26CornerBlitz Posted February 2, 2018 Posted February 2, 2018 It’s widely believed that each of the three Vikings veteran quarterbacks will become unrestricted free agents in March. One of them still may not. As PFT first explained in May, the Collective Bargaining Agreement states in clear and obvious terms that a contract tolls for any player who, in the last year of his deal, is physically unable to perform through the sixth game of the regular season. Bridgewater, who was on the PUP list to start the season, ultimately was physically unable to perform through Minnesota’s sixth game.
PromoTheRobot Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 On 18/01/2018 at 1:57 PM, Bangarang said: Throwing for 3000 yards and making the Pro Bowl as an alternate isn’t impressive. His knee exploded a year ago so if he’s cheap and healthy then sure go for it. He can compete. Why pay anything for a guy who was that badly hurt? Seriously. Would you pay anything for an exploding Pinto? If he were a free agent, maybe. But I'm not giving up an asset for him.
26CornerBlitz Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 1 minute ago, PromoTheRobot said: Why pay anything for a guy who was that badly hurt? Seriously. Would you pay anything for an exploding Pinto? If he were a free agent, maybe. But I'm not giving up an asset for him. He's a pending UFA.
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 5 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said: He's a pending UFA. "The Collective Bargaining Agreement contains a provision that plainly states the contract will toll if he remains on the Physically Unable to Perform through the sixth game of the 2017 regular season. With Bridgewater still recovering from a devastating knee injury suffered last August, a decision to leave him on the PUP list at the start of the regular season guarantees that he'll be on PUP for the first six games, because: (1) the window to exit PUP doesn't open until after Week Six; and (2) the Vikings don't have a bye in the first six weeks of the season." DeMaurice Smith, executive director of the NFL Players Association, said one major sticking point regards whether Bridgewater had been healthy enough to play for the Vikings before the end of his mandated six-week stay on the PUP list. "One of the critical issues is whether he was medically cleared or whether he was medically able to play," Smith said, per The Athletic's Chad Graff. According to Cronin, the NFLPA would consider filing a grievance and taking the matter to court were the NFL to toll Bridgewater's contract.
26CornerBlitz Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said: "The Collective Bargaining Agreement contains a provision that plainly states the contract will toll if he remains on the Physically Unable to Perform through the sixth game of the 2017 regular season. With Bridgewater still recovering from a devastating knee injury suffered last August, a decision to leave him on the PUP list at the start of the regular season guarantees that he'll be on PUP for the first six games, because: (1) the window to exit PUP doesn't open until after Week Six; and (2) the Vikings don't have a bye in the first six weeks of the season." DeMaurice Smith, executive director of the NFL Players Association, said one major sticking point regards whether Bridgewater had been healthy enough to play for the Vikings before the end of his mandated six-week stay on the PUP list. "One of the critical issues is whether he was medically cleared or whether he was medically able to play," Smith said, per The Athletic's Chad Graff. According to Cronin, the NFLPA would consider filing a grievance and taking the matter to court were the NFL to toll Bridgewater's contract. I'm aware of this as I already posted it in the thread. Vikings G.M. Rick Spielman tiptoed around that issue during a subsequent visit to PFT Live. “We know the rule very well,” Spielman said last May. “We’ve talked to the Management Council, we understand everything that’s involved with it, but again it’s something from a contractual standpoint that I’d rather not comment on. But there are specific rules there, and we’re quite aware of what the rules are.” If the Vikings are “quite aware” of the rule, they’re the only ones; despite the plain language of the CBA, some believe that the contract for a player like Bridgewater would toll for a year only if he had missed the entire season. Because he didn’t miss the full season, but did miss six games, a squabble could be looming over whether he’s free to leave — or whether the Vikings can keep him for another year at a base salary of $1.354 million. Edited February 3, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz
Fan in Chicago Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 On 1/24/2018 at 8:27 AM, GunnerBill said: They could fall in love with one... but as of now based on what I am hearing on the rumour mill I don't think they are intending to go QB at #2. I repeat - I would if I were in their GM chair..... I just get a strong sense that they think they can still win and win now with Eli. Both could be true and is the best situation for them to pick a QB. Allows Eli to ride off into the sunset with the Giants after another 1-2 seasons and the young buck is ready by that time. I for one, do not rule out teams like Steelers who maybe in the market, under the radar to picking a Rd 1 QB. 1
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 2 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said: I'm aware of this as I already posted it in the thread. Vikings G.M. Rick Spielman tiptoed around that issue during a subsequent visit to PFT Live. “We know the rule very well,” Spielman said last May. “We’ve talked to the Management Council, we understand everything that’s involved with it, but again it’s something from a contractual standpoint that I’d rather not comment on. But there are specific rules there, and we’re quite aware of what the rules are.” If the Vikings are “quite aware” of the rule, they’re the only ones; despite the plain language of the CBA, some believe that the contract for a player like Bridgewater would toll for a year only if he had missed the entire season. Because he didn’t miss the full season, but did miss six games, a squabble could be looming over whether he’s free to leave — or whether the Vikings can keep him for another year at a base salary of $1.354 million. ...they would be crazy not to keep him for that amount.......sign Keenum and Bradford is odd man out IMO..........
SouthNYfan Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) On 1/24/2018 at 9:27 AM, GunnerBill said: They could fall in love with one... but as of now based on what I am hearing on the rumour mill I don't think they are intending to go QB at #2. I repeat - I would if I were in their GM chair..... I just get a strong sense that they think they can still win and win now with Eli. How much off-season contact and interaction can the new QB whispering coach have with Webb before the draft? Webb had a pretty high ceiling from what I remember on his draft profile, but needed work. Maybe shurm thinks he can get Webb up to par on 2 years, that would play out the remainder of Eli's contact (through 2019) then have Webb take over in 2020 at age 25. That's the only way the don't go QB imo 2 hours ago, Fan in Chicago said: Both could be true and is the best situation for them to pick a QB. Allows Eli to ride off into the sunset with the Giants after another 1-2 seasons and the young buck is ready by that time. I for one, do not rule out teams like Steelers who maybe in the market, under the radar to picking a Rd 1 QB. I think it all depends on what shurm thinks of webb. If he thinks he is good enough to take over in 1-2 years, then I think they pass on a QB. Steelers I agree with as a wild card. Remember, they took Ben ahead of us, not many thought they would take a QB that year. Edited February 3, 2018 by SouthNYfan
Bangarang Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 5 hours ago, PromoTheRobot said: Why pay anything for a guy who was that badly hurt? Seriously. Would you pay anything for an exploding Pinto? If he were a free agent, maybe. But I'm not giving up an asset for him. If he’s a free agentand willing to sign for cheap then I’d bring him in to compete assuming the knee checks out clean. I would never give up a draft pick to get him though.
26CornerBlitz Posted February 19, 2018 Posted February 19, 2018 (edited) Bridgewater, 25, could be one of the more interesting players headed towards free agency -- if an independent arbitrator doesn't rule that Bridgewater's rookie contract should toll into 2018 because of time spent on the physically unable to perform list last year. The Vikings viewed Bridgewater as their future at quarterback before the injury. Now it's uncertain whether he'll ever be given a chance to earn a No. 1 gig. Bridgewater still sees himself as an NFL starter. The question is whether the Vikings or another team will agree. "I'm just going to continue focusing on becoming a better football player, attacking the offseason with the mindset of getting stronger and doing everything that I can to show that when the time comes, I'm ready to play football," Bridgewater said. "The best thing about it is my dream gets to continue to come true -- that I get to play football next year. I'm going to be playing football next year." Edited February 19, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz
Jamie Muellers Ghost Posted February 27, 2018 Posted February 27, 2018 10 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said: Ding, Ding, Ding! Send the jet in March.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted February 27, 2018 Posted February 27, 2018 21 minutes ago, Jamie Muellers Ghost said: Ding, Ding, Ding! Send him to the jets in March. 1
ALF Posted February 27, 2018 Posted February 27, 2018 If the Bills could not trade up , then Bridgewater and take a QB at 21 works for me.
Teddy KGB Posted February 27, 2018 Posted February 27, 2018 Teddy and rookie QB acquired through tradeup >>> the QB purgatory crew
Recommended Posts