Vikings Message Board.Com

I think we've more or less come to a consensus that Zimm focussed heavily on building the defense. The OL sucks in part by being neglected for that purpose. And I think many agree that no OC can shape up the OL roster as it stands. In reality, I believe this is the final year of building a super bowl team.

So then, speaking of building. my prediction after last season was exactly this -

The defensd looked mean towards the end. By this year we we'll have the purple people eaters resurrected.
We will take this season to work out the offense.
We will still take division, and one up last year by taking one play off game.
Then next year we'd be ready for the bowl in our stadium.

Now speaking -

Our defense is tops. Zimms focus of the D is a success.
Now on to the O
Our OL is such a problem that needing to build it (and being ready for the super bowl next year, is SO HAMMERED into reality, that the mess will be at the for front of Zimms mind to get it sorted in the off season, and the draft. His defense focus was a success, now on to the OL

I'm sticking to my prediction I made post Walshian playoff botch. I feel it is going the way I was thinking. And I believe next year will will be in the fortress making a play for the ring
We must hold true to the possibility of this shaping up this season, but I believe, in reality, it will get sorted for next season.

Post note: it will be quite telling, as Purplemustwin stated, how we play next weekend. We are going into next Monday after a MAJOR botch. How they fair, and if there is an energy of resolve, will tell EVERYTHING about the rest of the season. EVERYTHING (IMO)


BUT don't get worked up about giving up this year. there's still time.

If they don't clean things up against the Bears then sure, they can mark down their second loss in a row and they would deserve that.

I just don't see that happening again. The team is too well-coached to put in another stinker like this, plus the Bears have a lot more systemic issues than the Vikings. I mean, it's not even close. Whereas Philly is a solid team with some flaws they were largely able to cover up and/or compensate for, the Bears are a hot mess pretty much across the board.

Vikes were due to turn in a stinker and we saw it. Odds of that happening 2 weeks in a row is probably less than me winning the Powerball this week. I'd expect a much improved performance on Monday night. I'll go further and predict a solid performance against the Lions to follow that. We'll see from there, but this team should be 7-1 in 2 weeks.

VikingLord wrote:If they don't clean things up against the Bears then sure, they can mark down their second loss in a row and they would deserve that.

I just don't see that happening again. The team is too well-coached to put in another stinker like this, plus the Bears have a lot more systemic issues than the Vikings. I mean, it's not even close. Whereas Philly is a solid team with some flaws they were largely able to cover up and/or compensate for, the Bears are a hot mess pretty much across the board.

Vikes were due to turn in a stinker and we saw it. Odds of that happening 2 weeks in a row is probably less than me winning the Powerball this week. I'd expect a much improved performance on Monday night. I'll go further and predict a solid performance against the Lions to follow that. We'll see from there, but this team should be 7-1 in 2 weeks.

Agreed. But we can't look at a win over the Bears as the tell tail sign of this picking up. It's HOW we win. Facing a less then worthy opponent can hide our flaws. Keep a wide open eye on HOW we win this one. However, I do think this - a win of any kind will boast moral.

I love the optimism, and I do think is warranted.

To be clear I am right on board with you

The-Purple-Reign wrote:Agreed. But we can't look at a win over the Bears as the tell tail sign of this picking up. It's HOW we win.

I will be very upset if we win by less than 10. Our offense needs to score 20+ and move the ball without turnovers.

Well, I have to disagree to a point. They did work on the offense. They went out and got people to make the O-line better. Problem is, you can't predict injuries. Does anyone think that if we had the original starting line in there they would have been that bad on Sunday? I don't.

Raptorman wrote:Well, I have to disagree to a point. They did work on the offense. They went out and got people to make the O-line better. Problem is, you can't predict injuries. Does anyone think that if we had the original starting line in there they would have been that bad on Sunday? I don't.

Spielman, been unwilling to allocate high assets to fixing the line, so we end up with a lot of day 3 picks, trades for backups, and lower tier FAs. I understand that you can definitely find starters from those pools, but it is not realistic to build an entire OL this way.

Just happened to come across this tonight. Interesting reading.

The Cardinals’ offense is filled with highly drafted players: Quarterback Carson Palmer was the first overall pick in 2003, wide receiver Larry Fitzgerald was the third overall pick the following year, and four other starters — wide receiver Michael Floyd, right tackle D.J. Humphries, left guard Mike Iupati and tight end Jermaine Gresham — were drafted in the first round. Three other starters (running back David Johnson, right guard Evan Mathis and left tackle Jared Veldheer) were taken in the third round.

Meanwhile, of the Seahawks’ top 11 leaders in offensive snaps, none were a top-60 draft selection, and only three (quarterback Russell Wilson, center Justin Britt and running back Christine Michael) were taken in the first 90 picks. Four of the offense’s regular starters were undrafted: both offensive tackles, Garry Gilliam and Bradley Sowell, and both starting wide receivers, Doug Baldwin and Jermaine Kearse.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/her ... aft-picks/


Red highlight is mine.

Raptorman wrote:Well, I have to disagree to a point. They did work on the offense. They went out and got people to make the O-line better. Problem is, you can't predict injuries. Does anyone think that if we had the original starting line in there they would have been that bad on Sunday? I don't.

That bad? No.

Bad? Absolutely.

Mothman wrote:
That bad? No.

Bad? Absolutely.

Completely agree. The OL playing poorly is nothing new at all, even when the starters were present.

Raptorman wrote:Just happened to come across this tonight. Interesting reading.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/her ... aft-picks/


Red highlight is mine.

Thanks for the link. I'm not sure what to make of it, especially since it only considers results from this season. It certainly points to a truth we all knew, which is that good players can be found at any point in the draft, as well as among undrafted players.

Mothman wrote: Thanks for the link. I'm not sure what to make of it, especially since it only considers results from this season. It certainly points to a truth we all knew, which is that good players can be found at any point in the draft, as well as among undrafted players.

Since 2010, Seattle has drafted 5 O-line players in the first 2 rounds. Only 2 remain on the team and only one is starting. In the same time period New England has picked 2 players in the first two rounds, both tackles both starting. So it really is a crap shoot. Both of the Vikings high picks were Tackles. Of course one is now gone and one is injured.

Of the 101 O-lines players picked in the first 2 rounds since 2010, 66 were tackles, 11 were centers and the rest Guards. 17 of these 101 are no longer playing.

Raptorman wrote:Since 2010, Seattle has drafted 5 O-line players in the first 2 rounds. Only 2 remain on the team and only one is starting.

I mean no offense but that stat is inaccurate and it's a bit misleading. The Seahawks have drafted 4 offensive linemen in the first 2 rounds since 2010, not 5. They are:

2010: Russell Okung T, R1
2011: James Carpenter T, R1
2014: Justin Britt T, R2
2016: Germain Ifedi G, R1

Okung isn't starting for Seattle but he is starting for Denver. Carpenter is starting for the Jets. Britt is starting at center for the Seahawks. The rookie, Ifedi, is playing too, after working his way back from a high ankle sprain. If I'm not mistaken, he is also a starter.

In other words, all 4 players are starters. They just aren't all starting for the Seahawks.

In the same time period New England has picked 2 players in the first two rounds, both tackles both starting. So it really is a crap shoot. Both of the Vikings high picks were Tackles. Of course one is now gone and one is injured.

Of the 101 O-lines players picked in the first 2 rounds since 2010, 66 were tackles, 11 were centers and the rest Guards. 17 of these 101 are no longer playing.

In other words, 83% of 101 players drafted over 6 years and 7 drafts are playing. I'm guessing that's a higher percentage than we'd see from later round picks.

None of the above sounds like a crap shoot to me. A crap shoot is random. Sure, there are failures. Sometimes a high draft pick bombs or never plays up to his potential due to injuries but it seems to me the talent level matters and that scouting, pro situation, coaching and development, injuries, etc. all contribute to which players succeed or fail. If it was truly a crap shoot, teams wouldn't expend so much time and energy on the draft.

Its not Zims fault that we have no OL. That is all on Spielmans shoulders. No matter how well you coach, you can't take a total lack of talent on the OL and coach them up. Slow response speed, a lack of strength and weight...all are just physical realities that can't be changed. The OL needs to be replaced. None of them are top quality or even average NFL player. We need new bodies all across the OL.

The NFL window is very small due to free agency in terms of being a contender. See Carolina, Arizona, and even Seattle as examples. There are teams like New England and Green B-B-Buh sorry can't say it, who stay at or near the top for many years but it's a rarity. If Zim can keep the nucleus of the defense together, one of TB or Bradford is "the guy", and they can fix the line then maybe they'll be able to be one of those teams that is always near the front. But it's way too early to tell. Right now the window is maybe a year or two.