SHould Rick get a pay cut or just a cut

[VikingPaul73]

Lets also not forget they invested more in the line than any other team. It's unfortunate that Kalil, Sullivan, Loadholt, and Harris were injured but that's the way the cards fell.

Being critical of a GM is fine, but I think it's a little premature to be calling for his job or a pay cut at this point.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Sorry, but you sound as thought it was just a bad roll of the dice - it wasn't.

Kalil - bad pick. After a solid first year, he's been injured or bad or both. It was a controversial decision to extend Kalil on a 5th year because 1)he's injury prone 2) he acts like he doesn't care as has been discussed ad nauseum even on this site for year, 3) he's been terrible at times, average at other. Spielman is the GM and he made the decision to go with Kalil with a HUGE 5th year salary this year. There were red flags all over the place with Kalil, Spielman chose to ignore them.

Sully - I like Sully, but he is 30+ and had a major back injury last year. Again, lots of red flags. Spielman failed on this one again

Loadholt - again I like him but he's 30+ and is coming off a major Achilles injury, not to mention he missed all of the previous year. HUGE red flags - Spielman fails AGAIN here.

Harris - this is the one I give him a pass. Not even sure what the issue is, but it sounds bad and I feel terrible for Harris. it was a fluke and impossible to predict. That said, it's not like Harris was some OL savior, just a decent OG - better than Fusco.

The 3rd round trade this year because the roster was too deep - FAIL! He could have picked up a good OL at this point.

Beavers - FAIL! just a total FAIL!!!

I just can't believe people try to explain this OL with bad luck!!! It's an utter and complete failure by Spielman, and the results speak for themselves.

[chicagopurple]

1. Kalil is not just injured...he sucks...and he is injury prone
2. Sully's injuries were almost gauranteed to make him unreliable this year but Spielman did nothing to fix this...he just went with lots of prayers for a medical miracle...NOT!
3. Clemmings was a conversion project and a prayer (again) and flopped.
4. Fusco is a journeyman at best and everyone knows it except Spielman

I have been watching the Pats lately and damn but they are a top notch organization. I think our coach can be in the same league as theirs but their front office is insanely talented. They have been winning forever, and therefore had crappy draft ranking but they still manage to find REAL back up QBs, solid OL starters AND back-ups.
We aspire to be the best as fans and Ziggy needs to have the same aspirations for his office staff. I just dont see it.

[Nunin]

Kalil - bad pick. After a solid first year, he's been injured or bad or both. It was a controversial decision to extend Kalil on a 5th year because 1)he's injury prone 2) he acts like he doesn't care as has been discussed ad nauseum even on this site for year, 3) he's been terrible at times, average at other. Spielman is the GM and he made the decision to go with Kalil with a HUGE 5th year salary this year. There were red flags all over the place with Kalil, Spielman chose to ignore them.

Sully - I like Sully, but he is 30+ and had a major back injury last year. Again, lots of red flags. Spielman failed on this one again

Loadholt - again I like him but he's 30+ and is coming off a major Achilles injury, not to mention he missed all of the previous year. HUGE red flags - Spielman fails AGAIN here.


The 3rd round trade this year because the roster was too deep - FAIL! He could have picked up a good OL at this point.

Beavers - FAIL! just a total FAIL!!!

It's an utter and complete failure by Spielman, and the results speak for themselves.

So how do you feel about the line?

I disagree that Kalil was a bad pick. It was a bad decision to extend him, but I can't imagine there is a GM out there who didn't have him graded as one of the top 3 OL in that draft. His leg joints can't hack it, which probably messes up his motivation. No excuse, just the sad facts IMO. Unfortunate.
-
I think he's whiffed plenty along the o-line, but I do like the Boone signing. I also believe there is a chance this group, as is, might round into a servicable unit by week 6. I actually believe the combo of McKinnon/Asiata creates different possibilities for Turner that can change the results along the line.
And it could be a continuing disaster, of course.
But, just like you are needing to see more weeks of Bradford before calling the trade a win, I need to see more weeks of the line playing together before I consider them DOA.
Either way, it doesn't dismiss the fact that there has been some really poor picks in this area.

[PurpleKoolaid]

Great post jim, a few post before this in the thread. A few things I should add. I dont want Norv first yet, mainly because they have done the research on who is better for SB. I dont think that person is Norv though, at at. I asl think Norv, Scott and Rick are very stubborn and wont move. At least Zim is stubborn, but he on the defensive side of the ball. Im guess this aall comes to a head shortly after the bye week. Man, Packers and the the Panthers, thats 2 very hard teams in a row, but we got it.

[Just Me]

I disagree that Kalil was a bad pick. It was a bad decision to extend him, but I can't imagine there is a GM out there who didn't have him graded as one of the top 3 OL in that draft. His leg joints can't hack it, which probably messes up his motivation. No excuse, just the sad facts IMO. Unfortunate.

That pretty much sums it up. The decision to extend Kalil was questionable and certainly can be criticized, but Spielman actually did good job of taking a "no brainer" (one of the Top Rated OL in the draft at the time when we sorely needed one) and managed to drop down a spot, scoring extra draft picks for doing so, and still getting the guy we wanted (at the time - now maybe not so much ). I think we have the benefit of hindsight to say that it was a "bad pick", but no one was saying that when Kalil was selected.

[Texas Vike]

That pretty much sums it up. The decision to extend Kalil was questionable and certainly can be criticized, but Spielman actually did good job of taking a "no brainer" (one of the Top Rated OL in the draft at the time when we sorely needed one) and managed to drop down a spot, scoring extra draft picks for doing so, and still getting the guy we wanted (at the time - now maybe not so much ). I think we have the benefit of hindsight to say that it was a "bad pick", but no one was saying that when Kalil was selected.

Exactly. If anything, the fact that they picked a LT so high, to me, is a positive. That Rick played CLE while getting the prospect that they wanted was just a cherry on top. Kalil has not lived up to expectations, but he was widely considered a can't miss tackle at the time. His inability to fulfill that promise shouldn't be blamed on Rick or our scouts, IMO. The lack of commitment to the position since that pick, however, is a valid criticism.

What bothers me most is I don't see that the Vikings have anyone with a clear vision of how to evaluate and acquire talent at the position or to coach them up once here. Sparano's not been here long, so any reasonable fan needs to remain patient.

[Nunin]

I definitely agree with Tex about there being a serious shortcoming with prospects panning out on the o-line. It's not like they don't draft guys. They've really done well on the other side of the line, but I assume that speed and athleticism are bigger factors for a successful d-lineman than on the o-line. I believe O-line is much more difficult a position to be nfl-worthy. But I don't know for certain.
I also hope Sparano will have an effect becuase I believe coaching plays a huge role in the outcome in the trenches, moreso than for players who are gifted at skill positions.
I also think they need to draft better prospects from the getgo. Now that the defense is fairly well stocked maybe they can flip the script some for the next couple drafts. Necessity is pretty much dictating it.

[VikingPaul73]

That pretty much sums it up. The decision to extend Kalil was questionable and certainly can be criticized, but Spielman actually did good job of taking a "no brainer" (one of the Top Rated OL in the draft at the time when we sorely needed one) and managed to drop down a spot, scoring extra draft picks for doing so, and still getting the guy we wanted (at the time - now maybe not so much ). I think we have the benefit of hindsight to say that it was a "bad pick", but no one was saying that when Kalil was selected.

I see what you guys are saying....but just because other GMs would have made the pick and it seemed like a "no brainer" doesn't make it a good pick. And yes, hindsight is 20/20 but this is what separates the good GM/FOs like the Patriots. They make decisions that the mainstream says is crazy and stupid, but they work out in the long run.

[Nunin]

But Kalil was not a bad pick. He was a top ranked talent at a position of real need.
A similar example for the Patriots would be Logan Mankin. He was a fairly high pick if I remember, but they shockingly dealed him before his contract was up. In hindsight, the Vikes may have been wise to do this but Kalil has NEVER been heathy beyond his rookie season, a season in which he mae the pro-bowl mind you.
There have been several whiffs by Spielman on the O-line but I don't think it's legit to suggest that Kalil was a bad pick that should count against Spielman.
It was a great pick. Then the injuries began...I'm not sure how one can expect a GM to divine that happening.
Given his injuries and contract, it may not have been viable to trade him.
The issue was and has been not having a viable backup plan so they could just release him. That is where Spielman messed it, IMO. And it started with McKinnie and Charlie Johnson. To straight up cut your pro-bowl caliber LT in training camp and replace him with Johnson making yourself desperate for a LT in the draft is bascally how they got here.
That was totally bad management and fair critiscism. Hell, McKinnie wet on a got a SB ring, he even started the SB if I recall correctly.
Fat guy has the last laugh?

[VikingPaul73]

If it was just injuries, I'd agree with what you're saying. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think it's more than that. I think he lacks the drive, tenacity, ambition, and love of the game to justify a 4th overall pick - and I think that's something a great GM could have picked up on with all of the pre-draft interviews/access that they have to potential draft picks.

I will admit:

1. I was very happy with the pick at the time
2. I probably sound sanctimonious wrt to Kalil, but I'm not trying to be. Even if I had the talent to play in the NFL (trust me I don't ), I would still lack the drive, tenacity, ambition, and love of the game to succeed in the NFL. Beer is just too tasty

Anyway, I'm not optimistic about Clemmings, but let's hope he's an upgrade at LT!!!

[S197]

Sorry, but you sound as thought it was just a bad roll of the dice - it wasn't.

Kalil - bad pick. After a solid first year, he's been injured or bad or both. It was a controversial decision to extend Kalil on a 5th year because 1)he's injury prone 2) he acts like he doesn't care as has been discussed ad nauseum even on this site for year, 3) he's been terrible at times, average at other. Spielman is the GM and he made the decision to go with Kalil with a HUGE 5th year salary this year. There were red flags all over the place with Kalil, Spielman chose to ignore them.

Sully - I like Sully, but he is 30+ and had a major back injury last year. Again, lots of red flags. Spielman failed on this one again

Loadholt - again I like him but he's 30+ and is coming off a major Achilles injury, not to mention he missed all of the previous year. HUGE red flags - Spielman fails AGAIN here.

Harris - this is the one I give him a pass. Not even sure what the issue is, but it sounds bad and I feel terrible for Harris. it was a fluke and impossible to predict. That said, it's not like Harris was some OL savior, just a decent OG - better than Fusco.

The 3rd round trade this year because the roster was too deep - FAIL! He could have picked up a good OL at this point.

Beavers - FAIL! just a total FAIL!!!

I just can't believe people try to explain this OL with bad luck!!! It's an utter and complete failure by Spielman, and the results speak for themselves.

I never said it was just bad luck but when you lose competition at 80% of your line, is that not legitimate?

Kalil is only a bad pick in hindsight. Trent Richardson, Mo Claiborne, and Blackmon were far bigger busts and I seriously doubt anyone here wanted anyone other than those 4 choices at that spot.

Loadholt was supposed to compete with Smith, Harris with Fusco, Sully with Berger, they brought in Boone, and Kalil was supposed to hold the end while Clemmings got another year. You could argue picking up Kalil's option was questionable, I think that's fair, but who was the other option?

Spielman had a plan for the line but when you lose four guys at four different positions, that's not exactly something any team can just shrug off. I'm in agreement that we should have picked up guys in earlier rounds at some point in the last few years but I'm also trying to stay objective of the situation.

[fiestavike]

I never said it was just bad luck but when you lose competition at 80% of your line, is that not legitimate?

Kalil is only a bad pick in hindsight. Trent Richardson, Mo Claiborne, and Blackmon were far bigger busts and I seriously doubt anyone here wanted anyone other than those 4 choices at that spot.

Loadholt was supposed to compete with Smith, Harris with Fusco, Sully with Berger, they brought in Boone, and Kalil was supposed to hold the end while Clemmings got another year. You could argue picking up Kalil's option was questionable, I think that's fair, but who was the other option?

Spielman had a plan for the line but when you lose four guys at four different positions, that's not exactly something any team can just shrug off. I'm in agreement that we should have picked up guys in earlier rounds at some point in the last few years but I'm also trying to stay objective of the situation.

There is no excuse for viewing Loadhold and Sully as anything but long shots to contribute, similarly to Bykowski, Sirles and Shepherd. The biggest loss the line suffered is Mike Harris. He would have likely been a contributor by this point.

[VikingPaul73]

I don't understand the "only a bad pick in hindsight" concept.

Isn't every pick judged "in hindsight"?

what wins Super Bowls? Performance on the field or Mel Kiper draft grades?

[fiestavike]

I don't understand the "only a bad pick in hindsight" concept.

Isn't every pick judged "in hindsight"?

what wins Super Bowls? Performance on the field or Mel Kiper draft grades?

No. Every pick shouldn't be judged in hindsight. (If you are a fan, judge it howerver you want). It should be judged based on its value and your scouts should be judged based on their valuations. In other words, if players you value organizationally keep busting, its on the scouts, unless your gm is disregarding their evaluations and making his own choice, like Kevin Costner in Draft Day. If that's happening, I guess you wind up being the Browns though.

[VikingPaul73]

In other words, if players you value organizationally keep busting, its on the scouts, unless your gm is disregarding their evaluations and making his own choice.

well who hires the scouts? Who manages the scouting department? The buck has to stop somewhere.

By your logic Spielman doesn't deserve credit for Diggs, a WR scout does (IMO they both do )