View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Wed Nov 22, 2017 6:14 am



Reply to topic  [ 173 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris 
Author Message
Hall of Fame Candidate
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
Posts: 3225
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Mothman wrote:
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
The OL hasnt really effected AP's play though.


Of course it's impacted his performance. To suggest otherwise is to suggest run blocking makes no difference on running plays!


Ok so it's impacted him in the 3 games he played this year? Over the years though, no I don't believe it has. The guy has how many 1000 yard seasons plus a 2000 yard season. Doesn't seem like it was slowing him down much


This is what happens when production is the measure of success instead of excellence. It decends into incomprehensibility.


Thu Feb 16, 2017 8:40 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Ok so it's impacted him in the 3 games he played this year? Over the years though, no I don't believe it has. The guy has how many 1000 yard seasons plus a 2000 yard season. Doesn't seem like it was slowing him down much


Football 101: Blocking is fundamental to football. OL performance always impacts RB performance.

OL performance didn't just impact Peterson in 3 games last year, it's impacted his performance in every game he's ever played! It can't be otherwise. The same is true for every other RB.


Thu Feb 16, 2017 8:42 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3259
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Mothman wrote:
mansquatch wrote:
Some more stats to throw into the mix:

Heard on the radio today: typical time it takes a 3rd or later round guy (who doesn't get cut and a significant % get cut) to take meaningful snaps in the NFL is 3 1/2 years. Let that sink in for a bit. Harrison Smith will be 32 years old when a guy we take in this draft is likely to be viable to start.


That's possible but stats like that are just averages. Every player and situation is different so a player chosen in the third round or later might take 3.5 years to take meaningful snaps in the NFL or he might be a good starter by the end of his rookie season.

Quote:
Guys taken in the 1st and 2nd rounds are not guaranteed starters either. In 2015 only two of something like 15 OL taken cracked the starting line up. I'm sure a guy we take could crack the starting line up, especially at tackle, but that isn't because he is good it is because our Tackles are bad.


... or it could be because he's good. There ARE still good offensive linemen coming out of college, players who start and play well in their first or second year.

Quote:
Cliff Notes Version: Free Agency is needed for players THIS year.


I agree but I think that's been obvious from the start because the Vikes have created a mess that's going to require action in both free agency and the draft to fix over the next few years.


My point in citing these statistics is to point out the fact that MOST LIKELY immediate help is not going to come from the draft. A secondary point is that the trajectory of risk in relation to drafting OL in general is upward. If they can find help there, great. However, it seems like a high risk move to gamble a superbowl window on your ability to draft an immediate starter with no 1st round pick.

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


Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:33 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
mansquatch wrote:
My point in citing these statistics is to point out the fact that MOST LIKELY immediate help is not going to come from the draft. A secondary point is that the trajectory of risk in relation to drafting OL in general is upward. If they can find help there, great. However, it seems like a high risk move to gamble a superbowl window on your ability to draft an immediate starter with no 1st round pick.


Setting aside the idea that they're actually in a Super Bowl window in the first place, the time it takes to develop draft picks into quality starters combined with the difficulty and expense of signing quality o-line players in free agency is why I've been so angry about the poorly-addressed deterioration of the o-line over the last few years in the first place. I doubt there's an easy, one offseason fix here. I doubt there's a fix that isn't a gamble. If they're looking to improve over what they put on the field the last 2 seasons, a combination of new talent from both free agency and the draft (or trades, as others have suggested) not only seems the most likely path to success but the inevitable path they must take.

I'm not worried about the risk in the draft. That's always there, at every position. Free agency comes with risks too.

I'm still not 100% clear about your position here. I get the impression you're recommending they sell out for a quick fix via free agency, regardless of expense, in an effort to win a Super Bowl next season. Is that correct?


Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:05 am
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 am
Posts: 1269
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
the idea that WE are in a Super Bowl window is absurd. Did you even watch the Super Bowl? We arent even in the same league as the Pats or the Cowboys, we have so many holes to fill. Our pass defense is solid but our run defense is beginning to look questionable, we have ZERO OL, and QB is still a bit of a question mark. We have no real established RB, just a fading star and 2 career back ups. We will have to do some serious building and it all starts with the front lines, There is NO quick fix, just another big job for the Vikes......again.....and I am not sure Spielman is the guy to get it done.


Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:00 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
chicagopurple wrote:
the idea that WE are in a Super Bowl window is absurd. Did you even watch the Super Bowl? We arent even in the same league as the Pats or the Cowboys..


.. or the Falcons. ;)


Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:09 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3259
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Not to be rude, but whether any of us think we are in a window or not is irrelevant. The Vikings Front Office has made it quite clear that THEY think we are in a Superbowl window. They would have never made the Sam Bradford Trade if they didn't think feel way. They even said upon making that trade that "they believe in this team." In addition, several media outlets are already picking this team as a SB contender in 2017. Whatever the opinions on this message board might be, there is a professional consensus out there that this team is a contender going into 2017 and it isn't just the usual purple kool-aid drinkers like Mike Wobschall.

I bash the media all the time, so I'm not going sit here and put stock in what they say, but even the most strident of skepticism on this point doesn't matter. The decision makers at Winter Park have already put significant chips on the table with regards to this point of view. Unless something major changes, it shouldn't be shocking that the FO attacks this off season with a win it now mentality.

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


Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:29 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
mansquatch wrote:
Not to be rude, but whether any of us think we are in a window or not is irrelevant. The Vikings Front Office has made it quite clear that THEY think we are in a Superbowl window. They would have never made the Sam Bradford Trade if they didn't think feel way. They even said upon making that trade that "they believe in this team." In addition, several media outlets are already picking this team as a SB contender in 2017. Whatever the opinions on this message board might be, there is a professional consensus out there that this team is a contender going into 2017 and it isn't just the usual purple kool-aid drinkers like Mike Wobschall.

I bash the media all the time, so I'm not going sit here and put stock in what they say, but even the most strident of skepticism on this point doesn't matter.


If you're not putting stock in the media's opinion on the matter than why is the "professional consensus" you referred to above even relevant?

Quote:
The decision makers at Winter Park have already put significant chips on the table with regards to this point of view. Unless something major changes, it shouldn't be shocking that the FO attacks this off season with a win it now mentality.


Something major has already changed. They made the trade for Bradford, their OL moves flopped, Peterson got hurt and they finished 8-8, winning just 3 of their last 11. That puts them in a significantly different place than they were a year ago. The Vikings clearly believed they were in a Super Bowl window last year after winning the division in 2015 but I'm not sure we can assume they will see things in the same light they did a year earlier and behave accordingly. I don't think they should take that view either. They have as much reason to doubt that Super Bowl window is open as we do and they're facing the potential for significant change.


Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:02 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4536
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
chicagopurple wrote:
the idea that WE are in a Super Bowl window is absurd. Did you even watch the Super Bowl? We arent even in the same league as the Pats or the Cowboys, we have so many holes to fill. Our pass defense is solid but our run defense is beginning to look questionable, we have ZERO OL, and QB is still a bit of a question mark. We have no real established RB, just a fading star and 2 career back ups. We will have to do some serious building and it all starts with the front lines, There is NO quick fix, just another big job for the Vikes......again.....and I am not sure Spielman is the guy to get it done.


You're starting to get awfully repetitive with your posts lately. Yes, we know you arent a fan of Spielman, think the Vikings arent that good and think that we have "zero" OL. We get it. You've made that quite clear in just about every thread recently.

But yeah I did watch the SB and the Cowboys werent in it. But if you were trying to compare us to Dallas, I mean that game did come down to a 2 point conversion so yeah I would say we arent too far off. Clearly you dont think so but I will say I disagree.

-Why is QB all of the sudden a question mark??

-To say we have ZERO OL would technically mean we dont have anyone capable of starting anywhere else which is completely false.

-Obviously we dont have an established RB since AP is still here but it's obviously a position we assess this year especially if he leaves. No less this RB class is loaded so hold your horses. It's not like we're going into next year with this current roster.

-You're acting like it's the 2012 offseason and we have to do a complete rebuild. It's 3 OL positions (LT, RT, RG) along with adding depth no less we could fill the RG spot with Berger if need be for this year, 1 RB, probably a 3 tech DT, depth along the defense, depth at QB, maybe a WLB even though they dont play much in this defense. This isnt something that is overly difficult to do. I'm not saying it's going to be easy by any means but back in 2012, our fingers would fall off if we tried typing all the holes on the vikings. That's really not the case. The majority of this is depth. For immediate starters we need 3 OL, a RB and I would say a DT.


For starters, WRs are set, TE is set (could add depth), QB is set, LG and C/RG (wherever Berger plays) are set for now, DE is set, 1 tech DT is set, MLB is set, SLB is set (not really concerned about Barr having a down year), outside CBs are set, nickel could be set if Alexander pans out but it wouldnt hurt to add depth there, FS is set and as much as I couldnt stand Sendejo, he's a serviceable starter and had a much better season. Would never hurt adding another safety though.

Now, we could always get better at these positions I suppose but as of right now, we have some pretty good players in those spots. We couldnt come close to saying that in 2012. Yes we have some work to do. Just like every other team in the league but it's much less work than others have to do if they want to be in contention. I've said before, this line just needs to be average for us to succeed IMO. We dont need the Cowboys OL. We need a good RB which the draft has plenty, and we need some depth on both sides.

I guess it just drives me nuts when guys are oblivious to the talent we have on this team. If we were the Browns, yeah I'd be saying the same stuff you are right now. But we are nowhere near any of those teams. We have A LOT of pieces in place. Spielman and Zim need to draft and sign right thats for sure. But I have confidence they will.

_________________
Image


Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:06 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3259
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Mothman wrote:
I'm still not 100% clear about your position here. I get the impression you're recommending they sell out for a quick fix via free agency, regardless of expense, in an effort to win a Super Bowl next season. Is that correct?


I think the Vikings FO thinks they are in a window. To me, if they feel that way then as a fan I want them to g for broke to try and win that SB. I also think there is debate on this message board as to whether or not they are in a window.

That debate is really an offshoot of all the other debates wev'e been having since the 2016 bye week. Without rehashing all the old debates it basically comes down to what you think this roster is capable of without all the injuries, coaching drama, and kicker issue that it had in 2016. I find three points persuasive:

1.) This team in 2015 with a slightly worse QB, somewhat healthy Matt Kalil, healthy AP, and TJ Clemmings at RT won 11 games and probably could have won 12 or 13. It was a missed FG away from a divisional playoff game.
2.) I see at least 5 games in 2016 that we probably would have won withtout the above littany of sorrows in 2016. (I get it, we didn't!)
3.) Sam Bradford is a better passing QB than Teddy Bridgewater

To me that adds up to a potential contender. I know others are not as optimistic about it and that is fine, that is their choice. What I don't see is how anyone thinks this team is somehow in a downward spiral if the roster gets healthy. To me that doesn't add up either. They had tons of adversity and still went 8-8. It would take A LOT to match the same level of advesity in 2017. So even if the truth is probably somewhere in between, the bottom is likely 8-8. So how many more wins do does getting healthy and adding some talent on OL get them? If it is 4 or more they have a playoff bye week. Give points 1 and 2 above I don't think that is a huge stretch. But that is just my opinion.

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


Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:17 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
mansquatch wrote:
Mothman wrote:
I'm still not 100% clear about your position here. I get the impression you're recommending they sell out for a quick fix via free agency, regardless of expense, in an effort to win a Super Bowl next season. Is that correct?


I think the Vikings FO thinks they are in a window. To me, if they feel that way then as a fan I want them to g for broke to try and win that SB. I also think there is debate on this message board as to whether or not they are in a window.

That debate is really an offshoot of all the other debates wev'e been having since the 2016 bye week. Without rehashing all the old debates it basically comes down to what you think this roster is capable of without all the injuries, coaching drama, and kicker issue that it had in 2016. I find three points persuasive:

1.) This team in 2015 with a slightly worse QB, somewhat healthy Matt Kalil, healthy AP, and TJ Clemmings at RT won 11 games and probably could have won 12 or 13. It was a missed FG away from a divisional playoff game.
2.) I see at least 5 games in 2016 that we probably would have won withtout the above littany of sorrows in 2016. (I get it, we didn't!)
3.) Sam Bradford is a better passing QB than Teddy Bridgewater

To me that adds up to a potential contender. I know others are not as optimistic about it and that is fine, that is their choice. What I don't see is how anyone thinks this team is somehow in a downward spiral if the roster gets healthy. To me that doesn't add up either. They had tons of adversity and still went 8-8. It would take A LOT to match the same level of advesity in 2017. So even if the truth is probably somewhere in between, the bottom is likely 8-8. So how many more wins do does getting healthy and adding some talent on OL get them? If it is 4 or more they have a playoff bye week. Give points 1 and 2 above I don't think that is a huge stretch. But that is just my opinion.


Okay, so just to be clear, when you write "go for broke" are you endorsing what I asked about above, that they sell out for a quick fix via free agency, regardless of expense, in an effort to win a Super Bowl next season? Is that what you think they should do and if so, how do you think they should approach the draft in regard to the offensive line?


Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:25 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
-Why is QB all of the sudden a question mark??


There's nothing sudden about it. Bradford's currently under contract for one more season and he's never posted a winning record as a starter. That's not all his fault and I think he's a better QB than the last few the Vikings have had but if we're talking about Super Bowl-winning potential, he still has a LOT to prove. I don't think he's even been in a postseason game, has he?


Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:28 pm
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 11:02 am
Posts: 1631
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Mothman wrote:
Okay, so just to be clear, when you write "go for broke" are you endorsing what I asked about above, that they sell out for a quick fix via free agency, regardless of expense, in an effort to win a Super Bowl next season? Is that what you think they should do and if so, how do you think they should approach the draft in regard to the offensive line?


to chime in here, I don't think "go for broke" and "quick fix" are fair categorizations to make here. Its a framing mechanism that makes a choices automatically unpaletable before the choice is even finished being offered. First there is a massive range between a good deal and "going for broke" when signing a free agent. I know you will inevitably ask "how much is too much" and we don't know yet but there is a very wide range of pay that could be achieved between "Steal for the Vikings" and "shades of Walker" I fully expect the Vikings to be slightly closer to the walker end on that scale but overpaying=/=terrible decision making.

"Quick fix" also bugs me. Wagner is 27, Olinemen regularly play into their early 30s. Outliers make it to 35. It isn't unreasonable to say that since he has made it this far there is a good chance he'll play for 4-5 more years. Since when is half a decade of play a band aid?

This draft is weak from what I have heard. I am sure that an Olinemen or two will end up being very very good from this draft. EVERY draft has late stars, but I have no clue.

I think, barring an absolutely absurd unwarranted drop by a top tier player we should spend our second round pick on an Olinemen. Or trade back and stockpile for next year. If we do that then we should pick up at least 2 free agent Olinemen and raid a handful of practice squads. I would want to go into camp with 3-4 more than average and expect Sparano to find the best line out of all those pieces. If he doesn't this year, can him.


Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:44 pm
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 11:02 am
Posts: 1631
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Mothman wrote:
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
-Why is QB all of the sudden a question mark??


There's nothing sudden about it. Bradford's currently under contract for one more season and he's never posted a winning record as a starter. That's not all his fault and I think he's a better QB than the last few the Vikings have had but if we're talking about Super Bowl-winning potential, he still has a LOT to prove. I don't think he's even been in a postseason game, has he?



Him and 24 other starters have a lot to prove as far as SB potential.


Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:45 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3259
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
If they believe they are in a window then I endorse them doing whatever is necessary to win it all now. Does that mean they give a guy a 1 year $100MM contract? No. But does it mean getting guys under contract in the short term, knowing they will lose them in the long term? Maybe.

I'm not Rick. I do not know what the market is currently doing. My previous comments have just attempted to communicate that the statistically LIKELY outcomes indicate that Free Agency is the MOST LIKELY avenue to repair the OL in short term. However, does that mean they go for the long run and try to sign a 25 or 27 year old guy who will add value over 5-6 seasons vs. paying a guy like Wentworth a large sum of money so the can win today? I don't know. I'm not Rick.

What I would hate is if they believe they are in a window and then didn't adjust their strategy accordingly or played it conservative and let the window slip away.

Conceptually this idea makes since. How they execute it properly is less clear.

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


Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:05 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4536
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Mothman wrote:
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
-Why is QB all of the sudden a question mark??


There's nothing sudden about it. Bradford's currently under contract for one more season and he's never posted a winning record as a starter. That's not all his fault and I think he's a better QB than the last few the Vikings have had but if we're talking about Super Bowl-winning potential, he still has a LOT to prove. I don't think he's even been in a postseason game, has he?


No but think about the teams he's been on. In all of his years playing, the best WR he's had is probably either Thielen or Diggs. The best TE he's ever had is Rudy. The best defense he's ever been around is this one. The poor guy has been on some pretty poor teams. When you're posting a 20:5 ratio standing behind a terrible line and being sacked the most in your career AND having no running game, I would have to imagine if you surround him with the right pieces, you'll see the success.

That's like asking if a career Brown or Bill has ever been to a playoff game or won a playoff game. The guy played for the Rams the majority of his career and they failed to ever put an OL or WR or TE around him. I don't care if he was Tom Brady. You'd be hard pressed to make the playoffs on any of those Rams teams. I really don't care what he did or didn't do in the past. Bottom line is, if you put a RB and OL in this offense with what we already have, this will be a solid offense. We just have to make the right signs and picks

I mean the guy set an NFL record for completion percentage, went 20:5 TD:INT, showed toughness, threw for almost 4,000 which he would've had if he played week 1 and showed some durability. If I sat here and told you guys last year that this year we would have a QB that did all that, would you be all for it? I sure would. Who cares if he went to the playoffs or not. Why does that matter. That doesn't mean he isn't a good QB. Marino never won a SB, does that mean he was just another guy or was he great? I'd say the latter. This sounds like the whole Spielman thing and guys holding Miami over his head. Now we're holding the playoffs over Sams?

_________________
Image


Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:10 pm
Profile
Fenrir
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Posts: 10590
Location: Hawaii
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
chicagopurple wrote:
the idea that WE are in a Super Bowl window is absurd. Did you even watch the Super Bowl? We arent even in the same league as the Pats or the Cowboys, we have so many holes to fill. Our pass defense is solid but our run defense is beginning to look questionable, we have ZERO OL, and QB is still a bit of a question mark. We have no real established RB, just a fading star and 2 career back ups. We will have to do some serious building and it all starts with the front lines, There is NO quick fix, just another big job for the Vikes......again.....and I am not sure Spielman is the guy to get it done.


Atlanta was 8-8 last year. The NFL, especially the NFC, is very dynamic. Teams rise and fall very quickly. If you look at Atlanta's trajectory (they had a similar strong out the gate performance then collapse in 2015) it's actually very close to the Vikings.

If I had said last year that the Panthers and Cardinals would miss the playoffs but the Lions would get in, I think everyone would have had a good laugh. But it happened.

Success in the NFL is a combination of talent, timing, and luck. Past performances are not indicative of future results :wink:


Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:32 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
IrishViking wrote:
Mothman wrote:
Okay, so just to be clear, when you write "go for broke" are you endorsing what I asked about above, that they sell out for a quick fix via free agency, regardless of expense, in an effort to win a Super Bowl next season? Is that what you think they should do and if so, how do you think they should approach the draft in regard to the offensive line?


to chime in here, I don't think "go for broke" and "quick fix" are fair categorizations to make here. Its a framing mechanism that makes a choices automatically unpaletable before the choice is even finished being offered. First there is a massive range between a good deal and "going for broke" when signing a free agent. I know you will inevitably ask "how much is too much" and we don't know yet but there is a very wide range of pay that could be achieved between "Steal for the Vikings" and "shades of Walker" I fully expect the Vikings to be slightly closer to the walker end on that scale but overpaying=/=terrible decision making.


"Go for broke" was the phrase Mansquatch used in his post. I simply asked for clarification on how he was using it.

Quote:
"Quick fix" also bugs me. Wagner is 27, Olinemen regularly play into their early 30s. Outliers make it to 35. It isn't unreasonable to say that since he has made it this far there is a good chance he'll play for 4-5 more years. Since when is half a decade of play a band aid?


Who said it was a band-aid? :) I was using the phrase in a literal sense, to characterize the idea that the Vikings should try to quickly fix/rebuild their offensive line in one offseason, primarily through free agency. I didn't intend it to have a negative connotation.

Why do you think I'm trying to make choices seem unpalatable before they're made? I'm not opposed to signing free agents. I'm just seeking clarity in the conversation.


Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:41 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
mansquatch wrote:
If they believe they are in a window then I endorse them doing whatever is necessary to win it all now. Does that mean they give a guy a 1 year $100MM contract? No. But does it mean getting guys under contract in the short term, knowing they will lose them in the long term? Maybe.

I'm not Rick. I do not know what the market is currently doing. My previous comments have just attempted to communicate that the statistically LIKELY outcomes indicate that Free Agency is the MOST LIKELY avenue to repair the OL in short term. However, does that mean they go for the long run and try to sign a 25 or 27 year old guy who will add value over 5-6 seasons vs. paying a guy like Wentworth a large sum of money so the can win today? I don't know. I'm not Rick.

What I would hate is if they believe they are in a window and then didn't adjust their strategy accordingly or played it conservative and let the window slip away.

Conceptually this idea makes since. How they execute it properly is less clear.


Okay, I understand where you're coming from now. Thanks for explaining it further.


Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:43 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Mothman wrote:
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
-Why is QB all of the sudden a question mark??


There's nothing sudden about it. Bradford's currently under contract for one more season and he's never posted a winning record as a starter. That's not all his fault and I think he's a better QB than the last few the Vikings have had but if we're talking about Super Bowl-winning potential, he still has a LOT to prove. I don't think he's even been in a postseason game, has he?


No but think about the teams he's been on. In all of his years playing, the best WR he's had is probably either Thielen or Diggs. The best TE he's ever had is Rudy. The best defense he's ever been around is this one. The poor guy has been on some pretty poor teams. When you're posting a 20:5 ratio standing behind a terrible line and being sacked the most in your career AND having no running game, I would have to imagine if you surround him with the right pieces, you'll see the success.

That's like asking if a career Brown or Bill has ever been to a playoff game or won a playoff game. The guy played for the Rams the majority of his career and they failed to ever put an OL or WR or TE around him. I don't care if he was Tom Brady. You'd be hard pressed to make the playoffs on any of those Rams teams. I really don't care what he did or didn't do in the past. Bottom line is, if you put a RB and OL in this offense with what we already have, this will be a solid offense. We just have to make the right signs and picks

I mean the guy set an NFL record for completion percentage, went 20:5 TD:INT, showed toughness, threw for almost 4,000 which he would've had if he played week 1 and showed some durability.


... and once again had a losing record as a starter on an offense that struggled to score points. As I've already said, that's not all his fault but the point is there are, and should be, questions about whether Bradford is the kind of QB who can lead a team to a Super Bowl and there's also a question about his future with the Vikings beyond 2017. Chicagopurple wasn't wrong to say QB is still a bit of a question mark. We know the Vikings have a legitimate starter but how far they can go with that starter and how long he'll remain the starter are both open questions.


Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:50 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4536
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
S197 wrote:
chicagopurple wrote:
the idea that WE are in a Super Bowl window is absurd. Did you even watch the Super Bowl? We arent even in the same league as the Pats or the Cowboys, we have so many holes to fill. Our pass defense is solid but our run defense is beginning to look questionable, we have ZERO OL, and QB is still a bit of a question mark. We have no real established RB, just a fading star and 2 career back ups. We will have to do some serious building and it all starts with the front lines, There is NO quick fix, just another big job for the Vikes......again.....and I am not sure Spielman is the guy to get it done.


Atlanta was 8-8 last year. The NFL, especially the NFC, is very dynamic. Teams rise and fall very quickly. If you look at Atlanta's trajectory (they had a similar strong out the gate performance then collapse in 2015) it's actually very close to the Vikings.

If I had said last year that the Panthers and Cardinals would miss the playoffs but the Lions would get in, I think everyone would have had a good laugh. But it happened.

Success in the NFL is a combination of talent, timing, and luck. Past performances are not indicative of future results :wink:


This couldn't be more accurate. Luck is definitely a factor in there. That's why I question guys that say it's ridiculous for the Vikings to be considered a contender next year. There a team that has a lot of talent. Atlanta was the same way but more on the offensive side of the ball. We have a good coach as do they. There's no reason this team couldn't contend next year if we sign and draft right

_________________
Image


Thu Feb 16, 2017 6:36 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4536
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Mothman wrote:

... and once again had a losing record as a starter on an offense that struggled to score points. As I've already said, that's not all his fault but the point is there are, and should be, questions about whether Bradford is the kind of QB who can lead a team to a Super Bowl and there's also a question about his future with the Vikings beyond 2017. Chicagopurple wasn't wrong to say QB is still a bit of a question mark. We know the Vikings have a legitimate starter but how far they can go with that starter and how long he'll remain the starter are both open questions.


Because once again the guy was practically by himself without a run game or OL. If a washed up Peyton Manning that had a horrible year two seasons ago can win a SB I would say Bradford could IF he has the right pieces around him. We'll see but I don't look at it as a question mark at all. Even if he's not the guy, what could we really do at this point?

_________________
Image


Thu Feb 16, 2017 6:40 pm
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 11:38 pm
Posts: 1590
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Free Agent Right Tackles
http://www.1500espn.com/vikings-2/2017/ ... t-tackles/

Free Agent Left Tackles
http://www.1500espn.com/vikings-2/2017/ ... t-tackles/

The links shows who could be available in FA


Last edited by halfgiz on Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:24 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Because once again the guy was practically by himself without a run game or OL. If a washed up Peyton Manning that had a horrible year two seasons ago can win a SB I would say Bradford could IF he has the right pieces around him. We'll see but I don't look at it as a question mark at all. Even if he's not the guy, what could we really do at this point?


Well, that's something to seriously consider since he's only under contract for one more year but the point here is simply that it's legitimate to say "QB is still a bit of a question mark" for the Vikings. Is it that hard to simply acknowledge that?

Bridgewater's career is potentially in jeopardy and he's entering the last year of his current contract. Bradford's on his 3rd NFL team, has never had a winning record as a starter and he's also entering the last season of his current contract. QB clearly is a bit of a question mark going forward. That doesn't mean the potential answers to questions about the position are all negative but there are obviously some big questions about it, including who will be playing QB for the Vikes in 2018.


Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:52 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4536
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Mothman wrote:
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Because once again the guy was practically by himself without a run game or OL. If a washed up Peyton Manning that had a horrible year two seasons ago can win a SB I would say Bradford could IF he has the right pieces around him. We'll see but I don't look at it as a question mark at all. Even if he's not the guy, what could we really do at this point?


Well, that's something to seriously consider since he's only under contract for one more year but the point here is simply that it's legitimate to say "QB is still a bit of a question mark" for the Vikings. Is it that hard to simply acknowledge that?

Bridgewater's career is potentially in jeopardy and he's entering the last year of his current contract. Bradford's on his 3rd NFL team, has never had a winning record as a starter and he's also entering the last season of his current contract. QB clearly is a bit of a question mark going forward. That doesn't mean the potential answers to questions about the position are all negative but there are obviously some big questions about it, including who will be playing QB for the Vikes in 2018.


I mean I would hope we would try and extend Bradford. If so, then we could be set for some time. I mean if you're looking at it in a way that he could be a free agent next year, yeah I suppose. But I really don't care what he did in the past. Especially given the teams he was on. This is the best team he's ever been on and best players he's ever been around. I'm not really worried about the QB position. I'm worried about a backup. But not a starter. If we don't extend him this year, I highly doubt we let him walk next year unless he suffers a major injury or completely flops but I don't see him flopping.

_________________
Image


Fri Feb 17, 2017 12:30 am
Profile
Pro Bowl Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2014 6:28 pm
Posts: 549
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
chicagopurple wrote:
the idea that WE are in a Super Bowl window is absurd. Did you even watch the Super Bowl? We arent even in the same league as the Pats or the Cowboys, we have so many holes to fill. Our pass defense is solid but our run defense is beginning to look questionable, we have ZERO OL, and QB is still a bit of a question mark. We have no real established RB, just a fading star and 2 career back ups. We will have to do some serious building and it all starts with the front lines, There is NO quick fix, just another big job for the Vikes......again.....and I am not sure Spielman is the guy to get it done.


so with a top 15 oline last year we couldn't have made a push? That in itself is absurd. This team with the 30th ranked offensive line was a stupid play or two away from a playoff berth.If they could actually block it WOULD have turned out different, that is a fact, no doubting that. Every single offensive problem, from the abysmal running game, to bradford having to take two step drops started with that blocking.


Fri Feb 17, 2017 3:31 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
I mean I would hope we would try and extend Bradford. If so, then we could be set for some time. I mean if you're looking at it in a way that he could be a free agent next year, yeah I suppose. But I really don't care what he did in the past. Especially given the teams he was on. This is the best team he's ever been on and best players he's ever been around. I'm not really worried about the QB position. I'm worried about a backup. But not a starter. If we don't extend him this year, I highly doubt we let him walk next year unless he suffers a major injury or completely flops but I don't see him flopping.


It's very simple: unresolved issues and previously unachieved goals are open questions. It's not a question of what you think or believe will happen. That isn't the point. The point is that these things remain open, unanswered questions so it's appropriate to describe them that way.


Fri Feb 17, 2017 7:32 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
Posts: 3225
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
The team was certainly closer to a Super Bowl at this time last year than they are today. They took several steps backward during the 2016 season.

That said, they still have a good group of young players, and could have an extended period of being competitive. Its not worth mortgaging that for a fairly longshot attempt by putting all your eggs in the 2017 basket.

The priority should be to lock up their top young players for the next 5 years. The next priority should be to create an offensive line good enough to allow them to compete. That might mean a high price FA spending spree, but multi year mid range players like Boone, Short 1-2 year 3rd contract guys or players coming off injury like Clady, Kalil, and rookies taken in the draft are a more likely combination.

In a two year period, from 2016-2018, they are likely to have 5 new starters on the offensive line. If they are lucky, one of those players is a young player already on the roster.

The overhaul is going to be dramatic. Two big mistakes, in my opinion, would be (1) to go all in on top FA offensive linemen and blow the cap or (2) think holding on for another year of Kalil, Boone, Berger makes any sense. They need to bring in a young replacement for every one of those three players THIS YEAR and hope that they can beat them out for immediate playing time. If Hill and Easton are those youngs guys, they should have been playing LAST YEAR. They'll have to sign a RT in free agency. They'll have to sign a RG in free agency. They are fools if they don't draft a LT, G, and C THIS YEAR, to play in 2018,


Fri Feb 17, 2017 9:38 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
fiestavike wrote:
The team was certainly closer to a Super Bowl at this time last year than they are today. They took several steps backward during the 2016 season.

That said, they still have a good group of young players, and could have an extended period of being competitive. Its not worth mortgaging that for a fairly longshot attempt by putting all your eggs in the 2017 basket.

The priority should be to lock up their top young players for the next 5 years. The next priority should be to create an offensive line good enough to allow them to compete. That might mean a high price FA spending spree, but multi year mid range players like Boone, Short 1-2 year 3rd contract guys or players coming off injury like Clady, Kalil, and rookies taken in the draft are a more likely combination.

In a two year period, from 2016-2018, they are likely to have 5 new starters on the offensive line. If they are lucky, one of those players is a young player already on the roster.

The overhaul is going to be dramatic. Two big mistakes, in my opinion, would be (1) to go all in on top FA offensive linemen and blow the cap or (2) think holding on for another year of Kalil, Boone, Berger makes any sense. They need to bring in a young replacement for every one of those three players THIS YEAR and hope that they can beat them out for immediate playing time. If Hill and Easton are those youngs guys, they should have been playing LAST YEAR. They'll have to sign a RT in free agency. They'll have to sign a RG in free agency. They are fools if they don't draft a LT, G, and C THIS YEAR, to play in 2018,


Excellent post. I agree that this is going to be a dramatic overhaul and I think you've correctly identified 2 big potential mistakes to be avoided. This year (and probably in 2018 too) they definitely need to start aggressively drafting the kind of young OL talent they should have been drafting in recent years. Easton did see some significant playing time in the latter part of 2016 so perhaps they have one young piece in place but I'd like to see them look for a young center (preferably with the flexibility to play guard) in the draft anyway. By the end of 2018, the vast majority of players listed on the OL depth chart should be players that aren't on it now.


Fri Feb 17, 2017 9:53 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
Posts: 3225
Post Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
halfgiz wrote:
Free Agent Right Tackles
http://www.1500espn.com/vikings-2/2017/ ... t-tackles/

Free Agent Left Tackles
http://www.1500espn.com/vikings-2/2017/ ... t-tackles/

The links shows who could be available in FA


Its the riskier option, but identifying young players who aren't quite there yet,--players who come cheaper and have growth potential-- could be the ideal solution for a team that needs to replace 5 offensive linemen in a two year period. Adding one or two guys who won't break the bank and might be able to give you 3-4 years of competent service would make a huge difference for this team.

From these lists, players who might fit that mold would be
Austin Pasztor, Cleveland Browns
Jordan Mills, Buffalo Bills
Kelvin Beachum, Jacksonville Jaguars


Fri Feb 17, 2017 10:03 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 173 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 14 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.