does?

 

[26CornerBlitz]

10 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Dude, please.  I'm not the one arguing for him.  I have no interest in him.  This is a message board and you have expressed a viewpoint.  It's entirely appropriate to ask you the basis for holding that viewpoint.  Unless you got nothing.

 

C'mon, if you can tell us that Bridgewater is rhythm passer who can read D and gets the ball out with timing and anticipation and might be a good QB for us to look at despite the injury risk posed by his knee, you really should be able to support that viewpoint.

 

On my second question, I'll take that as a "yes, 26CornerBlitz is satisfied with the Bills track record signing injured players and content with whatever they decide".

Thanks.

 

That's basically the question I'm asking.

 

You really should be able to do better than this to support what you posted.  A couple of games that showed promise.  A highlight film.  If the stats don't tell the story (though usually, when a guy can read a defense, take 3, 5, and 7 step drops, and get the ball out with timing and anticipation, it shows up in the stat line somewhere), fine - what does?

 

 

It's out there if you want to find it. Do your own research. 

Edited January 20, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz

[Hapless Bills Fan]

45 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

It's out there if you want to find it. Do your own research. 

 

Let me translate:

 

"I, 26CornerBlitz, reserve the right to assert any unsupported claims whatsoever and dismiss any evidence (like stats) to the contrary. 

I'll willingly exchange puerile insults anyone who will bite, but when politely asked to support my claims, I Got Nothin'."

 

Again, I'm not the one discounting the seriousness of Bridgewater's injury and making assertions about Bridgewater's quality as QB.  If you can't or aren't willing to support what you claim, you live in a falling credibility zone - essentially, that makes you a Troll who posts interesting links sometimes, but who can't or won't engage in actual football convo.

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Let me translate:

 

"I, 26CornerBlitz, reserve the right to assert any unsupported claims whatsoever and dismiss any evidence (like stats) to the contrary. 

I'll willingly exchange puerile insults anyone who will bite, but when politely asked to support my claims, I Got Nothin'."

 

Again, I'm not the one discounting the seriousness of Bridgewater's injury and making assertions about Bridgewater's quality as QB.  If you can't or aren't willing to support what you claim, you live in a falling credibility zone - essentially, that makes you a Troll who posts interesting links sometimes, but who can't or won't engage in actual football convo.

 

Let me translate for you: I haven't done any research, but am challenging someone's assertion because I looked up stats.  

[Green Lightning]

On 1/18/2018 at 2:06 PM, Mr. WEO said:

 

They have been---in other threads.

 

The bottom line--he is a younger, more fragile TT, but infinitely less mobile.

 

 

He's head and shoulders over TT (well not height-wise) as a passer. He's a gamer as well.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 minute ago, Green Lightning said:

He's head and shoulders over TT (well not height-wise) as a passer. He's a gamer as well.

 

OK, I'll ask you.  What shows that he is head and shoulders over TT as a passer? 

[Green Lightning]

17 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

OK, I'll ask you.  What shows that he is head and shoulders over TT as a passer? 

Teddy  actually throws before the break, and and he actually targets wide receivers, doesn't doesn't have 50 yard total passing games and brought his team from behind five times for victories.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, Green Lightning said:

Teddy  actually throws before the break, and and he actually targets wide receivers, doesn't doesn't have 50 yard total passing games and brought his team from behind five times for victories.

 

Let's leave the 50 yard passing games out, since before this season TT didn't have those either.

 

OK, he throws before the break and targets WR.  Can you help me understand why didn't that result in more passing yards for the Vikes with him at the helm?  I can buy the "many sacks but it's not his fault" thing if the OL is porous and he was uncertain as to where to go.  But when you got a guy who can read a D, throw with anticipation, and pick his target, it usually results in yards (and TDs) unless there is some exceptional circumstance.  I know they lost AP in 2014, but they had him back in 2015 and he was productive.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

Let me translate for you: I haven't done any research, but am challenging someone's assertion because I looked up stats.  

 

That needed no translation.  Questioning each other's assertions and discussing the basis for them is kind of the point here, isn't it?  If it isn't a reasonable expectation of folks to back up assertions with some form of evidence or rational argument, the board degrades to the 3rd grade standard of "Is!" "Is Not!" "Is Too and Yo Momma"  "NaNa NaNa BooBoo!"

 

You say "you looked up stats" like that's a Bad Thing.  The reason stats exist and people look at them is that they reflect performance.  Not always, not all stats, and there can be more to a story.  Enough that when stats and assertions don't match, there should be a reason.  If Bridgewater had played in Buffalo and the passing offense was 28th and 31st in the league fans here be assembling the hook, not saying "bring him for a look", especially if the year before and the year after were better for passing (23, 18).

 

You have been invited to explain what that "more to the story" is.  So far I have "bad OL, that somehow managed to do better for Cassel the previous year and Bradford the year after".  OK, I'll accept "sacks not Bridgewater's fault".  Now how about the YPG and the low TD?  Usually guys who can throw with timing and anticipation and read a D rack up yards.  Why not Bridgewater?

 

The "You're challenging my (unsupported) assertion so it's On You to research" card has low persuasiveness.  Just Sayin'.

 

 

 

Edited January 20, 2018 by Hapless Bills Fan

[SouthNYfan]

13 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Questioning each other's assertions and discussing the basis for them is, Oh I don't know, kind of the point here, isn't it?

 

If it isn't a reasonable expectation to back up assertions with some form of evidence or rational argument, the board degrades to the 3rd grade playground standard of "Is!" "Is Not!" "Is Too!" "Yo Momma and NaNaNaNaBoo Boo!"

 

You say "you looked up stats" like that's a Bad Thing.  The reason stats exist and people look at them is that they reflect performance.  Not always, not all stats, and there can be more to a story, but enough that when stats and an assertion don't match, it ought to raise eyebrows.

 

You have been invited to explain what that "more to the story" is.  So far I have "bad OL, that somehow managed to do better for Cassel the previous year and Bradford the year after".  OK, I'll accept "sacks not Bridgewater's fault".  Now how about the YPG and the low TD?  Usually guys who can throw with timing and anticipation and read a D rack up yards.  Why not Bridgewater?

 

The "You're challenging my (unsupported) assertion so it's On You to research" card has low value for persuasiveness.  Just Sayin'.

 

 

 

 

Spot on.

 

Assertions about Bridgewater as a QB are made, and when asked for evidence to backup these claims, gives the finger and says "look it up yourself"?

Check.

 

Downplays the injury risk, is provided massive amounts of evidence and professional experience with said injury that points to the contrary, then is dismissive and condescending to said individuals?

Check.

 

Seems a spot on with "internet troll" to me.

[26CornerBlitz]

26 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

That needed no translation.  Questioning each other's assertions and discussing the basis for them is kind of the point here, isn't it?  If it isn't a reasonable expectation of folks to back up assertions with some form of evidence or rational argument, the board degrades to the 3rd grade standard of "Is!" "Is Not!" "Is Too and Yo Momma"  "NaNa NaNa BooBoo!"

 

You say "you looked up stats" like that's a Bad Thing.  The reason stats exist and people look at them is that they reflect performance.  Not always, not all stats, and there can be more to a story.  Enough that when stats and assertions don't match, there should be a reason.  If Bridgewater had played in Buffalo and the passing offense was 28th and 31st in the league fans here be assembling the hook, not saying "bring him for a look", especially if the year before and the year after were better for passing (23, 18).

 

You have been invited to explain what that "more to the story" is.  So far I have "bad OL, that somehow managed to do better for Cassel the previous year and Bradford the year after".  OK, I'll accept "sacks not Bridgewater's fault".  Now how about the YPG and the low TD?  Usually guys who can throw with timing and anticipation and read a D rack up yards.  Why not Bridgewater?

 

The "You're challenging my (unsupported) assertion so it's On You to research" card has low persuasiveness.  Just Sayin'.

 

I'd have more respect for your questions if you actually watched him play and came to a different conclusion than I have, but you have not.  

 

6 minutes ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

Spot on.

 

Assertions about Bridgewater as a QB are made, and when asked for evidence to backup these claims, gives the finger and says "look it up yourself"?

Check.

 

Downplays the injury risk, is provided massive amounts of evidence and professional experience with said injury that points to the contrary, then is dismissive and condescending to said individuals?

Check.

 

Seems a spot on with "internet troll" to me.

 

Whatever PT man. 

 

2 hours ago, Green Lightning said:

Teddy  actually throws before the break, and and he actually targets wide receivers, doesn't doesn't have 50 yard total passing games and brought his team from behind five times for victories.

 

This is exactly what I see when watching him play. 

Edited January 20, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz

[SouthNYfan]

3 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

I'd have more respect for your questions if you actually watched him play and came to a different conclusion than I have, but you have not.  

 

Whatever PT man. 

 

No you wouldn't have more respect for his questions.

You'd find another way to dodge the question, or dismiss it, as if there is some secret tape that you've seen that we haven't.

Generally, when somebody comes to an conclusion, especially one which isn't in agreement with common perception, they are willing to back it up with facts and tangible evidence as to how they came to said conclusion (as I did in reference to his knee injury).

Instead, you deflect in a condescending manner because everybody isn't bowing down and kissing your feet, calling you the forum genius.

 

Get over yourself.

[Green Lightning]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Let's leave the 50 yard passing games out, since before this season TT didn't have those either.

 

OK, he throws before the break and targets WR.  Can you help me understand why didn't that result in more passing yards for the Vikes with him at the helm?  I can buy the "many sacks but it's not his fault" thing if the OL is porous and he was uncertain as to where to go.  But when you got a guy who can read a D, throw with anticipation, and pick his target, it usually results in yards (and TDs) unless there is some exceptional circumstance.  I know they lost AP in 2014, but they had him back in 2015 and he was productive.

 

We can debate stats all day long. You tell me, it's the fourth quarter were down a touchdown who do you want to have the ball, Tyrod or Bridgewater? Ask anybody on this board and I think you have your answer.