Teddy Bridgewater Likely Out For 2017?

The catastrophic knee injury that caused Vikings quarterback Teddy Bridgewater to sit out the entire 2016 season is also likely to cost him the 2017 campaign, a team source told Jason Cole of Bleacher Report (video link). Doctors have informed the Vikings that the best-case scenario for Bridgwater would be a 19-month recovery. His injury occurred last August, which means he’s unlikely to return to full strength until March 2018 at the earliest.

On the other hand, Bridgewater’s agent Kennard McGuire has strongly disputed Cole’s report, telling Ben Goessling of ESPN.com“I would not overreact to a story that has zero substance and no credibility.” The Vikings have maintained there is no current update on Bridgewater’s status, while sources tell Andrew Krammer of the Minneapolis Star Tribune Bridgewater still has no “set timeline” for return.

Teddy Bridgewater

As of October, Bridgewater’s career was reportedly in jeopardy on account of the complete ACL tear and dislocated kneecap he suffered in practice. More recently, Vikings head coach Mike Zimmer expressed uncertainty earlier this month as to when Bridgewater might return. That came after Zimmer declared that Sam Bradford would be the Vikings’ starting quarterback to at least begin next season.

The Vikings’ decision to send their 2017 first-round pick and 2018 fourth-round selection to the Eagles for Bradford last September came in response to Bridgewater’s injury. Minnesota was the reigning NFC North champion at the time and hoping to keep its playoff chances alive, though it ultimately wasn’t able to replicate its 2015 success this season. That wasn’t necessarily the fault of Bradford, who set an NFL record for single-season completion percentage (71.6) and tossed 20 touchdowns against five interceptions as part of a conservative passing attack. Despite Bradford’s career-best statistical season, not to mention a 5-0 start, the Vikings stumbled to an 8-8 record and a third-place finish in their division.

Both Bridgewater and Bradford are set to enter contract years, though the former is controllable through 2018 by way of a fifth-year option. The Vikings are likely to exercise the option because it would give them another year to evaluate Bridgewater’s recovery, per Ben Goessling of ESPN.com. The 24-year-old Bridgewater, whom the Vikings chose 32nd in the 2014 draft, combined for a 64.9 percent completion rate and 28 scores against 21 picks in his first two seasons. Minnesota has posted an impressive 17-11 record in his 28 career starts.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

View Comments (29)
newest oldest

29 comments on “Teddy Bridgewater Likely Out For 2017?

  1. sportsfan60

    Wasn’t the 4th round pick in the trade initially reported as conditional?

    • powerslave777

      I believe 4th was the floor. It could have improved to an earlier round if the Vikes had advanced to certain rounds in the playoffs

      • Connor Byrne

        Right. it would’ve become a third had the Vikings gotten to the NFC title game or a second had they won the Super Bowl. It’s now locked in as a fourth.

  2. JT19

    While the trade is still an overpay, if the Vikings knew about Bridgewater’s recovery timetable before the Bradford trade, the trade makes a ton of sense. Bradford isn’t a great QB at all, but if healthy, should be good enough to help lead a team to the playoffs. What hurt the Vikings the most this year was injuries across the team. A healthy Vikings squad and a repeat season from Bradford should make the team a contender.

    • realfootballfan

      No, it still doesn’t make sense. Essentially, the Cowboys got another mediocre QB who has had more success in the defense first role in Mark Sanchez for nothing a week later. It didn’t make sense then and makes even less sense now because it played out like some of us thought it would, badly. When you consider that Brett Favre and Carson Palmer couldn’t overcome no off-season with teams with way better supporting offensive pieces, who in the world thought Sam Bradford would do it? Now, they’re missing the first rounder that could have replaced Peterson, gotten another offensive lineman, or something else important. Just a dumb, dumb move, and I said that at the time. Sometimes you have bad luck, and they did with that injury.

  3. Jake

    It was more than a dislocated knee cap, it was a dislocated knee, which of course is different.

  4. LGBT Raven Lover

    Bad break for my purple siblings up north. They’ll be forced to spend an early pick on a QB for sure. Short pass Sammy can’t carry a team, he has proven incapable on 3 teams. Hope the Vykes can maybe get a young guy, groom him, while Sammy holds down the fort and then the young guy can take over when Sammy fails again.

      • LGBT Raven Lover

        Romo is a year older, was already broken down, and always made bad decisions. He’s not anyone’s solution to getting to the playoffs.

          • LGBT Raven Lover

            Romo is a year older meaning he was old this past season, and will be even older next season. He would be a decent backup at this point in his career but if some one thinks Tony Romo will save their season…LOLOL.

      • lyle77

        romo would be overpaying. as a cowboy fan though, wish the vikes would take him

    • JT19

      Just because he can’t carry the team doesn’t mean he’s incapable. Is he going to win any awards for his play? No. But health permitting, he’s solid enough to be a step above a game manager. He’s essentially a slightly worse Alex Smith who also took years to figure it all out anyway. Yeah a QB who can carry your team is great, but a good defense, which the Vikings do have, can be good enough if the QB doesn’t prove to be a total failure and can limit turnovers and make plays when it matters. As a Raven fan you should know best, Trent Dilfer is the prime example of a QB being just good enough to help lead his team to the playoffs (and a Super Bowl win) thanks to a good defense.

  5. fisher40

    Sammy Bradford is going to have to step it up a notch next year if the queens want to compete with their neighbors along the bay of Lake Michigan

  6. Hannibal8us

    While it was an overpay I’m shocked at how down people were on Bradford’s season, for a guy with absolutely no offensive line and no running game he looked fine. If they sure up those things and continue to not cough up games due to kicking (like they did before punting Walsh) there’s no reason to believe they can’t compete next year. Bradford and the passing game were literally the only bright spots on that offense this past year.

    • LGBT Raven Lover

      Sam Bradford leading a team not just to the playoffs but as legitimate contenders??? I’ll believe that when I see it. Not happening for him in MIN. Unless they draft a top flight QB who changes his name to Sam Bradford then beats out old Sammy.

      • Hannibal8us

        Totally disagree, when the OL played even halfway decent he outplayed Aaron Rodgers. Give him an even average OL and running game with those receiving weapons and he could easily be a top 15 QB which is all the Vikes need to be contenders with that defense. I watched every game this year and I was impressed by what Bradford did when he wasn’t on his back due to instant pressure from a god awful line.

        • LGBT Raven Lover

          The only way Bradford can out play Rodgers is if Rodgers has a horrible game and just isn’t himself. If Bradford plays his absolute best and Rodgers plays ok (for Rodgers), there is no comparison. A journeyman like Bradford isn’t near the level of a future HOFer like Rodgers.

          • lyle77

            laughable comparison. bradford has consistently been overrated throughout his career. he isn’t the player he was thought to be. which isn’t to say he’s had a terrible career, but he is no aaron rodgers. i suppose you could make an argument that injuries and coaching philosophies derailed his game to some extent in stlouis. that argument lost ground in philly. his reputation has become more that of a “capable journeyman” rather than a highlight reel game winner like rodgers. there’s always been reasons why he hasn’t achieved what it was once thought he could. if bridgewater is out for 2017, this could be a situation where sambo may finally have the stability to show some glimmer of promise, but i think that time has really past. what you see is what you get.

  7. hill
    hill

    Bradford wasn’t the problem for the ’16 Vikings.

    I agree it was a slight overpay but given the timing it wasn’t egregious.

    • LGBT Raven Lover

      Regardless of timing – horrible decision. The kind that gets a GM fired. Without Bradford – no playoffs. With Bradford – no playoffs and now missing valuable draft picks.

      • realfootballfan

        Exactly. This is one of the reasons Hue Jackson got buried in Oakland. Besides that it’s never worked in the history of the league, plopping a QB on a team with no off-season, but the expectation was higher than that with Minnesota because they had Super Bowl aspirations and actually were my pick before that injury. Sometimes you have bad luck, and it would have made more sense to grab a vet like Sanchez after he got cut and roll with Hill who has continued to outplay Bradford everywhere they’ve taken snaps with the same team. Go figure. What you don’t do is let a team hold you hostage for a move that is inevitably going to fail anyway.

  8. JD396

    I don’t quite get why people are so down on Bradford who put up some pretty darn good numbers considering the garbage he had to deal with.

    The price was definitely steep but I think calling Bradford an inexcusable overpay is way too dramatic.

    • realfootballfan

      Yep, because #1 picks come along all the time, especially in deep drafts for RB where you are long in the tooth this year. Bradford wasn’t taking you to the Super Bowl, and I can say that because the league probability for its history says so. Thus, it was a stupid trade. Now, in March, don’t you think the Eagles would have been a bit more reasonable to trading him to get Wentz on the field after he would have gone 6-10 again rather than doing a shotgun trade in training camp? Now, you have to justify the trade, and it will never be justified because Bradford is never leading anybody to a Super Bowl. If you actually think he played well, you need to get your eyes adjusted. Playing well goes beyond stats sometimes, which was something I pointed out of why it would be a downgrade from Bridgewater despite the clueless Viking fans trying to convince themselves because Bradford has never been good at managing games. It is often used to knock players, but at its core, it’s something all of the great ones do well, from Unitas to Brady, even before they put up numbers. In that sense, there has been no comparison in their careers, and Bradford proved again incapable, putting up hollow numbers while blowing a 5-0 start witha dominant defense before that happened. Now, watch next year as they try to further prove they were right in this erroneous trade and get everybody in the building fired in the process because they have few picks to fix that attrocious line, can’t draft Peterson’s replacement, and Zimmer looks to have lost the team. Otherwise, seems like the arrow is pointing up.

Leave a Reply