O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

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

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3472
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by fiestavike » Thu Feb 16, 2017 8:40 am

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

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37384
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by Mothman » Thu Feb 16, 2017 8:42 am

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.
0 x

mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3458
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by mansquatch » Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:33 am

Mothman wrote: 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.


... 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.
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.
0 x
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37384
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by Mothman » Thu Feb 16, 2017 10:05 am

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?
0 x

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

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by chicagopurple » Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:00 am

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.
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37384
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by Mothman » Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:09 am

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. ;)
0 x

mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3458
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by mansquatch » Thu Feb 16, 2017 11:29 am

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.
0 x
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37384
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by Mothman » Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:02 pm

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?
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.
0 x

User avatar
Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5312
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by Pondering Her Percy » Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:06 pm

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.
0 x
Image

mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3458
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by mansquatch » Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:17 pm

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.
0 x
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37384
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by Mothman » Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:25 pm

mansquatch wrote: 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?
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37384
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by Mothman » Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:28 pm

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?
0 x

User avatar
IrishViking
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1631
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 11:02 am

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by IrishViking » Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:44 pm

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.
0 x

User avatar
IrishViking
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1631
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 11:02 am

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by IrishViking » Thu Feb 16, 2017 1:45 pm

Mothman wrote: 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.
0 x

mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3458
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN

Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Post by mansquatch » Thu Feb 16, 2017 2:05 pm

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.
0 x
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi

Post Reply