Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings!

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

Locked
User avatar
808vikingsfan
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3336
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 5:45 pm
Location: Hawaii

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by 808vikingsfan » Wed Jan 18, 2017 9:04 pm

chicagopurple wrote:Those of us who have been viking fans for 3-4 decades are more likely to be utterly disgusted and fed up. We have seen countless cycles like this. In reality, we are no where near being a contender. The OL is a wreck, and NO, injuries are not to blame there as virtually ALL the starters, their replacements, and the guys off the street that were allowed to put on the purple this year were ALL sub-standard. It is a HUGE problem and pretty much all the current OL players need to go.
We are about to see AP leave, having wasted a Hall Of Fame RB Career thanks to various owners and coaches who couldnt put a winner around him.
Our Defense is very good but is only aging as we spin our wheels on offense.
Our Coach seemed to regress this year.
The rest of the league is also looking for OL help so the picking will be slim.
It looks pretty crappy and I am tired of 40 yrs of mediocrity.
It's the ride that I enjoy, not the destination. I've been a fan since I can remember (74?)
Joined: Aug 2006
Deleted: Sept 12 2014
Reborn: Sept 17 2014

User avatar
808vikingsfan
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3336
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 5:45 pm
Location: Hawaii

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by 808vikingsfan » Wed Jan 18, 2017 9:47 pm

chicagopurple wrote:The Steelers have had 3 coaches in the last 50 yrs......we go thru that many every 3-4 yrs.
The Patriots also are rock solid on coaching.
Ownership never changes in those town
Hmmmmm. I don't hear too many people here suggesting the ownership commit to Zimmer. All I hear are fans questioning if the Vikings hired the right coach. Maybe we all need to change our mentality and show patience in building a team rather than demanding immediate results just as S197 said in another thread.
Joined: Aug 2006
Deleted: Sept 12 2014
Reborn: Sept 17 2014

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37379
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by Mothman » Wed Jan 18, 2017 10:15 pm

808vikingsfan wrote: Hmmmmm. I don't hear too many people here suggesting the ownership commit to Zimmer. All I hear are fans questioning if the Vikings hired the right coach. Maybe we all need to change our mentality and show patience in building a team rather than demanding immediate results just as S197 said in another thread.
An extended commitment to a head coach (or GM!) without results to justify it is just foolish and we're 3 years into the Zimmer era now so we're way past demanding "immediate" results. I recognize the value of continuity and that's why, when Zimmer was hired, I said I hoped he'd get at least 4 years to show what he can do. He's going to get those 4 years (and he should) but further commitment beyond that should absolutely be conditional on results. Everybody should question whether the Vikings have hired the right head coach until it's crystal clear that they actually hired the right head coach. We've seen 3 straight seasons of lousy, bottom 15% of the league-level offense with little-to-no-improvement. We've seen almost no improvement in the run defense either and the Vikes just followed a playoff season with a train wreck of a season. At this point, anybody not wondering if Zimmer is the right head coach for the job might have an excess of patience. :)

mosscarter
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 2:34 am

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by mosscarter » Wed Jan 18, 2017 10:19 pm

i'm on board with all of the frustration. someone used the word patience, well what in the world do you think us fan's have been trying to be for years? at least in the 90's and early 2,000's the team had carter and moss and were entertaining to watch. watching this vikings offense for the past 5 years has been utterly brutal. they cannot score touchdowns consistently and zimmer has had plenty of time now to at least put an offense together. i only watched two games the entire second half of the season, the thanksgiving game (in which we could only muster one rushing td) and the dallas game only because i was stuck at a hotel and was flying out the next day. we had one meaningless touchdown at the very end of regulation. i had no interest in watching an offense that putrid and i agree there is no way we can get entirely new offensive line in one off season. it will take a ton of creativity and also a ton of spending and i'm not sure we have either. we made some picks that simply didn't pan out. you don't draft two receivers in the first round in the past 4 years and get these kinds of results. how many picks did we trade for patterson? i don't care if it is coaching, lack of creativity on offense, or what anymore but this guy was drafted to be a number 1 receiver and so was treadwell. first round picks are supposed to be productive in the nfl. the two of them combined are at best a number 2 receiver. think if we had used some of those picks for patterson on linemen back then; i don't the situation would be this dire regarding the line.

User avatar
Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5282
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by Pondering Her Percy » Wed Jan 18, 2017 11:37 pm

chicagopurple wrote:Those of us who have been viking fans for 3-4 decades are more likely to be utterly disgusted and fed up. We have seen countless cycles like this. In reality, we are no where near being a contender. The OL is a wreck, and NO, injuries are not to blame there as virtually ALL the starters, their replacements, and the guys off the street that were allowed to put on the purple this year were ALL sub-standard. It is a HUGE problem and pretty much all the current OL players need to go.
We are about to see AP leave, having wasted a Hall Of Fame RB Career thanks to various owners and coaches who couldnt put a winner around him.
Our Defense is very good but is only aging as we spin our wheels on offense.
Our Coach seemed to regress this year.
The rest of the league is also looking for OL help so the picking will be slim.
It looks pretty crappy and I am tired of 40 yrs of mediocrity.
We were a contender last year and had a mediocre to below average OL. So how does that happen yet you sit here and act like the world is crumbling around us?? We have a weak OL. What else is "weak"? RB?? Ok but what else? Not QB, not TE, not WR, not this defense. You're acting like this is the 2011 Vikings that had the 3rd overall pick. Nobody is happy about what happened this year. We are all frustrated. But to act like this team has no chance because we're going into the offseason with a weak OL is pretty sad if you ask me. It's not going to be a one year fix but if we can bring in some key pieces and sprinkle in some depth this offseason, I'm not really sure what you're worried about. I've been a fan of this team for 20+ years, have seen a lot of heartbreaks, but I'm not going to sit here and say this TEAM is a wreck because of an OL problem. That's just an overreaction at its finest if you ask me. If you recall, back in 2012 we didnt have many building blocks and had a horrible defense. This team is above and beyond better than that one.

Pretty much all the current OL need to go?? Come on dude. Just take some time and read what you're saying.
Image

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37379
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by Mothman » Thu Jan 19, 2017 7:23 am

Pondering Her Percy wrote:We were a contender last year and had a mediocre to below average OL. So how does that happen yet you sit here and act like the world is crumbling around us?? We have a weak OL. What else is "weak"? RB?? Ok but what else? Not QB, not TE, not WR, not this defense. You're acting like this is the 2011 Vikings that had the 3rd overall pick. Nobody is happy about what happened this year. We are all frustrated. But to act like this team has no chance because we're going into the offseason with a weak OL is pretty sad if you ask me. It's not going to be a one year fix but if we can bring in some key pieces and sprinkle in some depth this offseason, I'm not really sure what you're worried about. I've been a fan of this team for 20+ years, have seen a lot of heartbreaks, but I'm not going to sit here and say this TEAM is a wreck because of an OL problem.That's just an overreaction at its finest if you ask me. If you recall, back in 2012 we didn't have many building blocks and had a horrible defense. This team is above and beyond better than that one.
Those of us with deeper concerns think the Vikings have more than just an OL problem. That simple explanation for their problems is your diagnosis, not a universally accepted explanation.

User avatar
Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5282
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by Pondering Her Percy » Thu Jan 19, 2017 8:55 am

Mothman wrote: Those of us with deeper concerns think the Vikings have more than just an OL problem. That simple explanation for their problems is your diagnosis, not a universally accepted explanation.
Of course because we came off a playoff year to going 8-8 and everyone thinks the sky is falling. You think it's coaches, Spielman, ownership, yada yada yada. Yet many of these fans that have "deeper concerns", KNOW that this team would probably be better than 8-8 if it wasn't for injuries to the offense. GB would have probably had a better record if they didn't lose their whole secondary. However, my thing is, it's very tough to overcome. Just because we have an injury riddled season, now everyone is going to question Zim, Spielman and so on. The OL has been an issue for some time now yeah I get that. But we also wouldn't have our defense if we went in the other direction. And the Spielman haters would be saying the same thing they're saying now. It's pretty easy to sit behind a computer screen and say he should have done this or done that

Seattle has a pathetic OL. Maybe just as bad or worse than ours. But a good defense. Is anyone questioning Schneider for "ignoring" the OL?? I sure haven't heard anything. Personally, I think some of you are blowing things way out of proportion. 40 years of frustration yeah I get that. Like I said, nobody is happy about what happened. But if I was actually worried about Spielman or Zim, I'd have no problem saying it. But I have no worries whatsoever. So I'll leave it at agree to disagree
Image

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37379
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by Mothman » Thu Jan 19, 2017 9:25 am

Pondering Her Percy wrote:Of course because we came off a playoff year to going 8-8 and everyone thinks the sky is falling.
No , that's how you're choosing to characterize and dismiss the concerns being expressed.
You think it's coaches, Spielman, ownership, yada yada yada. Yet many of these fans that have "deeper concerns", KNOW that this team would probably be better than 8-8 if it wasn't for injuries to the offense.
I don't think anybody can truly know that but even if we assume it's true, being better than 8-8 doesn't make them a serious Super Bowl contender or even mean they're truly on the road to becoming a serious SB contender.
GB would have probably had a better record if they didn't lose their whole secondary. However, my thing is, it's very tough to overcome. Just because we have an injury riddled season, now everyone is going to question Zim, Spielman and so on. The OL has been an issue for some time now yeah I get that. But we also wouldn't have our defense if we went in the other direction.
Who cares if the team isn't good enough as a whole? Too many people have stars in their eyes over the defense. A good defense is 1/3 of a good team.
Seattle has a pathetic OL. Maybe just as bad or worse than ours. But a good defense. Is anyone questioning Schneider for "ignoring" the OL??
Seattle built a Super Bowl-winning team that was good enough to almost win 2 in a row. They ran into post-championship cap issues because they had built an excellent team and they couldn't afford to pay all the talent they had assembled. That's very different from the Vikings situation. the Vikes have the problems without the accomplishments.
Personally, I think some of you are blowing things way out of proportion. 40 years of frustration yeah I get that.
It's not just 40 years of frustration. It's 40+ years of observation. It's perspective. It doesn't seem to occur to you that some of us look at this team, based on that experience, and perhaps see things you don't see, see patterns and problems indicative of the same struggles that have kept the Vikes out of the Super Bowl for the past 4 decades and seem likely to keep them out of it in the near future too.

mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3456
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by mansquatch » Thu Jan 19, 2017 9:32 am

Pondering Her Percy wrote:
We were a contender last year and had a mediocre to below average OL. So how does that happen yet you sit here and act like the world is crumbling around us?? We have a weak OL. What else is "weak"? RB?? Ok but what else? Not QB, not TE, not WR, not this defense. You're acting like this is the 2011 Vikings that had the 3rd overall pick. Nobody is happy about what happened this year. We are all frustrated. But to act like this team has no chance because we're going into the offseason with a weak OL is pretty sad if you ask me. It's not going to be a one year fix but if we can bring in some key pieces and sprinkle in some depth this offseason, I'm not really sure what you're worried about. I've been a fan of this team for 20+ years, have seen a lot of heartbreaks, but I'm not going to sit here and say this TEAM is a wreck because of an OL problem. That's just an overreaction at its finest if you ask me. If you recall, back in 2012 we didnt have many building blocks and had a horrible defense. This team is above and beyond better than that one.

Pretty much all the current OL need to go?? Come on dude. Just take some time and read what you're saying.
PHP it is time for the offseason hiatus, trust me. I've been killing that horse for over 2 months and no one cares. When they win a bunch of games next year no one will remember us being the voices of confidence. Time to go fishing my friend.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37379
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by Mothman » Thu Jan 19, 2017 9:45 am

mansquatch wrote:PHP it is time for the offseason hiatus, trust me. I've been killing that horse for over 2 months and no one cares. When they win a bunch of games next year no one will remember us being the voices of confidence. Time to go fishing my friend.
I remember you guys being the voices of confidence prior to this season too. :(

Jordysghost
Packers Suck
Posts: 2992
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:40 pm

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by Jordysghost » Thu Jan 19, 2017 9:50 am

Pondering Her Percy wrote: Of course because we came off a playoff year to going 8-8 and everyone thinks the sky is falling. You think it's coaches, Spielman, ownership, yada yada yada. Yet many of these fans that have "deeper concerns", KNOW that this team would probably be better than 8-8 if it wasn't for injuries to the offense. GB would have probably had a better record if they didn't lose their whole secondary. However, my thing is, it's very tough to overcome. Just because we have an injury riddled season, now everyone is going to question Zim, Spielman and so on. The OL has been an issue for some time now yeah I get that. But we also wouldn't have our defense if we went in the other direction. And the Spielman haters would be saying the same thing they're saying now. It's pretty easy to sit behind a computer screen and say he should have done this or done that

Seattle has a pathetic OL. Maybe just as bad or worse than ours. But a good defense. Is anyone questioning Schneider for "ignoring" the OL?? I sure haven't heard anything. Personally, I think some of you are blowing things way out of proportion. 40 years of frustration yeah I get that. Like I said, nobody is happy about what happened. But if I was actually worried about Spielman or Zim, I'd have no problem saying it. But I have no worries whatsoever. So I'll leave it at agree to disagree
I just want to clarify PHP, while i suspect you threw that comment about GB's secondary in there to dissuade me from going at your idea that the Vikes would have a better record with less injuries to your O line, Id like to make it clear that I never disputed that, only the notion that it was the sole problem or reason for concern.
"Follow my lead today, whos goona be the big dog with me?" - Aaron Rodgers, February 6th, 2011

PurpleKoolaid
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8359
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:52 pm

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by PurpleKoolaid » Thu Jan 19, 2017 11:29 am

Some great posts, Jim. Finding myself agreeing with most of them.

I would start by looking at Rick first (who I have a feeling wont be here in 2018 if we dont WIN a playoff game), then Zimmer, coaches, assistant coaches, etc., and make sure everyone is on the same page as to our main schemes on on O and D, and practice them constantly. AD is going to be gone (or maybe not, who knows), so lets be ready for that. I dont like our RB's, so I say we get rid of then, convert Line to a FB, short yardage. And get a late TE that can block, and be a power runner/and good on screens.
(BTW, whatever happened to Pruitt? I really like that guy as a receiver and hard saw him.)

Barr needs to get his head in the game. Treadwell need to put in more effort with Bradford. We would have a good, not average but good, passing game if Treadwell plays to expectations. And the Oline improves. I hope everyone know we cant ffix this Oline in 1 year. But I think in 2 we can.

User avatar
chicagopurple
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1269
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 am

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by chicagopurple » Thu Jan 19, 2017 11:46 am

I would totally disagree with Percy's assertion that we were a "contender" in recent seasons. We were able to win a division, but we werent going to win a championship. We have had NO OL, a middling series of QBs, and a messed up RB situation. We were not, are not, and are not building towards being a real contender. The quality teams of the league are still head and shoulders ahead of the Vikings in talent, management, and coaching.....its a brutal truth.

After 40-50 yrs of Viking fandom, winning a meaningless wildcare/division with no real chance of a Super Bowl is not good enough and we arent even realistically able to expect even that goal.

User avatar
Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5282
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by Pondering Her Percy » Thu Jan 19, 2017 11:50 am

Mothman wrote: No , that's how you're choosing to characterize and dismiss the concerns being expressed.
Lol well lets see here. A FAN just started a thread saying "done, zero interest in the 2017 vikings". Like if we went 0-16, guess I could understand even though that would never be me but we went 8-8 after a year riddled by injuries, coaching changes, etc. And made the playoffs and practically beat Seattle last year. Now all of the sudden guys are "done" with the Vikings? If you are a fan and you are "done" with the 2017 Vikings or Vikings in general, then yeah, you're basically acting like the sky has fallen. Everyone is frustrated. But to say you have no interest in them, wont watch them, etc. thats pretty sad if you ask me. But hey, do as you please.

I don't think anybody can truly know that but even if we assume it's true, being better than 8-8 doesn't make them a serious Super Bowl contender or even mean they're truly on the road to becoming a serious SB contender.
Green Bay was 10-6, Atlanta and Pitt were both 11-5 which we went last year. All of them are currently contending. To have their record we would need 2-3 more wins. So those 3 teams can be contenders with a couple more wins that we had this year but if we were 10-6 or 11-5, we couldnt be contenders?? Makes a lot of sense
Who cares if the team isn't good enough as a whole? Too many people have stars in their eyes over the defense. A good defense is 1/3 of a good team.
Yeah because the defense is damn good. Outside of Locke I would say we have one of the better special teams, especially from a return stand point. So there is 2/3 of a good team. Right now, both teams playing for the NFC title have bottom 10 defenses when it comes to total defense.

So both Atlanta and GB have bottom 10 defenses but very good offenses. Special teams is special teams. So both of those teams, as you like to put it, have 1/3 of a good team. Maybe their special teams are good I honestly have no clue and dont really care. So if they can contend with 1/3 of a good team, the Vikings cant??

Your two above posts suggest that if we made the playoffs we couldnt contend with 1/3 of a team yet somehow GB and Atlanta are. Hmmmm...

Seattle built a Super Bowl-winning team that was good enough to almost win 2 in a row. They ran into post-championship cap issues because they had built an excellent team and they couldn't afford to pay all the talent they had assembled. That's very different from the Vikings situation. the Vikes have the problems without the accomplishments.
Ok? It's not like they didnt have draft picks. And they also still had Okung and Sweezy after the SB for another year or two. They just lost those guys last year. They went and drafted 3 RBs and flopped on their OL picks. I could only imagine what this board would do if the Vikings drafted 3 RBs in one class. The Seahawks finished 29th and 32nd the last 2 years in OL rankings according to PFF. That is WORSE than us both years. And that was WITH Okung and Sweezy last year. They havent had a good OL in a long time.


Directly from PFF this year:
Nobody has invested LESS in their offensive line than the Seattle Seahawks, and it showed in their performance over the 2016 season, with the unit being directly responsible for some of the team’s losses. Even their best performer, Justin Britt, was moved to center in a last-ditch attempt to salvage his career, rather than have to invest more in the position (though he has played far better at center than any other position, surrendering no sacks or hits this season). The other four starters top out at overall grades of 52.3, and the best-ranked among them (LG Mark Glowinski) is the 63rd-ranked player at his position league-wide. The success Seattle has experienced this season is entirely in spite of its offensive line, and requires QB Russell Wilson and the running backs to play stellar football to continue to overcome the unit’s deficiencies.
Yet they were considered "contenders" for a good portion of the season. :confused:

It's not just 40 years of frustration. It's 40+ years of observation. It's perspective. It doesn't seem to occur to you that some of us look at this team, based on that experience, and perhaps see things you don't see, see patterns and problems indicative of the same struggles that have kept the Vikes out of the Super Bowl for the past 4 decades and seem likely to keep them out of it in the near future too.
Right because we only have 1/3 of a team right? Or maybe 2/3? Which means we cant contend. I think Spielman is a good GM and Zim is a good coach. I've felt that way for a while now. I never liked Frazier or Childress and expressed that before. Hated Musgrave with a passion. And I had no problem expressing that during the season. But I like Zim as a coach. Reminds me a lot of my father. And I've been a Spielman supporter for a long time now because he builds through the draft. Nothing is going to change my mind on that right now. If they prove me wrong, I'll be the first to eat crow.
Image

User avatar
Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5282
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY

Re: Done, I have zero interest in following the 2017 Vikings

Post by Pondering Her Percy » Thu Jan 19, 2017 12:24 pm

PurpleKoolaid wrote:Treadwell need to put in more effort with Bradford.
Was this ever an issue before?

We would have a good, not average but good, passing game if Treadwell plays to expectations. And the Oline improves. I hope everyone know we cant ffix this Oline in 1 year. But I think in 2 we can.
Agreed
Image

Locked