Is there a QB debate?

Last week, I laid out a decision-making framework that might have pushed the Vikings to select Dobbs instead of Mullens, even in the case where Dobbs was the worse quarterback on average. The argument essentially went that the Vikings needed to prioritize increasing chaos when they are in a situation with a backup quarterback.

There was one caveat, though. A good defense minimizes the value of chaos and maximizes the value of the better, more consistent quarterback. And the Vikings might have an astounding defense. They allowed zero points to the Raiders – 13 fewer than Las Vegas has scored with Aidan O’Connell under center – and 12 points to the Bears, their second-lowest of the season.

Notably, the average starting field position for the Bears was the second-best that they had enjoyed all season. The best field position they earned this season was against the Washington Commanders, where they scored 40 points. Against the Vikings defense, their stunning field position – including two drives beginning in Minnesota territory – only managed 12 points and no touchdowns.

In fact, the Vikings lead the league in scores allowed on drives where the offense gained negative yards. That means the Vikings have allowed more points on drives where the defense performed outstandingly well than any other team in the league.

The Vikings are tied for first in points per game allowed since Week 5 and are second in defensive EPA per play. Given that, it might be worth dispensing of the idea that Minnesota should play a high-variance quarterback and instead should play the quarterback more likely to produce consistent results from down to down.

The Vikings fanbase has consistently underestimated Nick Mullens...

Even when accounting for Dobbs’ rushing ability through measures like EPA, it’s not particularly close – Mullens has a career EPA per play of 0.086 (31st among quarterbacks with at least 500 plays since 2012), while Dobbs has produced a negative EPA per play over his career, earning minus-0.096 expected points per play.

That ranks 86th of the 95 qualifying quarterbacks.

Mullens plays football like the Vikings need a quarterback to play football. Dobbs is in an unfair position – not just because of receiver drops but because he hasn’t had a chance to learn the offense. That’s not his fault. But the Vikings are not in the business of giving a quarterback as many chances as possible, and it’s arguably unfair for the Vikings to continue putting Dobbs in this position.

Fair or unfair, Mullens gives the Vikings a better chance to win because he can operate the offense. He gets rid of the ball in the rhythm of the offense and puts it where it needs to go in order for receivers to maximize their contribution.

Mullens’ familiarity with the offense is no accident. Kevin O’Connell‘s offensive system is built from the Sean McVay offense, itself an offshoot of Shanahan’s offense in San Francisco. That relationship made it relatively easy for Mullens to pick up the offense when he joined the team in 2022.

The two offseasons Mullens has had with the team have helped him understand where the receivers are meant to break and make appropriate reads for how plays adapt to opposing defenses.

It could be the case that Dobbs can run some NFL offenses better than Mullens can. But Mullens runs this offense. He gets the ball out at the top of his drop and throws to where the receiver is going to go. He knows how the play adjusts after the snap.

If the offense felt better when Mullens was in despite the fact that his passes were hitting receivers in the hands as often as Dobbs’ were, that’s why. It’s his offense. Sometimes, it’s that simple.

Should the Vikings have started Mullens as soon as he was healthy? Without the benefit of hindsight, it’s difficult to say they should have benched a white-hot Dobbs. But they have no choice going forward – not because Mullens is a better quarterback, but because he’s a better quarterback for this team.