Why the Vikings didn't overpay for Sam Bradford...

[Manster7588]

You know what's great about this thread. Fans always complain their team, now that we're talking about the Vikes, their fans want us to stop.

 

[Win TWINS!!!]

lel, you rainbow me for saying exactly what you are saying. Good stuff.

Did they overpay? Yes. I don't need qualifiers nor did I put any in there. They overpaid, that's my entire point. You agree, but you don't like it.

No - I rainbow the fact that you're hanging onto that, as though they shouldn't have/ didn't need to/ it's a bad deal, yada yada yada... That's where we diverge.

 

[Win TWINS!!!]

You play for a chance to win the SB, not just get there. And if you win the SB then it wasn't an overpay. Until that happens, it is an overpay IMO.

So winning the division vs missing the playoffs... Not good enough. Making the NFCCG not good enough.... Making the SB and not winning.... not good enough???

When rosters turnover ae the rate they do.... you'd have rather stood pat and gave up on the season, rolling with Hill and no back up.... That's seems acceptable.

 

[SJ76]

That's an odd statement considering he doesn't have the best completion percentage in the NFL. #2, no doubt. But Matt Ryan I believe has a higher accuracy rating.

Funny thing is Dak's stats are almost identical to Bradfords. And I don't hear nearly the man love for Dak in all of Dallas as i do for Sam in this thread. I think people are happy with Dak as a rookie and the future, but it's not pouring Dak in Dallas.

 

[PnkPanther]

Never said the trade wasn't worth it. I said you were when you said the Vikings would be in the NFCCG because of Bradford. Because of their D? Sure. AP? Yes. Bradford isn't impressing me - he's just being Trent Dilfer right now. He's not the reason the Vikings are winning games.

Trent Dilfer was terrible, not even close to true

 

[PnkPanther]

You say I am beating a dead horse, but I'm the one that is right and the Vikes fans are coming around to agree with what I've been saying for 30 pages.

I've stated from day they overpaid, and to that, I say big deal. When you factor in everything it's what they felt they had to do and I like the gamble. Who knows if it'll work. We have an extra third rounder next year, we'll most likely being drafting in later half, we'll be fine. I appreciate your concern

 

[Win TWINS!!!]

Funny thing is Dak's stats are almost identical to Bradfords. And I don't hear nearly the man love for Dak in all of Dallas as i do for Sam in this thread. I think people are happy with Dak as a rookie and the future, but it's not pouring Dak in Dallas.

Apples and oranges. Dak was drafted to be the heir apparent to Romo.

Two weeks before the season begins, the Vikings lost their QB and were going to either be forced roll with 37 yo Shaun Hill and a backup they still had to find (their 3rd was injured before camp even began), or go out and find a serviceable replacement to the starter. Additionally, they still were uncertain as to the extent of the injury to TB, or what the rehab process was going to look like until the surgery was completed.

When the deal broke - there was no shortage of people lambasting the Vikings for "overpaying" and making a rash move - which of course lead to this thread being created. It still took nearly a week to survey the field and land a QB.

Again, IMO, there is a difference between overpaying and making a bad deal.

 

[fordman84]

No - I rainbow the fact that you're hanging onto that, as though they shouldn't have/ didn't need to/ it's a bad deal, yada yada yada... That's where we diverge.

They overpaid, as in they didn't need to pay that much. You diverge in that you want to be practical and a homer at the same time.

 

[fordman84]

So winning the division vs missing the playoffs... Not good enough. Making the NFCCG not good enough.... Making the SB and not winning.... not good enough???

When rosters turnover ae the rate they do.... you'd have rather stood pat and gave up on the season, rolling with Hill and no back up.... That's seems acceptable.

You don't pay a 1st rounder for an expensive QB to play one, maybe 1.5 years and call that a success UNLESS you win it all.

Take the team out of it...would you say the Pack overpaid if they gave up a 1st rounder for a division or conference title but no SB? Of course you would. It isn't like this is spending a 1st for the future of the team. YOu bought a stopgap, a bandaid, for a 1st rounder SOLELY because the FO thinks they can win it all. If they don't, then it was a failure.

 

[PnkPanther]

You play for a chance to win the SB, not just get there. And if you win the SB then it wasn't an overpay. Until that happens, it is an overpay IMO.

And if you don't take the risk, you'll never know. There are no guarantees, I like the gamble.

We draft just fine all over. Seahawks paid for more Percy Harvin and they did just fine

 

[PnkPanther]

They overpaid, as in they didn't need to pay that much. You diverge in that you want to be practical and a homer at the same time.

Now that's just ridiculous. Philly would've kept Bradford unless we ponied up. Again, they initially asked for 2 first rounders

 

[Win TWINS!!!]

They overpaid, as in they didn't need to pay that much. You diverge in that you want to be practical and a homer at the same time.

What other deals were out there to be had? Do you know? They had a week to find something. Tell me. Which teams were willing to part with a QB, and what was the asking price? Sign Vick off the street? Kaepernick? Sanchez? Sorry, but no thanks at any price.

 

[fordman84]

I've stated from day they overpaid, and to that, I say big deal. When you factor in everything it's what they felt they had to do and I like the gamble. Who knows if it'll work. We have an extra third rounder next year, we'll most likely being drafting in later half, we'll be fine. I appreciate your concern

lol

Answering a thread is "my concern".

Good stuff.

 

[chf]

@SJ76 @PhillyGreen @chf

Shhhhhhh

Glad to know I'm still on your mind bud.

 

[packerzrule]

Apples and oranges. Dak was drafted to be the heir apparent to Romo.

Two weeks before the season begins, the Vikings lost their QB and were going to either be forced roll with 37 yo Shaun Hill and a backup they still had to find (their 3rd was injured before camp even began), or go out and find a serviceable replacement to the starter. Additionally, they still were uncertain as to the extent of the injury to TB, or what the rehab process was going to look like until the surgery was completed.

When the deal broke - there was no shortage of people lambasting the Vikings for "overpaying" and making a rash move - which of course lead to this thread being created. It still took nearly a week to survey the field and land a QB.

Again, IMO, there is a difference between overpaying and making a bad deal.

exactly what is the difference?

 

[fordman84]

Apples and oranges. Dak was drafted to be the heir apparent to Romo.

Two weeks before the season begins, the Vikings lost their QB and were going to either be forced roll with 37 yo Shaun Hill and a backup they still had to find (their 3rd was injured before camp even began), or go out and find a serviceable replacement to the starter. Additionally, they still were uncertain as to the extent of the injury to TB, or what the rehab process was going to look like until the surgery was completed.

When the deal broke - there was no shortage of people lambasting the Vikings for "overpaying" and making a rash move - which of course lead to this thread being created. It still took nearly a week to survey the field and land a QB.

Again, IMO, there is a difference between overpaying and making a bad deal.

nah, you don't draft the "heir apparent" in the 4th round. What happened was our backup broke his ankle and Romo was hurt about the same time Teddy was. Dallas said "we have what we have and are comfortable with that". They didn't go out and overpay for a one year stopgap.

Minny is closer to winning it all then Dallas is, so I get the overpay. But they overpaid.

 

[fordman84]

Now that's just ridiculous. Philly would've kept Bradford unless we ponied up. Again, they initially asked for 2 first rounders

There are other options, and Philly didn't want to sit on that much money in QB's.

 

[fordman84]

exactly what is the difference?

Overpaying we know now. Good or bad deal we will know at the end of the season.

 

[CowboyB]

As far as managing the game? That's all Sam has to do is be Trent Dilfer. You sound like you need some pussy little guy. Calm down. Or do you just beatoff to the Sam posters in your apartment?

Sam's number are better. That's great. His defense is what's got the Vikings 4-0.

Lol you're an idiot. I guarantee I have had more pussy this year than you have had your whole life.

 

[CowboyB]

That's an odd statement considering he doesn't have the best completion percentage in the NFL. #2, no doubt. But Matt Ryan I believe has a higher accuracy rating.

He means in terms of where he puts the ball. There are many other factors that determine completion %.