The Teddy Bridgewater Thread

[26CornerBlitz]

6 minutes ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

I never said somebody wasn't going to take a huge risk on him.

They might.

This entire discussion is whether the bills should.

My entire argument with you is that you are shrugging off the injury and acting like he's gonna be 100% ready to rock minimal risk.

 

We have a coach and gm who like healthy, low risk players (see: Sammy trade)

 

My opinion is, based on his injury, we shouldn't go for him, as he is a massive injury risk, as well as a massive risk to not even return to the average at best form he displayed pre injury.

 

Yet you continue to act like he's good to go, no problems, and refuse to acknowledge not only the severity of the injury, but also the factual evidence of the history of these injuries in others.

 

What I posted is that they would need to perform a thorough examination to assess where he is before making any offer (as any team would do) and that's if they are interested to begin with.  He isn't going to retire and will be playing in the NFL in 2018.  What you want is an agreement that he isn't worth the risk and you simply do not know that without the benefit of firsthand knowledge irrespective of historical trends. 

 

WRT to the Sammy trade, it's rather ironic that he missed no games due to injury in 2017 while the guy he has traded for missed several and did not finish others. 

Edited January 19, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz

[SouthNYfan]

1 minute ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

What I posted is that they would need to perform a thorough examination to assess where he is before making any offer (as any team would do) and that's if they are interested to begin with.  He isn't going to retire and will be playing in the NFL in 2018.  What you want is an agreement that he isn't worth the risk and you simply do not know that without the benefit of firsthand knowledge irrespective of historical trends. 

 

 

Actually, that is what historical data is used for, to assess risk.

His risk is high, even if they believe he is healthy enough to play right now, nobody has any idea if that knee will hold up, or if he can even perform in a game, not just pass an MRI

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, SouthNYfan said:

Actually, that is what historical data is used for, to assess risk.

His risk is high, even if they believe he is healthy enough to play right now, nobody has any idea if that knee will hold up, or if he can even perform in a game, not just pass an MRI

 

Historical data is not used alone to assess risk. The specifics of his physical condition based on examination would weigh into any decision as well as each case is different. He'll likely receive an incentive laden contract tied to his health/availability, but he's going to play in the NFL in '18.

[SouthNYfan]

2 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Historical data is not used alone to assess risk. The specifics of his physical condition based on examination would weigh into any decision as well as each case is different. He'll likely receive an incentive laden contract tied to his health/availability, but he's going to play in the NFL in '18.

 

Yes he is.

At least we agree on that.

 

You need to stop with this "each case is different" in regards to this though.

 

When over 80% who sustain this injury never return to PLOF then that is a huge risk, regardless of "case by case" basis.

 

He will have an incentive laden contract because teams need qbs and they are willing to throw money at them, hoping for a miracle.

 

Sure, somebody will eventually win the lottery, but even before an exam, he's too big a risk for us to bet the rent on.

[26CornerBlitz]

1 minute ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

Yes he is.

At least we agree on that.

 

You need to stop with this "each case is different" in regards to this though.

 

When over 80% who sustain this injury never return to PLOF then that is a huge risk, regardless of "case by case" basis.

 

He will have an incentive laden contract because teams need qbs and they are willing to throw money at them, hoping for a miracle.

 

Sure, somebody will eventually win the lottery, but even before an exam, he's too big a risk for us to bet the rent on.

 

Which means that 20% do, thus the reference to each case is different that I will continue to state. 

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

I like Teddie but I would go after younger and less injury prone options like McCarron or Smith way before Teddie.

[SouthNYfan]

2 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Which means that 20% do, thus the reference to each case is different that I will continue to state. 

 

20% can return to sport.

The % that return to the same level though has much lower.

I should have specified.

 

His level wasn't amazing pre injury.

So you are basically saying : "let's bet on a less than 20% chance can play at an average at best level again"

 

That's not even taking into account the high risk of reinjury.

 

 

[26CornerBlitz]

4 hours ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

20% can return to sport.

The % that return to the same level though has much lower.

I should have specified.

 

His level wasn't amazing pre injury.

So you are basically saying : "let's bet on a less than 20% chance can play at an average at best level again"

 

That's not even taking into account the high risk of reinjury.

 

Any associated risk will be mitigated by the language in the contract he receives.  He will be examined and worked out to assess what he can and cannot do post injury. 

 

You post as if he'll blindly be signed to a contract. 

Edited January 19, 2018 by 26CornerBlitz

[SouthNYfan]

2 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Any associated risk will be mitigated by the language in the contract he receives.  He will be examined and worked out to assess what he can and cannot do post injury. 

 

You post as if he'll blindly be signed him to a contract. 

 

And you post as if he's hunky dory 100%

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, SouthNYfan said:

And you post as if he's hunky dory 100%

 

Sure I do. He's doomed and should immediately retire because he's destined to be reinjured because history and you say so. 

[SouthNYfan]

1 minute ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Sure I do. He's doomed and should immediately retire because he's destined to be reinjured because history and you say so. 

 

I'll take a greater than 80% wager any day.

[BillsfanAZ]

59 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Sure I do. He's doomed and should immediately retire because he's destined to be reinjured because history and you say so. 

Even though there is no way of knowing if he will injure his knee again, he will be susceptible to the same injury again more than other players. Put whatever chances you want on it. I am sure they will have specialists examine him if they are interested but if it happens again, there will be "I told you so" going around. You are right in that the contract can be incentive based but they will still invest time and a roster spot in him. I didnt just stay at a Holiday Inn last night, my wife does knees/hips and was a trainer for a pro team for 10 yrs. 

[26CornerBlitz]

4 minutes ago, BillsfanAZ said:

Even though there is no way of knowing if he will injure his knee again, he will be susceptible to the same injury again more than other players. Put whatever chances you want on it. I am sure they will have specialists examine him if they are interested but if it happens again, there will be "I told you so" going around. You are right in that the contract can be incentive based but they will still invest time and a roster spot in him. I didnt just stay at a Holiday Inn last night, my wife does knees/hips and was a trainer for a pro team for 10 yrs. 

 

He could have a long career without sustaining another knee injury or he could get hurt again. We'll see. If players were worried about getting injured a 2nd time, there'd be a scarcity of good players.  As for I told you so, I'll sleep well regardless. 

[SouthNYfan]

1 hour ago, BillsfanAZ said:

Even though there is no way of knowing if he will injure his knee again, he will be susceptible to the same injury again more than other players. Put whatever chances you want on it. I am sure they will have specialists examine him if they are interested but if it happens again, there will be "I told you so" going around. You are right in that the contract can be incentive based but they will still invest time and a roster spot in him. I didnt just stay at a Holiday Inn last night, my wife does knees/hips and was a trainer for a pro team for 10 yrs. 

 

Right, but our objective driven assessment of the situation doesn't matter to 26corner because his man crush holds more value in the discussion.

[26CornerBlitz]

2 minutes ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

Right, but our objective driven assessment of the situation doesn't matter to 26corner because his man crush holds more value in the discussion.

 

Man crush.   Now you're just being silly.  Thanks again  PT Man. 

If I had a man crush it would be for a QB like Garropollo. 

[SouthNYfan]

28 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Man crush.   Now you're just being silly.  Thanks again  PT Man. 

If I had a man crush it would be for a QB like Garropollo. 

 

Your dismissive, condescending "PT man" doesn't really do much, other than show your immaturity and arrogance in regards to people who clearly have a more knowledge than you on a subject.

 

I would agree with you on a Jimmy G crush though.

Edited January 19, 2018 by SouthNYfan

[BillsfanAZ]

19 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

Man crush.   Now you're just being silly.  Thanks again  PT Man. 

If I had a man crush it would be for a QB like Garropollo. 

I could get on the Garropollo man crush thing. My wife is a 49ers fan so we usually watch that game after the Bills. I had to explain who he was when they first traded for him. 

[26CornerBlitz]

35 minutes ago, SouthNYfan said:

 

Your dismissive, condescending "PT man" doesn't really do much, other than show your immaturity and arrogance in regards to people who clearly have a more knowledge than you on a subject.

 

I would agree with you on a Jimmy G crush though.

 

When you throw out silly arbitrary comments like man crush you deserve to be dsimissed and it sure as hell doesn't speak to any maturity on your part.  In regards. 

[SouthNYfan]

40 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

When you throw out silly arbitrary comments like man crush you deserve to be dsimissed and it sure as hell doesn't speak to any maturity on your part.  In regards. 

 

You referred to me with "okay, whatever you say PT man" earlier in the thread, prior to the man crush remark.

 

Your responses give zero logical reasoning other than your subjective preference for bridgewater, while blatantly discounting and talking down numerous posts with statistical evidence as to why he is a large risk, which you continue to downplay.

 

referring to it as a "man crush" is anything but arbitrary in this situation as it is the only logical inference to your blind adoration and defense of why he should be signed.

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, SouthNYfan said:

 

You referred to me with "okay, whatever you say PT man" earlier in the thread, prior to the man crush remark.

 

Your responses give zero logical reasoning other than your subjective preference for bridgewater, while blatantly discounting and talking down numerous posts with statistical evidence as to why he is a large risk, which you continue to downplay.

 

referring to it as a "man crush" is anything but arbitrary in this situation as it is the only logical inference to your blind adoration and defense of why he should be signed.

 

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!

[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.