View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Dec 14, 2017 1:02 am



Reply to topic  [ 581 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20  Next
 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread) 
Author Message
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4617
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
VikingPaul73 wrote:
It seems like the Rick supporters are saying "Don't blame Rick Spielman for overpaying for mediocre tackles, the Vikings were in a situation where they HAD to overpay for tackles" ......without acknowledging the root cause of why the Vikings were in the situation to begin with......Rick Spielman



I think Moth summed it up perfectly with his post highlighting the 3 categories of Vikings fans on this topic.....Count me in the #3 group.



And I've always said, this is easier said than done. Granted, he hasnt done much on the OL but he's done a boatload on the defensive side of the ball. If the roles were reversed and we had a very good OL, but maybe awful CBs, or awful LBs, or DL, etc. Many fans would be saying the same thing. "Well our CBs are so bad because Rick Spielman has ignored the position for years to focus on building the OL so this is why we're overpaying average CBs in free agency". Could he have been a little more balanced with it? Yeah maybe but at the same time, he's a big reason we have the defense we have. How many teams do you see that are exceptionally good on both sides of the ball. Usually teams with very good defenses or elite defenses have mediocre at best offenses. And vice versa.

I'm not trying to make excuses for the guy, but lets be realistic here. It's pretty tough to compile a legit defense along with a legit offense. You just dont see that very often if ever. There is always weaknesses on teams in the NFL. Ours is the OL. The Packers are their DBs/LBs, the Lions are their RBs, the Bears are everything but their RB (Chicago has also signed a league high 8 free agents this year).

Yes due to not addressing the OL better, we had to pay a lot of money to average tackles. This couldve gone for any positions if we roles were reversed. Either way, it is what it is and it's being assessed. The plan last year, which I didnt think was terrible failed to work regarding the OL. Come the offseason, we had a lot of depth at all positions but a lot of question marks too. I said before I trusted they would assess this OL this year. So far, they've done a pretty solid job and I'm sure there is more to come with FA and the draft.

_________________
Image


Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:47 am
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:52 pm
Posts: 7974
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
I think Zimmers input had a lot more with getting our D bad on track (and its still isnt all that great). Rick really has done VERY little for this team IMO. If we go 8-8 this year, like I think we will, Rick will be gone. They didnt build that stadium for a few decades more of mediocrity. And thats what Rick is, since his Dolphin days, mediocre.


Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:37 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4617
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
PurpleKoolaid wrote:
I think Zimmers input had a lot more with getting our D bad on track (and its still isnt all that great). Rick really has done VERY little for this team IMO. If we go 8-8 this year, like I think we will, Rick will be gone. They didnt build that stadium for a few decades more of mediocrity. And thats what Rick is, since his Dolphin days, mediocre.


Listen, I know you dont like Spielman but to not give him credit for getting what we have on defense is pretty ridiculous if you ask me. Yeah Zim obviously is a factor too but to sit there and not give Spielman credit for the players HE drafted on this defense is just asinine. We want to give him credit (or lack there of) for guys like Ponder when he wasn't even officially the GM yet but we dont want to give him credit for drafting guys like Hunter, Kendricks, Barr, Waynes, signing Linval, etc.? Seriously?

But you think we'll go 8-8 with an already improved line, we lost very little in FA, you still dont have a clue who we draft and we havent even had our official schedule come out yet....but your prediction is 8-8.....just because you hate Rick Spielman..... makes sense :confused:

Oh and of course we had to bring up the "Dolphin days" because what happened back in the year 2000 (17 years ago) really matters......

_________________
Image


Last edited by Pondering Her Percy on Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:42 pm, edited 2 times in total.



Mon Mar 20, 2017 11:07 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
Posts: 3226
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
PurpleKoolaid wrote:
I think Zimmers input had a lot more with getting our D bad on track (and its still isnt all that great). Rick really has done VERY little for this team IMO. If we go 8-8 this year, like I think we will, Rick will be gone. They didnt build that stadium for a few decades more of mediocrity. And thats what Rick is, since his Dolphin days, mediocre.


Listen, I know you dont like Spielman but to not give him credit for getting what we have on defense is pretty ridiculous if you ask me. Yeah Zim obviously is a factor too but to sit there and not give Spielman credit for the players HE drafted on this defense is just asinine. We want to give him credit for guys like Ponder when he wasn't even officially the GM yet but we dont want to give him credit for drafting guys like Hunter, Kendricks, Barr, Waynes, signing Linval, etc.? Seriously?

But you think we'll go 8-8 with an already improved line, lost very little in FA, still dont have a clue who we draft and havent even had our official schedule come out yet....but your prediction is 8-8.....just because you hate Rick Spielman..... :confused:

Oh and of course we had to bring up the "Dolphin days" because what happened back in the year 2000 really matters......



If the Vikings want to stay relevant/competitive for the longterm, they might as well just stick with the Seattle model. Keep investing in defense, find roughly average skill position players on offense, draft a young QB who can do more with less, and hope his leg doesn't fall off this time.


Mon Mar 20, 2017 11:11 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3300
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
SEA won one SB doing that and almost a bagged a 2nd if not for that terrible red zone play call. One might argue that the 2015 Broncos used a similar model given that Manning was in the twilight of his career. 2 of the last 4 SB have been won that way, and as I said above, it was one bad play from bagging 3 out of 4.

The Vikings roster is similarly constructed if it can get it's offense out of the cellar.

_________________
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi


Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:11 pm
Profile
Veteran

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 5:03 pm
Posts: 262
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
Not sure if this was brought up in any of the other forums, but what about Chase Daniels as a backup since Teddy might not be available?


Mon Mar 20, 2017 12:41 pm
Profile
Practice Squad
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 4:35 pm
Posts: 25
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
I was wondering about that too. Haven't heard much about a possible backup QB signing other than Foles who is no longer available. Not really sure what their plan is for backup QB.


Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:38 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4617
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
mansquatch wrote:
SEA won one SB doing that and almost a bagged a 2nd if not for that terrible red zone play call. One might argue that the 2015 Broncos used a similar model given that Manning was in the twilight of his career. 2 of the last 4 SB have been won that way, and as I said above, it was one bad play from bagging 3 out of 4.

The Vikings roster is similarly constructed if it can get it's offense out of the cellar.


Exactly. It can be done. No less we lost how many close games this past year? I'm really not worried about this team. And I like what they've done to the offense already. No less we still have the draft. I would like to get some more depth on D though

_________________
Image


Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:45 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4617
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
Dakotavike wrote:
I was wondering about that too. Haven't heard much about a possible backup QB signing other than Foles who is no longer available. Not really sure what their plan is for backup QB.


Yeah me too and the more I've thought about it, my guess is, we're planning on drafting one. With Bradfords age and injury history I can see us doing that. Don't be surprised if this is a offensive-heavy draft. Still need a lot of pieces there. Another RB, backup QB, depth WR, backup TE and all the OL we can get. I'm kind of surprised right now that we haven't signed more depth guys in FA. You could see that coming soon

_________________
Image


Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:48 pm
Profile
Veteran

Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:04 am
Posts: 227
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
mansquatch wrote:
SEA won one SB doing that and almost a bagged a 2nd if not for that terrible red zone play call. One might argue that the 2015 Broncos used a similar model given that Manning was in the twilight of his career. 2 of the last 4 SB have been won that way, and as I said above, it was one bad play from bagging 3 out of 4.

The Vikings roster is similarly constructed if it can get it's offense out of the cellar.


Exactly. It can be done. No less we lost how many close games this past year? I'm really not worried about this team. And I like what they've done to the offense already. No less we still have the draft. I would like to get some more depth on D though


Our roster is not similarly constructed. Our offense is nowhere close to that of Seattle's. Our defense is nowhere as dominant. Did you


Mon Mar 20, 2017 3:53 pm
Profile
Backup

Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2016 6:47 pm
Posts: 89
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
fiestavike wrote:
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Listen, I know you dont like Spielman but to not give him credit for getting what we have on defense is pretty ridiculous if you ask me. Yeah Zim obviously is a factor too but to sit there and not give Spielman credit for the players HE drafted on this defense is just asinine. We want to give him credit for guys like Ponder when he wasn't even officially the GM yet but we dont want to give him credit for drafting guys like Hunter, Kendricks, Barr, Waynes, signing Linval, etc.? Seriously?

But you think we'll go 8-8 with an already improved line, lost very little in FA, still dont have a clue who we draft and havent even had our official schedule come out yet....but your prediction is 8-8.....just because you hate Rick Spielman..... :confused:

Oh and of course we had to bring up the "Dolphin days" because what happened back in the year 2000 really matters......


If the Vikings want to stay relevant/competitive for the longterm, they might as well just stick with the Seattle model. Keep investing in defense, find roughly average skill position players on offense, draft a young QB who can do more with less, and hope his leg doesn't fall off this time.


Bingo! I have said this several times on here. Its not difficult to see that the Seattle model has been the goal they have been shooting for since Zimmer arrived. It doesn't happen in a year or two. There Defense is still young and has progressed well since Zimmer took over. They have the right coaches and the talent to be elite. An average offense like Seattle and Denver had could put them in contention. Have they made the right moves to get them there? We will see. I like the approach. Without an elite QB, its really the only other way to contend. You have to be dominant on D and shut down these high powered passing attacks, which is what is Zimmer's specialty.


Mon Mar 20, 2017 4:27 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
Posts: 3226
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
Alaskan wrote:
fiestavike wrote:
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Listen, I know you dont like Spielman but to not give him credit for getting what we have on defense is pretty ridiculous if you ask me. Yeah Zim obviously is a factor too but to sit there and not give Spielman credit for the players HE drafted on this defense is just asinine. We want to give him credit for guys like Ponder when he wasn't even officially the GM yet but we dont want to give him credit for drafting guys like Hunter, Kendricks, Barr, Waynes, signing Linval, etc.? Seriously?

But you think we'll go 8-8 with an already improved line, lost very little in FA, still dont have a clue who we draft and havent even had our official schedule come out yet....but your prediction is 8-8.....just because you hate Rick Spielman..... :confused:

Oh and of course we had to bring up the "Dolphin days" because what happened back in the year 2000 really matters......


If the Vikings want to stay relevant/competitive for the longterm, they might as well just stick with the Seattle model. Keep investing in defense, find roughly average skill position players on offense, draft a young QB who can do more with less, and hope his leg doesn't fall off this time.


Bingo! I have said this several times on here. Its not difficult to see that the Seattle model has been the goal they have been shooting for since Zimmer arrived. It doesn't happen in a year or two. There Defense is still young and has progressed well since Zimmer took over. They have the right coaches and the talent to be elite. An average offense like Seattle and Denver had could put them in contention. Have they made the right moves to get them there? We will see. I like the approach. Without an elite QB, its really the only other way to contend. You have to be dominant on D and shut down these high powered passing attacks, which is what is Zimmer's specialty.


Wilson could be "elite" in terms of his ability to do much with so little. Fans like to boil things down until they are so simple they no longer reflect reality.


Mon Mar 20, 2017 5:40 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
Posts: 6556
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
Mothman wrote:
J. Kapp 11 wrote:
God, this gets old.


Indeed it does but my response was to mansquatch's implication about "the narrative", not to what you wrote. I responded directly to that and you said you didn't disagree with any of that response.

Quote:
I've said we have the CAPABILITY of making big plays in the passing game, mostly because plenty of people on VMB think we have no receivers, no QB, and no coach. Nothing you've posted disproves the FACT that we were 12th in the NFL in 20+ yard pass plays, Jim, which proves we have the CAPABILITY. My response to your dink-and-dunk assertion is that it's because we've had a dumpster fire for an O-line. Again, you haven't disproved that.


I'm not attempting to disprove the OL was awful and I didn't suggest the team lacked the capability to throw deep so we did not and do not disagree about that. I didn't attempt to disprove that the team was 12th in 20+ yard passing plays either so why, exactly, is any of the paragraph above being directed at me?

Quote:
And I don't think that was a passive-aggressive post. Not at all. It's called sarcasm, and frankly when it comes to Vikings fans, it's warranted. Most of what I've read from fans on this board in the 12 years I've been part of it is how terrible we are; how bad our front office is; how much discord there is in the locker room because a freaking DAD made an unsubstantiated, third-party accusation; how our team doesn't care about the offensive side of the ball. I hear it when we're good, and I hear it when we're bad. I've even read posts intimating that if we somehow win it all, it will mean nothing if it's not sustainable. It just gets old.

I know, I know. "Mediocrity gets old, too." "All I'm doing is showing I care about this team." Whatever.


So it goes. It's a public board with an inevitable diversity of opinions. Some of them are frustrating but over the course of the past 12 years, the team has had 5 winning seasons, 4 playoff appearances and just one playoff win. Over that time, the team has sometimes been terrible. That track record certainly provides more than a little reason to be dissatisfied with the front office. The offense has struggled for the majority of that time too so whether the Vikings care about it or not, they haven't done a very good job with it most of the time. Blaming fans for expressing frustration over all of the above is shooting the messenger. The organization has underperformed and there's no disproving that particular fact.

Quote:
As smart as we think we are, we're not the GMs of the Minnesota Vikings, and there's a reason for that. The only thing any of us have ever done is sit here and armchair quarterback. So I choose to take a different approach. I'm trying to look at the offseason and assess whether the Vikings are addressing their stated weaknesses. I believe they are. It might not be in the WAY some of you want them to address them, but how difficult is it to alway be "right" when a franchise hasn't won a Super Bowl in 55 seasons of existence?


It's very difficult but what is it you want from people here, to be cheerleaders? There's always someone upset that somebody else isn't optimistic enough or is too optimistic. In these free agency threads, we're ALL assessing whether the Vikings are addressing their stated weaknesses and presumably, most of us are also trying to assess if they've done so effectively and if so, how effectively.

Quote:
I choose optimism, just as I have done for every single season of the nearly 50 I've been a fan. Every year, I believe we have a chance. I guess I'm still that 9-year-old watching his first Vikings game. Whatever. I can't stand living life under a shroud of doom. I choose optimism. Flame away. I don't care.


It's your choice, no need to flame you for it. Everybody else gets to make a choice too. Personally, I don't choose a default setting of optimistic or pessimistic when it comes to the Vikings. I certainly don't live "under a shroud of doom" when it comes to the team either and I don't think many fans here do.

Again, what do you want? Conformity to a particular point of view? Are people supposed to look at an offense comprised almost entirely of players with a history of being mediocre-to-average in the NFL, led by a coordinator with a similar history, and automatically anticipate greatness? Are we supposed to expect a team that's been disappointing for so long, and that disappointed us once again last year with a serious collapse after a great start, to storm to a Super Bowl?

I think you'll agree that there's a difference between hopes and expectations and I doubt many fans here have given up the former but at least some of us have been conditioned by the Vikings to reign in the latter. If I could have it my way, the Vikes would be seeking their 10th Super Bowl or so this season and we'd all have reason for great optimism. Unfortunately, that's not the case.

Thank you for not flaming. Sorry ... I've been working 70 hours a week and just had my first day off in a month.

I get that we haven't been very good over the past, well, couple of decades. Like you, Jim, I grew up with the Vikings winning the division every single year. This sucks.

But here's the weird thing ... I'm also a Cubs fan (not that weird, I guess, since the Iowa Cubs are right here where I live) and I waited my entire life for last season. Never lost optimism, even though most of the years I've been alive, they've had no shot. Maybe I'm just a glutton for punishment. Or maybe it's the Cub fan in me that's not afraid to say, "Wait until next year." I don't know.

Leadership is everything, no matter the organization. We saw with Childress that you can overcome a crappy leader, but not for very long. My personal opinion is that we have an excellent head coach in Mike Zimmer who is only going to get better. I honestly believe we're in really good hands. Let's not forget that the man also has had four eye surgeries (or however many it is) and went through a LOT last year in his personal life. He'd never, ever use it as an excuse, so I'll do it for him. The man lost his wife not that long ago, and has had the eye trouble, but he also has legions of players all over the league who would run through a cinder-block wall for him. So for me, Zim is the man to lead us.

On the other hand, I just don't know about Spielman. Sometimes he seems incredibly shrewd, especially on draft day. But some of his moves, shrewd as they seem at the time, haven't worked out. And the O-line has been an issue since the days of Randall McDaniel. Spielman deserves heavy criticism for that. On the other hand, I think his acquisition of Sam Bradford was a great move. Some will disagree, but I thought it was a stroke of genius. We paid a first-round draft choice for Bradford -- what are the odds we could have drafted a quarterback who's as good as Bradford was last year? Especially this draft class, where there may be NO viable quarterback options. It's a mixed bag with Rick.

Overall, I just want the Vikings to have a plan and stick to it, especially on offense. If they're going to go with Pat Shurmur as OC, then they need to go all-in. They need to acquire and draft players who fit what he does. That's why I give the Murray signing a thumbs-up. I think he's the right kind of player for Shurmur's offense, where he might NOT have been the right kind of player for Bill Musgrave's offense in Oakland.

As for AP, it sucks to see him go out this way, but the fact that he hasn't made a single visit to any team tells me that the Vikings were right in cutting ties. As the Patriots have shown over and over, a team is always better off dropping the sentimentality and doing what's necessary.

Finally, Remmers and Reiff aren't all-pros, but they're solid veterans who still have plenty of tread on the tires. To expect the Vikings to go from dumpster fire to an O-line full of Pro Bowlers in a single season is pretty unrealistic. Especially when league average gets us in the playoffs. We just need IMPROVEMENT.

Anyway, that's my take. I don't mind the moves. They're not splashy moves that make headlines. But I think they improve our offense, and with our defense, that might just be good enough, at least to get into the playoffs.

_________________
Image
Go ahead. I dare you.
Underestimate this man.


Mon Mar 20, 2017 9:33 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4617
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
YikesVikes wrote:
Our roster is not similarly constructed. Our offense is nowhere close to that of Seattle's. Our defense is nowhere as dominant. Did you


I disagree. Offense, yeah Seattle's was better but this is something guys on here have been talking about. Seattle's offense was middle of the road to a little above average in the main categories:

-19th in the NFL in points (we were 23rd). Not a big difference there.
-12th in yards (we were 28th). Big difference
-10th in passing yards (we were 18th). Not a huge difference
-25th in rushing yards (we were 32nd). Even though both were bad, still not a big difference.

Point being...just like Kapp said, by improving in these areas, we really aren't that far off at all from what Seattle did offensively. We don't need to improve drastically (in rushing, yeah) but overall its not some crazy jump we need to make. I feel like we've made steps in the right direction in doing so already this offseason and still have the draft.


As for defense, Seattle's defense is still very good but to say we are "nowhere near" dominant is false. A lot of guys like to hinge on the Indy and GB losses. We gave up 38 vs. GB. Well so did Seattle. Got killed 38-10. So vs. GB that is a wash. So essentially our defense had one more BAD game than Seattle's did. Not only that, but our defense outranked them in 2 out of 4 of those main categories.

-We were 6th in points (Seattle was 3rd). Not a big difference
-3rd in yards (Seattle was 5th). Not a big difference
-3rd in passing yards (Seattle was 8th). Not a huge difference
-20th in rushing yards (Seattle was 7th). Big difference. However, when you look into it, Seattle allowed 93 yards per game, we allowed 106. And I'm sure if you took Jordan Howards first game out of there, we are very close to Seattle.

Either way, we were 3rd in total defense. Seattle was 7th. Seattle's defense was elite a few years ago but it has tailed off a little compared to what it was and guys are starting to get old, especially in the back end and pass rushers.

Overall, these stats prove that we aren't really that far off of what Seattle has and are better in some areas on the defensive side of the ball. What Kapp, myself and a few others have been saying on here is if we can get better protection from the OL and in turn establish a run game, plus continue great play on defense which I feel we will, this team could be a regular playoff team year after year. No less, we still have the draft to come and can continue to improve on the offensive and defensive side of the ball. Either way, yes Seattles offense is better but by making the right changes, I don't see us being far off them and so far, I feel we've done that. And our defense is definitely up there as one of the best in the league. There is no question about that.

_________________
Image


Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:36 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4617
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
J. Kapp 11 wrote:
Thank you for not flaming. Sorry ... I've been working 70 hours a week and just had my first day off in a month.

I get that we haven't been very good over the past, well, couple of decades. Like you, Jim, I grew up with the Vikings winning the division every single year. This sucks.

But here's the weird thing ... I'm also a Cubs fan (not that weird, I guess, since the Iowa Cubs are right here where I live) and I waited my entire life for last season. Never lost optimism, even though most of the years I've been alive, they've had no shot. Maybe I'm just a glutton for punishment. Or maybe it's the Cub fan in me that's not afraid to say, "Wait until next year." I don't know.

Leadership is everything, no matter the organization. We saw with Childress that you can overcome a crappy leader, but not for very long. My personal opinion is that we have an excellent head coach in Mike Zimmer who is only going to get better. I honestly believe we're in really good hands. Let's not forget that the man also has had four eye surgeries (or however many it is) and went through a LOT last year in his personal life. He'd never, ever use it as an excuse, so I'll do it for him. The man lost his wife not that long ago, and has had the eye trouble, but he also has legions of players all over the league who would run through a cinder-block wall for him. So for me, Zim is the man to lead us.

On the other hand, I just don't know about Spielman. Sometimes he seems incredibly shrewd, especially on draft day. But some of his moves, shrewd as they seem at the time, haven't worked out. And the O-line has been an issue since the days of Randall McDaniel. Spielman deserves heavy criticism for that. On the other hand, I think his acquisition of Sam Bradford was a great move. Some will disagree, but I thought it was a stroke of genius. We paid a first-round draft choice for Bradford -- what are the odds we could have drafted a quarterback who's as good as Bradford was last year? Especially this draft class, where there may be NO viable quarterback options. It's a mixed bag with Rick.

Overall, I just want the Vikings to have a plan and stick to it, especially on offense. If they're going to go with Pat Shurmur as OC, then they need to go all-in. They need to acquire and draft players who fit what he does. That's why I give the Murray signing a thumbs-up. I think he's the right kind of player for Shurmur's offense, where he might NOT have been the right kind of player for Bill Musgrave's offense in Oakland.

As for AP, it sucks to see him go out this way, but the fact that he hasn't made a single visit to any team tells me that the Vikings were right in cutting ties. As the Patriots have shown over and over, a team is always better off dropping the sentimentality and doing what's necessary.

Finally, Remmers and Reiff aren't all-pros, but they're solid veterans who still have plenty of tread on the tires. To expect the Vikings to go from dumpster fire to an O-line full of Pro Bowlers in a single season is pretty unrealistic. Especially when league average gets us in the playoffs. We just need IMPROVEMENT.

Anyway, that's my take. I don't mind the moves. They're not splashy moves that make headlines. But I think they improve our offense, and with our defense, that might just be good enough, at least to get into the playoffs.



Great post Kapp :thumbsup:

_________________
Image


Mon Mar 20, 2017 10:42 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:52 am
Posts: 3488
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
I agree, solid post Kapp. I have enjoyed reading your exchange with Moth and I found myself nodding along with everything you wrote. I'd buy you a beer and toast to our Vikes, if I could! :beerock:


Tue Mar 21, 2017 8:25 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
YikesVikes wrote:
Our roster is not similarly constructed. Our offense is nowhere close to that of Seattle's. Our defense is nowhere as dominant. Did you


I disagree. Offense, yeah Seattle's was better but this is something guys on here have been talking about. Seattle's offense was middle of the road to a little above average in the main categories:

-19th in the NFL in points (we were 23rd). Not a big difference there.
-12th in yards (we were 28th). Big difference
-10th in passing yards (we were 18th). Not a huge difference
-25th in rushing yards (we were 32nd). Even though both were bad, still not a big difference.

Point being...just like Kapp said, by improving in these areas, we really aren't that far off at all from what Seattle did offensively. We don't need to improve drastically (in rushing, yeah) but overall its not some crazy jump we need to make. I feel like we've made steps in the right direction in doing so already this offseason and still have the draft.


As for defense, Seattle's defense is still very good but to say we are "nowhere near" dominant is false. A lot of guys like to hinge on the Indy and GB losses. We gave up 38 vs. GB. Well so did Seattle. Got killed 38-10. So vs. GB that is a wash. So essentially our defense had one more BAD game than Seattle's did. Not only that, but our defense outranked them in 2 out of 4 of those main categories.

-We were 6th in points (Seattle was 3rd). Not a big difference
-3rd in yards (Seattle was 5th). Not a big difference
-3rd in passing yards (Seattle was 8th). Not a huge difference
-20th in rushing yards (Seattle was 7th). Big difference. However, when you look into it, Seattle allowed 93 yards per game, we allowed 106. And I'm sure if you took Jordan Howards first game out of there, we are very close to Seattle.

Either way, we were 3rd in total defense. Seattle was 7th. Seattle's defense was elite a few years ago but it has tailed off a little compared to what it was and guys are starting to get old, especially in the back end and pass rushers.

Overall, these stats prove that we aren't really that far off of what Seattle has and are better in some areas on the defensive side of the ball. What Kapp, myself and a few others have been saying on here is if we can get better protection from the OL and in turn establish a run game, plus continue great play on defense which I feel we will, this team could be a regular playoff team year after year. No less, we still have the draft to come and can continue to improve on the offensive and defensive side of the ball. Either way, yes Seattles offense is better but by making the right changes, I don't see us being far off them and so far, I feel we've done that. And our defense is definitely up there as one of the best in the league. There is no question about that.


You're comparing the two 2016 teams but I think the original point was about Seattle's Super Bowl-winning team, not their 2016 team.


Tue Mar 21, 2017 8:31 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
J. Kapp 11 wrote:
Thank you for not flaming. Sorry ... I've been working 70 hours a week and just had my first day off in a month.


I understand. :) I have a lot of months like that...

Quote:
I get that we haven't been very good over the past, well, couple of decades. Like you, Jim, I grew up with the Vikings winning the division every single year. This sucks.

But here's the weird thing ... I'm also a Cubs fan (not that weird, I guess, since the Iowa Cubs are right here where I live) and I waited my entire life for last season. Never lost optimism, even though most of the years I've been alive, they've had no shot. Maybe I'm just a glutton for punishment. Or maybe it's the Cub fan in me that's not afraid to say, "Wait until next year." I don't know.

Leadership is everything, no matter the organization. We saw with Childress that you can overcome a crappy leader, but not for very long. My personal opinion is that we have an excellent head coach in Mike Zimmer who is only going to get better. I honestly believe we're in really good hands. Let's not forget that the man also has had four eye surgeries (or however many it is) and went through a LOT last year in his personal life. He'd never, ever use it as an excuse, so I'll do it for him. The man lost his wife not that long ago, and has had the eye trouble, but he also has legions of players all over the league who would run through a cinder-block wall for him. So for me, Zim is the man to lead us.

On the other hand, I just don't know about Spielman. Sometimes he seems incredibly shrewd, especially on draft day. But some of his moves, shrewd as they seem at the time, haven't worked out. And the O-line has been an issue since the days of Randall McDaniel. Spielman deserves heavy criticism for that. On the other hand, I think his acquisition of Sam Bradford was a great move. Some will disagree, but I thought it was a stroke of genius. We paid a first-round draft choice for Bradford -- what are the odds we could have drafted a quarterback who's as good as Bradford was last year? Especially this draft class, where there may be NO viable quarterback options. It's a mixed bag with Rick.


It's a very mixed bag and I see that as increasingly problematic because if the Vikings are going to get where they need to go, I think that needs to change. Spielman needs a higher percentage of his decisions to work out favorably if the Vikes are ever going to win a championship on his watch.

As for Zimmer: I like quite a bit about the man but the kind of inner strength and leadership that inspires fierce loyalty is only part of what makes a great head coach. He needs to improve in other areas and one thing I like about him is I suspect he'd be the first to admit it. That gives me hope. It also bring me to your next point...

Quote:
Overall, I just want the Vikings to have a plan and stick to it, especially on offense. If they're going to go with Pat Shurmur as OC, then they need to go all-in. They need to acquire and draft players who fit what he does. That's why I give the Murray signing a thumbs-up. I think he's the right kind of player for Shurmur's offense, where he might NOT have been the right kind of player for Bill Musgrave's offense in Oakland.

As for AP, it sucks to see him go out this way, but the fact that he hasn't made a single visit to any team tells me that the Vikings were right in cutting ties. As the Patriots have shown over and over, a team is always better off dropping the sentimentality and doing what's necessary.


I have a pretty different view of this but I won't elaborate on it unless someone wants me to go into more detail. Suffice to say, I'm not surprised that Peterson's still unsigned or that he hasn't had many visits yet (he's had one). His current situation doesn't affirm for me that the Vikings made the right move. It speaks to market forces, age and baggage but I don't think it says much about his actual potential value to a team as a football player in 2017. That will be determined on the field and I have a feeling he's still capable of playing at a pretty high level.

As for the offense: they definitely need to have a vision for it and seriously commit to making that vision work. I'm not convinced the hiring and subsequent promotion of Shurmur reflects that or is indicative of commitment to a better offense in the long term but we'll see. Hopefully, Shurmur's learned enough over his last few stops to be able to elevate the offense well beyond where it's been in recent years and hopefully, he'll have the personnel to do it.

Quote:
Finally, Remmers and Reiff aren't all-pros, but they're solid veterans who still have plenty of tread on the tires. To expect the Vikings to go from dumpster fire to an O-line full of Pro Bowlers in a single season is pretty unrealistic. Especially when league average gets us in the playoffs. We just need IMPROVEMENT.


This is where we really differ. I also get the impression much of the board has misunderstood my comments on this subject. I had no expectation the Vikes would be able to take their o-line from dumpster fire to Pro Bowl-caliber in a single offseason. I understand building a top-notch line takes time and that's one of the reasons I've been aggravated to see the line moving in the opposite direction for years now.

I don't think they just need improvement. I think they need significant improvement. Reiff and Remmers are necessary steps along the way but only because the line was allowed to become a dumpster fire in the first place. They represent improvement over last year but the bar needs to be set higher than that and they're coming at a very hefty price for solid veterans (I'm not sure I'd even apply that description to Remmers). That doesn't mean they're bad signings. I'm not even criticizing the team for signing them because they put themselves in a position where they had to make moves like this. I'm just not convinced either is a long-term solution. Maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way but when last year's line was historically awful, I think the standard needs to be higher than "better than last year".

Quote:
Anyway, that's my take. I don't mind the moves. They're not splashy moves that make headlines. But I think they improve our offense, and with our defense, that might just be good enough, at least to get into the playoffs.


I hope so. I don't mind the moves either. I don't care if they're splashy or not. I'm just trying to keep them in perspective and "good enough to get to the playoffs" just isn't what I'm looking for from this team at this point. One of the issues I have with both Spielman and the Vikings is they seem far too willing to settle for "good enough". I think that's been strongly reflected in the way they've done business since Spielman joined the team.

We're clearly in different places when it comes to the Vikes. I'm glad you haven't lost your sense of optimism about them. I haven't lost hope but I have lost that sense of optimism. I understand how to fit the pieces together to paint an optimistic picture of the team's immediate future and I can see other fans here doing it but I'm not going to force that viewpoint on myself. The team's going to have to bring it out of me. They've done it before and I'm sure they'll do it again.


Tue Mar 21, 2017 9:08 am
Profile
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Posts: 10040
Location: Burbank, California
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
Mothman wrote:
I don't think they just need improvement. I think they need significant improvement. Reiff and Remmers are necessary steps along the way but only because the line was allowed to become a dumpster fire in the first place. They represent improvement over last year but the bar needs to be set higher than that and they're coming at a very hefty price for solid veterans (I'm not sure I'd even apply that description to Remmers). That doesn't mean they're bad signings. I'm not even criticizing the team for signing them because they put themselves in a position where they had to make moves like this. I'm just not convinced either is a long-term solution. Maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way but when last year's line was historically awful, I think the standard needs to be higher than "better than last year".


Well said. As for me, where I think I disagree with many on the board is I feel the entire offensive line needs replacing and/or more decent depth. Every single position. I don't base this just on last season, not when the team dedicated years into making the OL seem as if it was an afterthought. Reiff and Remmers are improvements but no way should they be viewed as the solution by fans, particularly in Remmers' case.

I realize this may come off as harsh but we've seen anemic offensive production from this team on many levels. That includes pitiful blocking from the OL. I don't believe it ever had to get so bad.


Tue Mar 21, 2017 10:32 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4617
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
losperros wrote:
Mothman wrote:
I don't think they just need improvement. I think they need significant improvement. Reiff and Remmers are necessary steps along the way but only because the line was allowed to become a dumpster fire in the first place. They represent improvement over last year but the bar needs to be set higher than that and they're coming at a very hefty price for solid veterans (I'm not sure I'd even apply that description to Remmers). That doesn't mean they're bad signings. I'm not even criticizing the team for signing them because they put themselves in a position where they had to make moves like this. I'm just not convinced either is a long-term solution. Maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way but when last year's line was historically awful, I think the standard needs to be higher than "better than last year".


Well said. As for me, where I think I disagree with many on the board is I feel the entire offensive line needs replacing and/or more decent depth. Every single position. I don't base this just on last season, not when the team dedicated years into making the OL seem as if it was an afterthought. Just how bad was it? Reiff and Remmers are considered to be major upgrades to many fans. I find that mind-boggling, particularly in Remmers' case.

I realize this may come off as harsh but we've seen anemic offensive production from this team on many levels. That includes pitiful blocking from the OL. I don't believe it ever had to get so bad.



We had the worst LT of the decade starting for us last year. Yes, the decade. So how is us saying Reiff is an upgrade "mind-boggling"??

_________________
Image


Tue Mar 21, 2017 10:40 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
losperros wrote:
Mothman wrote:
I don't think they just need improvement. I think they need significant improvement. Reiff and Remmers are necessary steps along the way but only because the line was allowed to become a dumpster fire in the first place. They represent improvement over last year but the bar needs to be set higher than that and they're coming at a very hefty price for solid veterans (I'm not sure I'd even apply that description to Remmers). That doesn't mean they're bad signings. I'm not even criticizing the team for signing them because they put themselves in a position where they had to make moves like this. I'm just not convinced either is a long-term solution. Maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way but when last year's line was historically awful, I think the standard needs to be higher than "better than last year".


Well said. As for me, where I think I disagree with many on the board is I feel the entire offensive line needs replacing and/or more decent depth. Every single position. I don't base this just on last season, not when the team dedicated years into making the OL seem as if it was an afterthought. Just how bad was it? Reiff and Remmers are considered to be major upgrades to many fans. I find that mind-boggling, particularly in Remmers' case.

I realize this may come off as harsh but we've seen anemic offensive production from this team on many levels. That includes pitiful blocking from the OL. I don't believe it ever had to get so bad.


We had the worst LT of the decade starting for us last year. Yes, the decade. So how is us saying Reiff is an upgrade "mind-boggling"??


He obviously reconsidered that choice of words, since he re-phrased his post. The sentiment he was obviously trying to convey is pretty clear now: he sees both players as improvements, not solutions.

It's also worth noting that Clemmings was a backup forced into a starting role by Kalil's injury, so the "bottom line" changes here, in terms of the intended starters, are Reiff for Kalil and Remmers for Smith. What may not have changed (yet anyway) is the possibility that Clemmings could still end up being considered the primary backup at one of those tackle positions, an injury away from starting yet again. That really would be mind-boggling!


Tue Mar 21, 2017 10:52 am
Profile
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Posts: 10040
Location: Burbank, California
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
losperros wrote:
Mothman wrote:
I don't think they just need improvement. I think they need significant improvement. Reiff and Remmers are necessary steps along the way but only because the line was allowed to become a dumpster fire in the first place. They represent improvement over last year but the bar needs to be set higher than that and they're coming at a very hefty price for solid veterans (I'm not sure I'd even apply that description to Remmers). That doesn't mean they're bad signings. I'm not even criticizing the team for signing them because they put themselves in a position where they had to make moves like this. I'm just not convinced either is a long-term solution. Maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way but when last year's line was historically awful, I think the standard needs to be higher than "better than last year".


Well said. As for me, where I think I disagree with many on the board is I feel the entire offensive line needs replacing and/or more decent depth. Every single position. I don't base this just on last season, not when the team dedicated years into making the OL seem as if it was an afterthought. Just how bad was it? Reiff and Remmers are considered to be major upgrades to many fans. I find that mind-boggling, particularly in Remmers' case.

I realize this may come off as harsh but we've seen anemic offensive production from this team on many levels. That includes pitiful blocking from the OL. I don't believe it ever had to get so bad.



We had the worst LT of the decade starting for us last year. Yes, the decade. So how is us saying Reiff is an upgrade "mind-boggling"??


Poor sentence structure on my part. As Jim pointed out you, I reworded it before your post. Maybe you should reread what I wrote.


Tue Mar 21, 2017 11:54 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3300
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
The most telling stat for me during the SB runs by SEA was PA. They averaged somewhere around 15. That was something like 3 PA better than the next best defense. The SB teams also were able to sub in several good to elite pass rushers on a rotation, effectively rushing the opposing QB with fresh legs while also requiring the same QB to throw into the league’s best secondary.

Another important difference between those teams and the current incarnation was Marshawn Lynch on offense.

On the defensive side of the ball I think we are have the roster in place to play at a similar level. Our rush defense is obviously not at the same level as theirs, but it is my view that this statistic will be helped far more by our offense netting a higher PF than by adding some new talent to the defensive side of the ball.

_________________
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi


Tue Mar 21, 2017 12:23 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4617
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
losperros wrote:
Poor sentence structure on my part. As Jim pointed out you, I reworded it before your post. Maybe you should reread what I wrote.


I dont really see anyone on here saying, "hey our OT issue is fixed for years to come". We all realized, at least I hope we all did, that this OL wasnt going to be fixed in one year. And with a limited tackle FA market, a weak tackle draft class and no first round pick, yeah, I say we did pretty good for ourselves.

I disagree with the whole line being replaced as well. Nor is it really realistic. Boone and Berger are fine as of right now. Yes Berger retires soon so we need to look there unless they plan on Easton but I dont agree with the "everything needs to be replaced mentality". Thats a little overboard if you ask me. We need to see how this group plays together before we start throwing stuff like that out there.

_________________
Image


Tue Mar 21, 2017 12:43 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
mansquatch wrote:
The most telling stat for me during the SB runs by SEA was PA. They averaged somewhere around 15. That was something like 3 PA better than the next best defense.


That was the most telling stat to me too. The 2013 Seahawks (the team that won the Super Bowl) allowed an average of 14.4 points per game, which is just outstanding. The 2014 team allowed 15.9 points per game, which is also excellent, just not quite as impressive as 14.4!

What also stands out to me (statistically) when looking at that 2013 team, is they averaged 26.1 points per game. Combine that average with their average points allowed and it yields an impressive 11.7 point differential. Contrast that with the differential for the 2016 Vikings, which was 1.2, and it reveals a major difference between the two teams.

Quote:
Another important difference between those teams and the current incarnation was Marshawn Lynch on offense.


Exactly. They led the league in rushing by a substantial margin in 2014 and were 4th in rushing in 2013. A running game like that, combined with a strong defense and a resourceful QB is a mighty effective combination. It's worth noting that they had 27 TD passes in 2013 too so although that team had an "average" offense in terms of total yardage gained, they were a top 8 team in actual scoring.

Quote:
On the defensive side of the ball I think we are have the roster in place to play at a similar level.


Maybe but for the most part, they were a long way from that level after the bye last season and they haven't really approached that level of play for a season yet under Zimmer. They allowed an average of 22.1 points per game after the bye in 2016, which is moving in the wrong direction. That number is helped by their 10 point performance against the hapless, Matt Barkley-led Bears in the final game of the season. After the bye the Vikes allowed 20+ points per game in 5 straight games, followed that up by holding their next 3 opponents to 16, 17 and 16 points respectively, but then they ran into back-to-back offensive buzzsaws in Indy and GB.

That said, over the first 5 games, they allowed a superb average of just 12.6 ppg, so the potential for a truly dominant defensive season is clearly there.

Quote:
Our rush defense is obviously not at the same level as theirs, but it is my view that this statistic will be helped far more by our offense netting a higher PF than by adding some new talent to the defensive side of the ball.


It sure wouldn't hurt. :)


Tue Mar 21, 2017 12:54 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
I dont really see anyone on here saying, "hey our OT issue is fixed for years to come". We all realized, at least I hope we all did, that this OL wasnt going to be fixed in one year. And with a limited tackle FA market, a weak tackle draft class and no first round pick, yeah, I say we did pretty good for ourselves.

I disagree with the whole line being replaced as well. Nor is it really realistic. Boone and Berger are fine as of right now. Yes Berger retires soon so we need to look there unless they plan on Easton but I dont agree with the "everything needs to be replaced mentality". Thats a little overboard if you ask me. We need to see how this group plays together before we start throwing stuff like that out there.


If the goal is to build an outstanding o-line over the next few years, there's a good chance most of the current personnel will need to be replaced in that time. It's not realistic to expect that to happen all at once but I don't think that's what anybody is suggesting.

How people view this seems to be based on where they set the bar. To me (and apparently to Craig), "Fine" is not the where the bar should be set. They will need a new starting center sooner rather than later, possibly even this year. Reiff is clearly going to be playing tackle for a few years but he's a less-than-ideal left tackle, which is why the Lions eventually moved him to the right side. His contract is structured to give the Vikes an out after 2 years. Remmers' contract is structured to give the Vikes an out after just one year for a reason: he's a questionable long term solution. They don't really have a starting RG so we know that position needs to be filled and that leaves Boone and his $6.7 million per year salary. He's probably not going anywhere soon but if he doesn't play better than he did last season, replacing him won't be a bad idea.

We're already looking at a scenario where this year's line will probably feature 3 new starters.


Tue Mar 21, 2017 1:07 pm
Profile
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Posts: 10040
Location: Burbank, California
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
I dont really see anyone on here saying, "hey our OT issue is fixed for years to come". We all realized, at least I hope we all did, that this OL wasnt going to be fixed in one year. And with a limited tackle FA market, a weak tackle draft class and no first round pick, yeah, I say we did pretty good for ourselves.


I'm hoping some day to see the Vikings surpass "pretty good" and "good enough." I didn't say anything about anyone claiming the OT issue is or isn't fixed for years to come. I was talking about how Reiff and Remmers aren't the sole solution for the ineptitude of the entire offensive line.

Pondering Her Percy wrote:
I disagree with the whole line being replaced as well. Nor is it really realistic. Boone and Berger are fine as of right now. Yes Berger retires soon so we need to look there unless they plan on Easton but I dont agree with the "everything needs to be replaced mentality". Thats a little overboard if you ask me. We need to see how this group plays together before we start throwing stuff like that out there.


We'll have to agree to disagree, because I'm not budging on my view regarding replacing and/or adding depth to the entire OL. And yeah, it's realistic. It can't be done overnight but working on it now is far better than procrastination or ignoring the problem. That's another thing I won't waiver about. As I said, Reiff and Remmers are improvements. I hope the momentum continues and things get better. A lot better. As a fan, I'm in no mood for anything else. Not at this point, anyway.

We need to see how this group plays together before we can start throwing Pollyanna positives out there.


Tue Mar 21, 2017 1:17 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4617
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
@ Jim and Craig

But what we're saying is our offensive line needs to just be average this year. We arent saying, "Yeah lets have a mediocre line forever". We want to get it to a very good level eventually but as of right now, we have to make "fine" work. Trust me, nobody on this board wants this offense to just remain average. We were simply pointing out that with a good defense like we have, average right now can get us to the playoffs and beyond. Atlanta did it with an average to below average defense. No less went 8-8 the year before and started off 5-0....... :D

The NFL is a constant whirlwind. In the Moss days, we had an unreal OL and an explosive offense. Defense was very shaky. Now, its the complete opposite. Look how quick the 49ers went from very good, to horrid. Things change all the time.

Obviously, at some point down the road, Boone and Berger will be gone. Thats pretty obvious. But the way you said it, you said it like it had to happen right now or ASAP. If you didnt mean it in that way, then I dont know why you would mention it. We all know those guys will eventually be gone at some point.

_________________
Image


Tue Mar 21, 2017 2:34 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3300
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
Jim, IMO the increase in PA in 2016 was a direct correlation to the terrible PF the team was producing over the same stretch. I suspect an interesting analysis to compare the 2016 team vs. the 2013 SEA club would be the amount of rushing snaps the two defenses faced. If I were to venture a guess, it would be that the 2016 Vikings saw quite a few more since they were constantly struggling against their own inept offense.

The main take away I get is that offensive production affects defensive performance far more than the opposite since offensive production most often results in points while defensive production most often results in possessions. In 2016 the vikings OL crippled the majority of our positions, significantly reducing the advantage we gained from our defense.

So shift this to our achilles heel in '16, the OL. TJ Clemmings AKA the Saboteur, hampered all by himself something like 40% of the drives he played on due to penalties and awful pass protection, 2016 That is a massive detriment to the team. I know guys are not that excited by Reif / Remmers, but they probably have the potential of reducing the OL sabotage by a massvie margin (over 50%) just by playing below average NFL football.

That should provide an improvement to our PF, which if you buy the above should also lead to an improvement in our Rush D and PA numbers.

_________________
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi


Tue Mar 21, 2017 2:34 pm
Profile
Fenrir
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Posts: 10703
Location: Hawaii
Post Re: 2017 Vikings Free Agency Thread (Discussion Thread)
Wow Kapp, a Vikings and Cubs fan, talk about glutton for punishment. Are you a Sacramento Kings fan too?

Seriously though, glad you finally got to see your team win the pennant.


Tue Mar 21, 2017 2:53 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 581 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: John_Viveiros, Yahoo [Bot] and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.