Vikings Message Board.Com
http://vikingsmessageboard.com/

O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris
http://vikingsmessageboard.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29747
Page 6 of 6

Author:  Pondering Her Percy [ Wed Feb 22, 2017 9:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

mansquatch wrote:
The Safeties in question are young. It is the same reason Waynes and Alexander do not see more significant playing time. Mistakes in the secondary can be very costly in the NFL, plus the HC has extremely low tolerance for them, thus the young guys sit. I suspect much of Treadwell's issues are in a similar vein. We saw an example in the Dallas game where he ran a total boneheaded route and cost them in the red zone.

On a side note: If Waynes can learn to stop being so grabby he is going to be an incredible CB. He seems capable of playing even tighter coverage that Rhodes.


Agreed on all counts. I've always been a big Kearse fan. It's tough to figure Zims system out. Look at Linval and Captain their first years here. And they were veterans no less. Either way, this is a big reason I want to bring in Dre Kirkpatrick. He played under Zim and knows the scheme. Plus if Newman retires and we lose Cap it would be a solid sign

Author:  mansquatch [ Wed Feb 22, 2017 10:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

It is likely that we'll see Waynes play a lot more this season. Just a guess. Munnerlyn is a tougher deal since he is the slot guy and that is a different skillset than playing on the outside.

Ideally they've been grooming someone to fill that role knowing that Munnerlyn could walk. Although, Munnerlyn may have a desire to stay here since Zimmer has had a great impact on his game. Can't blame a guy for wanting to get paid though. We'll know soon enough.

Author:  fiestavike [ Thu Feb 23, 2017 8:21 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Six free agents who could be overpriced this offseason
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... -offseason

Quote:
Chance Warmack and Luke Joeckel, offensive linemen

As they'll be doing with good defensive backs, teams are going to be clamoring for interior offensive line help this offseason. In today's NFL, it is a necessity. While both Warmack and Joeckel will be extremely difficult to value, their status as former first-round picks (in Joeckel's case, he was the No. 2 overall pick in the 2013 NFL Draft) could complicate things. The Minnesota Vikings alone could be in the market for half of the top-end offensive linemen available this offseason, and teams with tenured O-line coaches will believe they can get the best out of under-performing first-round picks.

Author:  fiestavike [ Thu Feb 23, 2017 8:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

I would propose that the Vikings use "the two year plan" to rebuild their offensive line. Essentially what this entails is not signing anybody you can't reasonably expect two years of production from, and to write contracts which don't financially commit you to players for more than two years. The one exception being rookie OL.

As I've said elsewhere, the Vikings will likely be replacing 5 OL starters between this year and next. Boone could play up to the value of year three on his contract, which would be ... a boon, but I don't think anyone reasonably expects him to be worth over 7 million per season, which the next two years of his contract call for him to be paid.

Trying to fix this all at once is not going to be doable, or even a wise thing to attempt.

Combining the 2 year plan with aggressive drafting will allow the young players to slot into the lineup as they are ready. This might mean that Jeremiah Sirles is a better solution at RT or RG than Matt Kalil and his balkly knees are at LT, even though its not an exciting prospect for Vikings fans. At this point, anybody on the roster who is starting come week 1 represents an effort to "kick the can down the road" and deal with the problem later. The value of these bandaids is going to be partially determined by how far down the road they allow the vikings to kick that can. Boone and Berger are the short term type of bandaid, adding another (in Kalil) means we've done little to solve the longterm problems on this unit, leaving 60 percent of it to once again be overturned next season. Sires (for instance, just using him as an example) is cheap, and might play well enough to be counted on for two years. Of course, a better option is finding 3rd contract players a little over 30 years of age, who can provide what Joe Berger has provided this team for the last few seasons...a stable, solid piece. Unfortunately, the Vikings have wasted the time he provided as a longterm bandaid and he's now near the end of his run. Other positions on the line should already be manned by similar players or by young players who address the position longterm and significantly raise the standard of play. But trying to grab those players now and throw them into the lineup is unlikely to produce better results than we saw last year.

Author:  Mothman [ Thu Feb 23, 2017 10:24 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

fiestavike wrote:
I would propose that the Vikings use "the two year plan" to rebuild their offensive line. Essentially what this entails is not signing anybody you can't reasonably expect two years of production from, and to write contracts which don't financially commit you to players for more than two years. The one exception being rookie OL.

As I've said elsewhere, the Vikings will likely be replacing 5 OL starters between this year and next. Boone could play up to the value of year three on his contract, which would be ... a boon, but I don't think anyone reasonably expects him to be worth over 7 million per season, which the next two years of his contract call for him to be paid.

Trying to fix this all at once is not going to be doable, or even a wise thing to attempt.

Combining the 2 year plan with aggressive drafting will allow the young players to slot into the lineup as they are ready. This might mean that Jeremiah Sirles is a better solution at RT or RG than Matt Kalil and his balkly knees are at LT, even though its not an exciting prospect for Vikings fans. At this point, anybody on the roster who is starting come week 1 represents an effort to "kick the can down the road" and deal with the problem later. The value of these bandaids is going to be partially determined by how far down the road they allow the vikings to kick that can. Boone and Berger are the short term type of bandaid, adding another (in Kalil) means we've done little to solve the longterm problems on this unit, leaving 60 percent of it to once again be overturned next season. Sires (for instance, just using him as an example) is cheap, and might play well enough to be counted on for two years. Of course, a better option is finding 3rd contract players a little over 30 years of age, who can provide what Joe Berger has provided this team for the last few seasons...a stable, solid piece. Unfortunately, the Vikings have wasted the time he provided as a longterm bandaid and he's now near the end of his run. Other positions on the line should already be manned by similar players or by young players who address the position longterm and significantly raise the standard of play. But trying to grab those players now and throw them into the lineup is unlikely to produce better results than we saw last year.


Excellent post! I like the way you've framed a potential two-year plan and I agree that trying to fix everything at once might not be wise.

Author:  autobon7 [ Thu Feb 23, 2017 10:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

fiestavike wrote:
I would propose that the Vikings use "the two year plan" to rebuild their offensive line. Essentially what this entails is not signing anybody you can't reasonably expect two years of production from, and to write contracts which don't financially commit you to players for more than two years. The one exception being rookie OL.

As I've said elsewhere, the Vikings will likely be replacing 5 OL starters between this year and next. Boone could play up to the value of year three on his contract, which would be ... a boon, but I don't think anyone reasonably expects him to be worth over 7 million per season, which the next two years of his contract call for him to be paid.

Trying to fix this all at once is not going to be doable, or even a wise thing to attempt.

Combining the 2 year plan with aggressive drafting will allow the young players to slot into the lineup as they are ready. This might mean that Jeremiah Sirles is a better solution at RT or RG than Matt Kalil and his balkly knees are at LT, even though its not an exciting prospect for Vikings fans. At this point, anybody on the roster who is starting come week 1 represents an effort to "kick the can down the road" and deal with the problem later. The value of these bandaids is going to be partially determined by how far down the road they allow the vikings to kick that can. Boone and Berger are the short term type of bandaid, adding another (in Kalil) means we've done little to solve the longterm problems on this unit, leaving 60 percent of it to once again be overturned next season. Sires (for instance, just using him as an example) is cheap, and might play well enough to be counted on for two years. Of course, a better option is finding 3rd contract players a little over 30 years of age, who can provide what Joe Berger has provided this team for the last few seasons...a stable, solid piece. Unfortunately, the Vikings have wasted the time he provided as a longterm bandaid and he's now near the end of his run. Other positions on the line should already be manned by similar players or by young players who address the position longterm and significantly raise the standard of play. But trying to grab those players now and throw them into the lineup is unlikely to produce better results than we saw last year.


Agree with Jim here.....very solid post/plan. I don't always feel the same as fiestavike but on the same page here. The big question remains.....if the staff implemented a plan like the above I am wondering how our defense would look in 2 years? What critical faces on defense would no longer be on the team? Would they be better/worse/about the same? Such a shame that the O line has been severely neglected over the years as the current defense is pretty much "ready to win" but the O line is the one huge gaping hole that is holding up the offense. How much longer will the "window of opportunity" remain open?

Author:  fiestavike [ Thu Feb 23, 2017 11:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

autobon7 wrote:
fiestavike wrote:
I would propose that the Vikings use "the two year plan" to rebuild their offensive line. Essentially what this entails is not signing anybody you can't reasonably expect two years of production from, and to write contracts which don't financially commit you to players for more than two years. The one exception being rookie OL.

As I've said elsewhere, the Vikings will likely be replacing 5 OL starters between this year and next. Boone could play up to the value of year three on his contract, which would be ... a boon, but I don't think anyone reasonably expects him to be worth over 7 million per season, which the next two years of his contract call for him to be paid.

Trying to fix this all at once is not going to be doable, or even a wise thing to attempt.

Combining the 2 year plan with aggressive drafting will allow the young players to slot into the lineup as they are ready. This might mean that Jeremiah Sirles is a better solution at RT or RG than Matt Kalil and his balkly knees are at LT, even though its not an exciting prospect for Vikings fans. At this point, anybody on the roster who is starting come week 1 represents an effort to "kick the can down the road" and deal with the problem later. The value of these bandaids is going to be partially determined by how far down the road they allow the vikings to kick that can. Boone and Berger are the short term type of bandaid, adding another (in Kalil) means we've done little to solve the longterm problems on this unit, leaving 60 percent of it to once again be overturned next season. Sires (for instance, just using him as an example) is cheap, and might play well enough to be counted on for two years. Of course, a better option is finding 3rd contract players a little over 30 years of age, who can provide what Joe Berger has provided this team for the last few seasons...a stable, solid piece. Unfortunately, the Vikings have wasted the time he provided as a longterm bandaid and he's now near the end of his run. Other positions on the line should already be manned by similar players or by young players who address the position longterm and significantly raise the standard of play. But trying to grab those players now and throw them into the lineup is unlikely to produce better results than we saw last year.


Agree with Jim here.....very solid post/plan. I don't always feel the same as fiestavike but on the same page here. The big question remains.....if the staff implemented a plan like the above I am wondering how our defense would look in 2 years? What critical faces on defense would no longer be on the team? Would they be better/worse/about the same? Such a shame that the O line has been severely neglected over the years as the current defense is pretty much "ready to win" but the O line is the one huge gaping hole that is holding up the offense. How much longer will the "window of opportunity" remain open?


Part of my thinking is that this approach allows them to make the overhaul gradually and without huge financial investment. Targetting less desirable options, older players, mediocre players (by NFL standards), in an effort to buy time would hopefully allow them to retain their key defensive players.

Having said that, this plan would have the next two drafts focusing on offensive line, and that's going to mean less raw young talent on the other side of the ball. So in that regard, it will have a negative impact of the defense.

Author:  J. Kapp 11 [ Sat Feb 25, 2017 12:20 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

mansquatch wrote:
It is likely that we'll see Waynes play a lot more this season. Just a guess.

I didn't really have a great read on Waynes until I saw him play live against Arizona. We were in the end zone, third row from the top of the lower level ... almost a perfect all-22 vantage point. Waynes really stood out to me. He's very quick, changes directions extremely fast, and has this uncanny ability to mirror his man. He was an unsung star in that game against the Cardinals. No matter who he covered, including Fitzgerald, they couldn't shake him. He's different than Rhodes, who is bigger and stronger than many receivers he faces. Waynes wins with quickness.

He definitely has had a tendency to grab a lot (in part, a factor of how he was coached at Michigan State), which has hurt his playing time. But he seems to be improving there, and 3 picks in part-time duty, plus another in the playoff game last year against Seattle, portends good things to come.

Not sure how all this pertains to the offensive line ... I hear Waynes is popular with the backup tackles, meaning pretty much every O-lineman on the team.

OK, I made that up.

Author:  808vikingsfan [ Sat Feb 25, 2017 2:23 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

RUSSELL OKUNG'S BRONCOS CONTRACT OPTION WON'T BE PICKED UP, WILL BE FREE AGENT

Author:  808vikingsfan [ Sat Feb 25, 2017 2:53 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

mansquatch wrote:
Mothman wrote:
mansquatch wrote:
On the dink and dunk thing: GB is not a dink and dunk team. Rogers is the best deep passer the league has ever seen. He doesn't hold the ball for 10 seconds every other play because he is throwing quick slants and flat passes to the RB.

Our defense has shown it CAN shut down just about anyone. I would argue that the only argument for it not being elite is the fact that it has had issues with consistency over the course of a 16 game season. However, I would also argue that the biggest source of that inconsistency is offensive ineptitude. Last season the other side of the ball had no ability to bail them out if they made mistakes, thus every mistake was magnified.

In that respect, fixing the OL would probably do more for the defense that adding bodies, IMO.


Maybe, but laying the defense's shortcomings at the feet of the offense only goes so far. The offense didn't allow the Colts to score 27 points in the first half, allow the Bears to pound the ball for 150+ yards in the game at Soldier Field, blow late leads against Detroit twice, etc. It has been a contributing factor but the biggest source of inconsistency on defense seems to lie in the defense itself. They have areas of vulnerability that can be very effectively exploited by a team equipped to do so. Their stats for the season are even a bit deceptive as their performance early lifts their overall rankings.

Simply put: they're very good but they still have some work to do.


I didn't say the offense was the sole cause of defensive issues. I said I felt that fixing the offense would do more for the defense than just about any personnel moves they might make on the defensive side of the ball.


The game vs the COLTS, the 3 turnovers didn't help the defense, especially the Peterson fumble. The penalty on the FG attempt didn't help either.

The OT game vs DET, if Walsh doesn't miss the XP, there would be no OT.

We think the 2015 Bronocs had an elite D. Did you know they gave up 20 or more points eight times that year? With rules that favor the offense, it's almost impossible to ask a defense to shutdown an offense. Now more than ever, the best defense is a good offense. I read somewhere that an offense can't score if they don't have the ball. I also read that a defense can't give up a score if their offense has the ball.

Author:  Mothman [ Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:11 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

808vikingsfan wrote:
The game vs the COLTS, the 3 turnovers didn't help the defense, especially the Peterson fumble.


That was especially damaging because the Vikings were in scoring position but I don't see how it was especially damaging to the defense unless you're just talking about momentum. The fumble occurred at the Indianapolis 9 yard line and the Colts were already up 17-0 at that point. The Vikings defense allowed them to drive 91 yards after Peterson's fumble. It's not as if that fumble put indy in good field position. When the opposing offense starts at their own 9, that should mean advantage: defense, shouldn't it (especially when that defense is supposedly elite)?

Quote:
The OT game vs DET, if Walsh doesn't miss the XP, there would be no OT.


... and if the defense had simply prevented the Lions from driving 35 yards in 23 seconds to kick a field goal, the game wouldn't have gone to OT either. Walsh's blunder doesn't excuse their breakdown. Was asking them to stop an opponent with 23 seconds left asking too much?

Quote:
With rules that favor the offense, it's almost impossible to ask a defense to shutdown an offense.


... although it keeps happening to the Vikes offense anyway. ;) I understand and agree that it's hard to shut an offense down for an entire game but the rules don't mean an offense should score 27 first half points, drive 91 yards for a TD after a fumble or drive for a field goal with 23 seconds on the clock either.

Author:  VikingPaul73 [ Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris



this is interesting. The more FA tackles the better for the Vikes.

Author:  Bigwehrm [ Sun Feb 26, 2017 1:09 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Nick Mangold? Thoughts. We don't really need a center do we? But would it allow us to fill a guard position with one of our curre t centers?

Author:  Pondering Her Percy [ Sun Feb 26, 2017 2:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Bigwehrm wrote:
Nick Mangold? Thoughts. We don't really need a center do we? But would it allow us to fill a guard position with one of our curre t centers?


Well Berger can play RG but I'm guessing Mangold will still command decent money. I'd rather draft Pat Elflein or Pocic from LSU if we are going to go the C/OG route

Author:  Boon [ Sun Feb 26, 2017 2:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

There isn't a damn thing wrong with this defense besides sendejo and the penalties. Someone posted a 38% third down percentage. I'd be willing to bet the house that 25% of that 38% is boneheaded penalties. That percentage would probably be above 50 and they would probably be a top 5 unit on third down if they didn't have so many freaking defensive holds on third and long. Or trying to jump over the line at 340 lbs. Or roughings. Or PI. The boneheaded third down penalties are mind boggling

Author:  Boon [ Sun Feb 26, 2017 2:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Funny thing is i have a coworker who isnt very knowledgeable about football. We watch some games here since i work every other sunday and even he was cracking jokes later in the season about "lets see how many stupid penalties they make on third down today". Im in no way,shape or form kidding about this. If he sees it it should be clearly visible. They have an issue getting off the field on third down and it has nothing to do with scheme or overall defense

Author:  fiestavike [ Mon Feb 27, 2017 8:59 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

Bigwehrm wrote:
Nick Mangold? Thoughts. We don't really need a center do we? But would it allow us to fill a guard position with one of our curre t centers?


He may be a fit for the 2 year plan. Will depend if they think they have an in-house short-term solution at RG.

You don't need redundancy in the two year plan. Just a steady make do starter at every position and a young guy looking to take his place.

Author:  IrishViking [ Mon Feb 27, 2017 9:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

It seems odd to consider 3-4 years out of a player a "bandaid" at what point are they just playing a position?

Is Brady a bandaid for the Patriots until they find their "forever" QB? :lol:

Author:  halfgiz [ Thu Mar 02, 2017 5:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

I got a charge out of this statement by Zimmer.
@Vikings
5h
Coach Zimmer doesn't want to slight the defensive side of the ball when looking to improve the #Vikings offense.

Isn't that what he done to the offense.... :lol:

Author:  chicagopurple [ Sun Mar 05, 2017 12:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

WOO HOO!!! Spielman retained Sirles! All is well........what a great plan.....after all the ONLY thing SIrles can do is get better......there is no lower level of play possible. :puke:

Author:  fiestavike [ Sun Mar 05, 2017 2:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

chicagopurple wrote:
WOO HOO!!! Spielman retained Sirles! All is well........what a great plan.....after all the ONLY thing SIrles can do is get better......there is no lower level of play possible. :puke:


Sirles is a solid backup. I don't mind bringing him back. He could even play RG this season while they groom a young player to take over.

Author:  Pondering Her Percy [ Sun Mar 05, 2017 9:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

chicagopurple wrote:
WOO HOO!!! Spielman retained Sirles! All is well........what a great plan.....after all the ONLY thing SIrles can do is get better......there is no lower level of play possible. :puke:


:roll: Give it a rest dude

Author:  jackal [ Mon Mar 06, 2017 8:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: O-line changes have begun -- Vikes release Fusco, Harris

actually out of all out tackles he is only ones I wanted to keep.

I am hoping we try and grab the lions Tackle and possibly another.
I don't think there is a deep pool of tackles again this year.


we should have some money if we don't retain Kalil, Peterson and few others.

Page 6 of 6 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/