View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Fri Oct 20, 2017 2:28 pm



This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 215 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system 
Author Message
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
CbusVikesFan wrote:
Spielman, Spielman, Spielman! Go to room and stay there! :rock:


:lol:

One thing that's struck me as Spielman has been discussed on off over the course of last season and this offseason is how many mitigating circumstances have been put forth to alleviate criticism. He's been with the Vikings almost 11 years but there seem to be at least one or two major reasons why we're supposed to dismiss each season when considering his job performance. For example:

2006: He was hired to replace Fran Foley after the draft. This is a particularly legitimate reason.

2007-2010: He was part of the Triangle of Authority with Childress and Brzezinski
2011: He was part of the Triangle of Authority with Frazier and Brzezinski; They began rebuilding. From this season forward, "rebuilding" gets applied to pretty much every season.
2012: It was his first year as GM. He didn't have the coach he wanted.
2013: Second year as GM. Still rebuilding. Didn't have his coach.
2014: Viewed as a reset/rebuilding year.
2015: The team was still rebuilding but they won the division and achieved a moral victory by getting in position to win a playoff game so this year, more than the others, seems to be viewed as a legitimate season for evaluation.
2016: Injuries! STILL rebuilding...


Mon Apr 10, 2017 5:37 pm
Profile
Fenrir
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Posts: 10495
Location: Hawaii
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
Mothman wrote:
I agree that there's more to winning than building a roster but I don't think building a roster and building a team are quite the same thing and Spielman's in charge of football operations, not just building a roster.


I would say a GM is tasked with building a roster. The HC is charged with building a team.


Mon Apr 10, 2017 7:03 pm
Profile
Fenrir
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Posts: 10495
Location: Hawaii
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
Mothman wrote:
CbusVikesFan wrote:
Spielman, Spielman, Spielman! Go to room and stay there! :rock:


:lol:

One thing that's struck me as Spielman has been discussed on off over the course of last season and this offseason is how many mitigating circumstances have been put forth to alleviate criticism. He's been with the Vikings almost 11 years but there seem to be at least one or two major reasons why we're supposed to dismiss each season when considering his job performance. For example:

2006: He was hired to replace Fran Foley after the draft. This is a particularly legitimate reason.

2007-2010: He was part of the Triangle of Authority with Childress and Brzezinski
2011: He was part of the Triangle of Authority with Frazier and Brzezinski; They began rebuilding. From this season forward, "rebuilding" gets applied to pretty much every season.
2012: It was his first year as GM. He didn't have the coach he wanted.
2013: Second year as GM. Still rebuilding. Didn't have his coach.
2014: Viewed as a reset/rebuilding year.
2015: The team was still rebuilding but they won the division and achieved a moral victory by getting in position to win a playoff game so this year, more than the others, seems to be viewed as a legitimate season for evaluation.
2016: Injuries! STILL rebuilding...


It depends on how you look at it. You could say he rebuilt a defense that was 2nd to worst in the league to #3 over a span of 3 years. I think special teams, with the exception of Walsh, has been rather good over the last couple years. That's 2/3rds of your team that is "rebuilt." Patterson is a big loss but getting a kicker who can make PATs mitigates kickoff returns given the new rules.

As for the offense, I think they're average O-line play away from making this a good football team. This team has beat good teams. Won on the road. Won the North title. They went from terrible to beating Green Bay IN Lambeau to take the division over the course of two years. I don't consider this a rebuilding year at all, I think last year was extraordinary, and outside of what can only be described as a ridiculous amount of injuries, the trajectory is still upwards.

Rebuilding? Not in my book. But that's just me.


Mon Apr 10, 2017 7:14 pm
Profile
Starting Wide Receiver
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:48 pm
Posts: 17455
Location: Crystal, MN
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
I think you missed Jim's point, Landon... He is saying how every season people come up with excuses for Spielman on why his teams don't perform well on the field.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

_________________
The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." ‪#‎SKOL2016‬


Mon Apr 10, 2017 7:31 pm
Profile YIM WWW
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
S197 wrote:
Mothman wrote:
I agree that there's more to winning than building a roster but I don't think building a roster and building a team are quite the same thing and Spielman's in charge of football operations, not just building a roster.


I would say a GM is tasked with building a roster. The HC is charged with building a team.


But the GM hires the coach and oversees the entire football operation, including the coach. The head coach obviously plays a very significant role but he's also part of the team and the overall direction the team takes, from which type of coach gets hired in the first place to the acquisition of personnel (and more) is determined by the GM. There's a clear hierarchy.

I understand your point: the coach is supposed to forge the roster into an effective team but the team is built by the GM.


Mon Apr 10, 2017 7:45 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
PurpleMustReign wrote:
I think you missed Jim's point, Landon... He is saying how every season people come up with excuses for Spielman on why his teams don't perform well on the field.


yes... or excuses for why he can't be held accountable.


Mon Apr 10, 2017 7:47 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2005 9:13 am
Posts: 7194
Location: Ft Walton Beach, Florida
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
He sounds exactly Like every GM on a losing team, "we've got a core group of young talent and we're adding to it, Injuries, uncontrollable blah blah blah. You see head coaches and GMs of Winning teams talk like this


Mon Apr 10, 2017 8:30 pm
Profile
Commissioner

Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:24 pm
Posts: 23761
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
Mothman wrote:
S197 wrote:
Mothman wrote:
I agree that there's more to winning than building a roster but I don't think building a roster and building a team are quite the same thing and Spielman's in charge of football operations, not just building a roster.


I would say a GM is tasked with building a roster. The HC is charged with building a team.


But the GM hires the coach and oversees the entire football operation, including the coach. The head coach obviously plays a very significant role but he's also part of the team and the overall direction the team takes, from which type of coach gets hired in the first place to the acquisition of personnel (and more) is determined by the GM. There's a clear hierarchy.

I understand your point: the coach is supposed to forge the roster into an effective team but the team is built by the GM.


Especially frustrating since Zimmer seems like a guy capable of running a defense if the GM and offensive coaching staff are in place. Which they aren't. And in a season or two the entire thing will be exploded again. With an owner who doesn't seem to have any idea what he's doing.


Mon Apr 10, 2017 9:29 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4396
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
S197 wrote:
It depends on how you look at it. You could say he rebuilt a defense that was 2nd to worst in the league to #3 over a span of 3 years. I think special teams, with the exception of Walsh, has been rather good over the last couple years. That's 2/3rds of your team that is "rebuilt." Patterson is a big loss but getting a kicker who can make PATs mitigates kickoff returns given the new rules.

As for the offense, I think they're average O-line play away from making this a good football team. This team has beat good teams. Won on the road. Won the North title. They went from terrible to beating Green Bay IN Lambeau to take the division over the course of two years. I don't consider this a rebuilding year at all, I think last year was extraordinary, and outside of what can only be described as a ridiculous amount of injuries, the trajectory is still upwards.

Rebuilding? Not in my book. But that's just me.


Excellent post. Well said. I'm not sure why this is considered a "rebuilding year". We have to "rebuild" the tackle spots, guard, RB and some depth along the team. When has that ever been considered having to "rebuild"? A team never stops building. We're addressing holes. Not rebuilding. There is a gigantic difference between the two. Rebuilding is when you're getting rid of most of your roster/finding guys to replace others on MOST of your roster. We are not even close to doing that this year. In turn, that's not rebuilding.

For example, Seattle needs basically an entire OL, could use better WRs, haven't found a RB since Lynch (Lacy is a big question mark), are on the verge of getting weaker at CB and are weak at the DT spot. Does that mean they are rebuilding?? No they have holes to fill. And quite frankly, we've done a better job filling our holes so far this offseason than Seattle has. On probably a worse line than ours, they signed only Luke Joekel, who isn't very good at all. Signed Lacy who is a mystery and signed a safety that is simply depth. We filled both tackle spots, signed a solid RB and will probably draft another, added a much better backup QB and provided depth along the DL. I don't hear anyone saying a team like Seattle is rebuilding. So why are fans saying we are "rebuilding"? We aren't. We have to fill holes. Just like every single team in the NFL does every year. And we have to fill much less than a lot of teams out there (aka, the teams that are rebuilding).

I swear the words "rebuilding" and "bust" are by far the most overused/out of context words used on here and outside of here by a long shot. When you look at what they ACTUALLY mean and how fans use them, it really leaves me scratching my head.

_________________
Image


Mon Apr 10, 2017 10:29 pm
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:07 pm
Posts: 1368
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
S197 wrote:
Mothman wrote:
I agree that there's more to winning than building a roster but I don't think building a roster and building a team are quite the same thing and Spielman's in charge of football operations, not just building a roster.


I would say a GM is tasked with building a roster. The HC is charged with building a team.

The GM has to have a certain plan in place on how to build a winner. HC should be on the same page and/or his own plan if he gets carte Blanche to run the way he sees fit. Mostly who has the most experience, successfully. I don't think that it can be broken down in black or white. Everyone should hold themselves accountable for the success of the team. As the chain of command goes, so goes the team. Has to be good from top to bottom, front to back. From the janitor to the owners. The GM should get the most criticism, not too many positions above him a d he is most responsible for the team itself. The players report to the coach. The coach to the GM. Can't blame fhe players if the draft isn't up to winning standards. But you can blame the GM and HC.

_________________
Image
Don't hate on my Buckeyes. Some of the best Vikings went to Ohio State.
Including now, HOF WR #80 Cris Carter


Tue Apr 11, 2017 9:03 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
CbusVikesFan wrote:
The GM has to have a certain plan in place on how to build a winner. HC should be on the same page and/or his own plan if he gets carte Blanche to run the way he sees fit. Mostly who has the most experience, successfully. I don't think that it can be broken down in black or white. Everyone should hold themselves accountable for the success of the team. As the chain of command goes, so goes the team. Has to be good from top to bottom, front to back. From the janitor to the owners. The GM should get the most criticism, not too many positions above him a d he is most responsible for the team itself. The players report to the coach. The coach to the GM. Can't blame fhe players if the draft isn't up to winning standards. But you can blame the GM and HC.


Well said. Your first sentence really gets to the heart of the matter. The GM has to have a plan for building a winner (and by "winner", I mean "championship team"). With the exception of ownership, everything begins there and the GM needs to hire a coach with whom he can work closely to realize his plan. Both have a great deal of responsibility but only one gets to choose the other.


Tue Apr 11, 2017 9:35 am
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 am
Posts: 1269
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
I would say that a decade is long enough to evaluate the quality of a GMs "plan".

After a full decade with the huge benefit of having the best RB in the league we have nothing to show for it but a team in disarray. APs career was wasted. They never put a QB with him to make a complete offense except for a short rental of Farve.
The OL was neglected for years and now is a huge non-healing ulcer that will disrupt any chance of success until it is corrected.

Coaching staff has been suspect for 10 years. The GM chose the coaches.....its on him.


Tue Apr 11, 2017 10:11 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
chicagopurple wrote:
I would say that a decade is long enough to evaluate the quality of a GMs "plan".

After a full decade with the huge benefit of having the best RB in the league we have nothing to show for it but a team in disarray. APs career was wasted. They never put a QB with him to make a complete offense except for a short rental of Farve.
The OL was neglected for years and now is a huge non-healing ulcer that will disrupt any chance of success until it is corrected.

Coaching staff has been suspect for 10 years. The GM chose the coaches.....its on him.


This is why it gets complicated because Spielman has only chosen one head coach: Zimmer. Childress was hired before Spielman. Frazier was promoted by the Wilfs.

Spielman has been GM since January of 2012. Before that, he was Vice President of Player Personnel, one third of the "Triangle of Authority" and the primary author of the Vikings drafts. I think a philosophy similar to we've seen from him as a GM was evident during those years and since he was still at least 1/3 of the primary decision-making structure within the organization, I still think he bears a great deal of responsibility for the team's successes and failures at that time, but I understand why others want to cut him a lot of slack for that period.

As you said, Peterson's career as a Viking was wasted and as far as I'm concerned, nobody is more responsible for that than Rick Spielman.


Tue Apr 11, 2017 10:52 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4396
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
chicagopurple wrote:
I would say that a decade is long enough to evaluate the quality of a GMs "plan".

After a full decade with the huge benefit of having the best RB in the league we have nothing to show for it but a team in disarray. APs career was wasted. They never put a QB with him to make a complete offense except for a short rental of Farve.
The OL was neglected for years and now is a huge non-healing ulcer that will disrupt any chance of success until it is corrected.

Coaching staff has been suspect for 10 years. The GM chose the coaches.....its on him.


So I suppose it's Rick Spielman's fault that Adrian Peterson fumbled twice vs. New Orleans and once that recently led to Seattle's game winning drive. Maybe Adrian's career would look a little better if Adrian did was he was suppose to do and not put the ball on the ground in crucial moments. I'm not buying that it's Rick Spielman's fault that AP's career was "wasted". Adrian had his opportunities and failed when given them each time. So that argument can go both ways.

_________________
Image


Tue Apr 11, 2017 11:01 am
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 am
Posts: 1269
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
Yes , AP fumbled at the worst possible moments....Yes he was a crappy pass blocker....prolly not much of a father to group of kids he has scattered across the country.....

My point is that as good as his career was, it would have been epic if management had ever found a real QB to play along side him...He did what he did with every defense stacking the box against him because we had no real passing threat. Imagine if teams had to respect the pass during much of AP's career....We would have been devastating!

Its pretty inexcusable to have one of the Historic RBs in league history and never get him into one damn Super Bowl game.....

Kinda like the Bills and Jim Kelly....Oh wait, they made it to many Super Bowls....hmmmm what other super star was on a team that failed to ever reach a Super Bowl?


Tue Apr 11, 2017 11:24 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4396
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
chicagopurple wrote:
Yes , AP fumbled at the worst possible moments....Yes he was a crappy pass blocker....prolly not much of a father to group of kids he has scattered across the country.....

My point is that as good as his career was, it would have been epic if management had ever found a real QB to play along side him...He did what he did with every defense stacking the box against him because we had no real passing threat. Imagine if teams had to respect the pass during much of AP's career....We would have been devastating!

Its pretty inexcusable to have one of the Historic RBs in league history and never get him into one damn Super Bowl game.....

Kinda like the Bills and Jim Kelly....Oh wait, they made it to many Super Bowls....hmmmm what other super star was on a team that failed to ever reach a Super Bowl?


Uhh Barry Sanders, Eric Dickerson, LaDainian Tomlinson....should I keep going? In the end, I dont blame Rick Spielman for "wasting" AP's career. Like I said, it's not like AP didnt have the opportunities. He's just as much to blame as anyone else. You get to the big game and you choke. That's on you, nobody else.

_________________
Image


Tue Apr 11, 2017 11:32 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
chicagopurple wrote:
I would say that a decade is long enough to evaluate the quality of a GMs "plan".

After a full decade with the huge benefit of having the best RB in the league we have nothing to show for it but a team in disarray. APs career was wasted. They never put a QB with him to make a complete offense except for a short rental of Farve.
The OL was neglected for years and now is a huge non-healing ulcer that will disrupt any chance of success until it is corrected.

Coaching staff has been suspect for 10 years. The GM chose the coaches.....its on him.


So I suppose it's Rick Spielman's fault that Adrian Peterson fumbled twice vs. New Orleans and once that recently led to Seattle's game winning drive. Maybe Adrian's career would look a little better if Adrian did was he was suppose to do and not put the ball on the ground in crucial moments. I'm not buying that it's Rick Spielman's fault that AP's career was "wasted". Adrian had his opportunities and failed when given them each time. So that argument can go both ways.


Not really.

Peterson certainly could have avoided a few key mistakes in those games but he rushed for 122 yards and 3 TDs against the Saints, hardly indicative of failure on his part. He literally scored 3/4 of the Vikings points! Yes, he lost a turnover (one out of 5 committed by the team in that game) on a bad exchange but overall, his performance was one of the main reasons the game was close in the first place.

The fumble against Seattle was damaging but pointing to a couple of turnovers doesn't serve as anything close to an adequate argument against the rather obvious fact that the Vikings squandered the career of an all-time great RB over the course of Spielman's tenure with the team.


Tue Apr 11, 2017 11:33 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4396
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
Mothman wrote:
Not really.

Peterson certainly could have avoided a few key mistakes in those games but he rushed for 122 yards and 3 TDs against the Saints, hardly indicative of failure on his part. He literally scored 3/4 of the Vikings points! Yes, he lost a turnover (one out of 5 committed by the team in that game) on a bad exchange but overall, his performance was one of the main reasons the game was close in the first place.

The fumble against Seattle was damaging but pointing to a couple of turnovers doesn't serve as anything close to an adequate argument against the rather obvious fact that the Vikings squandered the career of an all-time great RB over the course of Spielman's tenure with the team.


Agree to disagree

_________________
Image


Tue Apr 11, 2017 11:37 am
Profile
Fenrir
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Posts: 10495
Location: Hawaii
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
Quote:
PurpleMustReign wrote:
I think you missed Jim's point, Landon... He is saying how every season people come up with excuses for Spielman on why his teams don't perform well on the field.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


No, I got it. All I'm saying is for me this isn't a rebuilding year and that isn't an acceptable excuse should the Vikings underperform this year. The differentiator is I do give Spielman a pass for 2016, not because they were rebuilding, but because they lost, what, 7 starters on the offense? To me that's an extraordinary circumstance, not rebuilding. I understand the argument of having starters with injury history but that wasn't the case for everyone. Teddy suffered a freak injury that I don't think has ever happened before. AD's injury was equally unavoidable. You lose your Hall of Fame weapon and starting QB, that's some major hurdles. Then pile on the O-line injuries. Did anyone see Harris getting injured? Another freak occurrence. Okay so Kalil, Loadholt, Smith, Fusco, etc., had injury history so maybe you expect one or two of them to not last the season. But all of them?

The Vikings offense was a black swan event. When you plan a season you prepare for contingencies, but you can't prepare for a black swan. I don't care how good of a GM you are.

Quote:
The black swan theory or theory of black swan events is a metaphor that describes an event that comes as a surprise, has a major effect, and is often inappropriately rationalized after the fact with the benefit of hindsight. The term is based on an ancient saying which presumed black swans did not exist, but the saying was rewritten after black swans were discovered in the wild.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory


Tue Apr 11, 2017 3:34 pm
Profile
Fenrir
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Posts: 10495
Location: Hawaii
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
Mothman wrote:
S197 wrote:
Mothman wrote:
I agree that there's more to winning than building a roster but I don't think building a roster and building a team are quite the same thing and Spielman's in charge of football operations, not just building a roster.


I would say a GM is tasked with building a roster. The HC is charged with building a team.


But the GM hires the coach and oversees the entire football operation, including the coach. The head coach obviously plays a very significant role but he's also part of the team and the overall direction the team takes, from which type of coach gets hired in the first place to the acquisition of personnel (and more) is determined by the GM. There's a clear hierarchy.

I understand your point: the coach is supposed to forge the roster into an effective team but the team is built by the GM.


The way I look at it is similar to any other company. The owner and GM is like your Board of Directors. The Head Coach is your CEO/President. The Board is responsible for finding a good CEO but they are looking at it from a macro perspective. The CEO is the leader of the company and through his vision and delegation, carries out the functions to make the business run. He/she too is more big picture, delegating more granular authority to his subordinates (in this case Coordinators, position coaches, scouts, etc.) but ultimately he's the guy that creates the culture.

I guess the way I look at it is the GM puts the chess pieces on the board, the HC is the one that moves the pieces and plays the game. There's a symbiotic relationship there so they do need to function together in order for it to work but there is a distinction between the roles.

My main point being with such a critical relationship, it's hard for a GM to forge his vision when he doesn't have control over who is his biggest counterpart. So yes, to some degree Spielman is responsible for the last 10 years or so but it gets a little fuzzy given the unknown structure prior to Zimmer. I believe Spielman really only became a "true" GM in the last 3 years. I realize some disagree with that, but that's where I'm coming from.


Tue Apr 11, 2017 3:44 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
S197 wrote:
No, I got it. All I'm saying is for me this isn't a rebuilding year and that isn't an acceptable excuse should the Vikings underperform this year.


Other than being hired after the 2006 to replace Foley, I don't think any of the excuses I listed are sufficient to give Spielman a pass in any of the years mentioned.

Quote:
The differentiator is I do give Spielman a pass for 2016, not because they were rebuilding, but because they lost, what, 7 starters on the offense? To me that's an extraordinary circumstance, not rebuilding. I understand the argument of having starters with injury history but that wasn't the case for everyone. Teddy suffered a freak injury that I don't think has ever happened before. AD's injury was equally unavoidable. You lose your Hall of Fame weapon and starting QB, that's some major hurdles. Then pile on the O-line injuries. Did anyone see Harris getting injured? Another freak occurrence. Okay so Kalil, Loadholt, Smith, Fusco, etc., had injury history so maybe you expect one or two of them to not last the season. But all of them?

The Vikings offense was a black swan event. When you plan a season you prepare for contingencies, but you can't prepare for a black swan. I don't care how good of a GM you are.


Perhaps not but it's possible to prepare for adversity better than he did last year. The impact of the Bridgewater injury has been wildly overblown in terms of it's on-field effects. It sounds great on a list (they lost their starting QB!) and off the field, it obviously resulted in a shift in plans and cost the team a first round draft pick (and more). However, the net result on the field was actually improved quarterback play. I'd argue that it actually improved their chances to win rather than proving detrimental to them.

Losing Peterson hurt but that alone shouldn't have sent the running game plummeting to the bottom of the league if the line had been any good and if the backups had performed better.

Losing Harris as they did was odd and unexpected but Harris wasn't a particularly impactful player and a team has to be able to overcome that kind of adversity. If they had simply spent an earlier pick on a good interior lineman, which was clearly necessary, they could have had a quality young alternative ready to take over that spot.

We've been over the linemen again and again here. Spielman set that line up to fail so he absolutely should not get a pass because it failed. I don't think what happens even qualifies as a Black Swan event because too much of it was anticipated. I don't mean that in a literal sense (nobody could know with certainty who would get injured or when) but the potential for very real problems in the areas where they occurred was easy to see. Most of the key players who were injured had injury histories of concern and QBs get injured often enough in the NFL that it was reckless not to have a better alternative than Shaun Hill on the roster, especially when the quality of the starter was highly debatable. Much of this, from Hill being problematic if Bridgewater went down to Loadholt's possible retirement, Sullivan possibly not being available, the need for a better backup behind inconsistent, injury-prone Matt Kalil, the painfully obvious need to draft for the line, Smith's unreliability, etc. was actually discussed and anticipated by fans here on the board last offseason. If we can see it and see potential means to prepare for it, why shouldn't we expect the GM to do likewise? These problems and means to avoid them weren't simply rationalized in hindsight. Heck, weaknesses and lack of depth in these particular areas of the team have been issues of concern here for years.

I think Spielman's a settler. He talks about how he's always looking for ways to improve the team but we get years of Jerome Simpsons, Matt Asiatas, Shaun Hills, Charlie Johnsons, T. J. Clemmings', etc., players who could be improved upon but remain too long. Too often, "good enough" seems to be good enough for him and that's not getting it done. I don't expect a roster full of blue chip players every year but these are players who could have and should have been replaced with better talent sooner than they were.


Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:13 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
S197 wrote:
The way I look at it is similar to any other company. The owner and GM is like your Board of Directors. The Head Coach is your CEO/President. The Board is responsible for finding a good CEO but they are looking at it from a macro perspective. The CEO is the leader of the company and through his vision and delegation, carries out the functions to make the business run.


I'd say that's the role Spielman holds. The "company" is the entire football operation so his role is parallel to that of a CEO.

Quote:
He/she too is more big picture, delegating more granular authority to his subordinates (in this case Coordinators, position coaches, scouts, etc.) but ultimately he's the guy that creates the culture.

I guess the way I look at it is the GM puts the chess pieces on the board, the HC is the one that moves the pieces and plays the game. There's a symbiotic relationship there so they do need to function together in order for it to work but there is a distinction between the roles.


I agree, there is a distinction between the roles but I'd say the key distinction is Spielman oversees ALL aspects of the football operation while Zimmer oversees the coaches and players. He's in charge of the biggest "division" in the company but Spielman is running the company for the Board of Directors (ownership). As "CEO", he hired and empowered Zimmer to supervise the football team and Spielman puts that team together in cooperation with both Zimmer's "division" and other divisions, like the scouting department, cap and contract management, etc.

Quote:
My main point being with such a critical relationship, it's hard for a GM to forge his vision when he doesn't have control over who is his biggest counterpart. So yes, to some degree Spielman is responsible for the last 10 years or so but it gets a little fuzzy given the unknown structure prior to Zimmer. I believe Spielman really only became a "true" GM in the last 3 years. I realize some disagree with that, but that's where I'm coming from.


You have to admit, it's a convenient, if understandable, position since he's been the GM since 2012. If he didn't want Frazier to be his HC, presumably he could have replaced him sooner than he did.

This illustrates the point I was making above: Spielman's been with the team for a decade but in terms of holding him accountable, most of that decade gets rationalized away and that leaves us with the last 3 years. However, people want to give him a pass for last year because of injuries and a pass for 2014 because it was the first year with a new coach so basically, we get to hold him accountable for one year out of a decade of employment in positions of great importance! :(


Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:29 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:28 pm
Posts: 6592
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
Mothman wrote:
The fumble against Seattle was damaging but pointing to a couple of turnovers doesn't serve as anything close to an adequate argument against the rather obvious fact that the Vikings squandered the career of an all-time great RB over the course of Spielman's tenure with the team.




EDIT

Deleting my rant. No point.

_________________
A Randy Moss fan for life. A Kevin Williams fan for life.


Tue Apr 11, 2017 4:47 pm
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:07 pm
Posts: 1368
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
These half dozen pages of debate have proven that people are different and have varying opinions. I don't think any of us are wrong or right. Our perceptions are various and that is a good thing. Think about it.

_________________
Image
Don't hate on my Buckeyes. Some of the best Vikings went to Ohio State.
Including now, HOF WR #80 Cris Carter


Tue Apr 11, 2017 5:50 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
CbusVikesFan wrote:
These half dozen pages of debate have proven that people are different and have varying opinions. I don't think any of us are wrong or right. Our perceptions are various and that is a good thing. Think about it.



That diversity of perspectives is what makes the board worthwhile.

Sometimes I'm a little surprised that we can't find more common ground since we all cheer for the same team but there's something to be learned from that too.

We'll learn more about this whole subject in the months ahead. For now, perhaps it's run it's course.


Tue Apr 11, 2017 7:04 pm
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2012 8:07 pm
Posts: 1368
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
Mothman wrote:
CbusVikesFan wrote:
These half dozen pages of debate have proven that people are different and have varying opinions. I don't think any of us are wrong or right. Our perceptions are various and that is a good thing. Think about it.



That diversity of perspectives is what makes the board worthwhile.

Sometimes I'm a little surprised that we can't find more common ground since we all cheer for the same team but there's something to be learned from that too.

We'll learn more about this whole subject in the months ahead. For now, perhaps it's run it's course.

It's been a polarizing subject. I hope that this year will be Spielman's best year as GM. For some of us it wouldn't take a whole heck of a lot for him to accomplish that feat. :D

_________________
Image
Don't hate on my Buckeyes. Some of the best Vikings went to Ohio State.
Including now, HOF WR #80 Cris Carter


Tue Apr 11, 2017 7:56 pm
Profile
Fenrir
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Posts: 10495
Location: Hawaii
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
Mothman wrote:
S197 wrote:
No, I got it. All I'm saying is for me this isn't a rebuilding year and that isn't an acceptable excuse should the Vikings underperform this year.


Other than being hired after the 2006 to replace Foley, I don't think any of the excuses I listed are sufficient to give Spielman a pass in any of the years mentioned.

Quote:
The differentiator is I do give Spielman a pass for 2016, not because they were rebuilding, but because they lost, what, 7 starters on the offense? To me that's an extraordinary circumstance, not rebuilding. I understand the argument of having starters with injury history but that wasn't the case for everyone. Teddy suffered a freak injury that I don't think has ever happened before. AD's injury was equally unavoidable. You lose your Hall of Fame weapon and starting QB, that's some major hurdles. Then pile on the O-line injuries. Did anyone see Harris getting injured? Another freak occurrence. Okay so Kalil, Loadholt, Smith, Fusco, etc., had injury history so maybe you expect one or two of them to not last the season. But all of them?

The Vikings offense was a black swan event. When you plan a season you prepare for contingencies, but you can't prepare for a black swan. I don't care how good of a GM you are.


Perhaps not but it's possible to prepare for adversity better than he did last year. The impact of the Bridgewater injury has been wildly overblown in terms of it's on-field effects. It sounds great on a list (they lost their starting QB!) and off the field, it obviously resulted in a shift in plans and cost the team a first round draft pick (and more). However, the net result on the field was actually improved quarterback play. I'd argue that it actually improved their chances to win rather than proving detrimental to them.

Losing Peterson hurt but that alone shouldn't have sent the running game plummeting to the bottom of the league if the line had been any good and if the backups had performed better.

Losing Harris as they did was odd and unexpected but Harris wasn't a particularly impactful player and a team has to be able to overcome that kind of adversity. If they had simply spent an earlier pick on a good interior lineman, which was clearly necessary, they could have had a quality young alternative ready to take over that spot.

We've been over the linemen again and again here. Spielman set that line up to fail so he absolutely should not get a pass because it failed. I don't think what happens even qualifies as a Black Swan event because too much of it was anticipated. I don't mean that in a literal sense (nobody could know with certainty who would get injured or when) but the potential for very real problems in the areas where they occurred was easy to see. Most of the key players who were injured had injury histories of concern and QBs get injured often enough in the NFL that it was reckless not to have a better alternative than Shaun Hill on the roster, especially when the quality of the starter was highly debatable. Much of this, from Hill being problematic if Bridgewater went down to Loadholt's possible retirement, Sullivan possibly not being available, the need for a better backup behind inconsistent, injury-prone Matt Kalil, the painfully obvious need to draft for the line, Smith's unreliability, etc. was actually discussed and anticipated by fans here on the board last offseason. If we can see it and see potential means to prepare for it, why shouldn't we expect the GM to do likewise? These problems and means to avoid them weren't simply rationalized in hindsight. Heck, weaknesses and lack of depth in these particular areas of the team have been issues of concern here for years.

I think Spielman's a settler. He talks about how he's always looking for ways to improve the team but we get years of Jerome Simpsons, Matt Asiatas, Shaun Hills, Charlie Johnsons, T. J. Clemmings', etc., players who could be improved upon but remain too long. Too often, "good enough" seems to be good enough for him and that's not getting it done. I don't expect a roster full of blue chip players every year but these are players who could have and should have been replaced with better talent sooner than they were.


The black swan event isn't the individual potential for problem, it's that it collectively all came to fruition. You can't say A was irrelevant, B was a tough loss, C was a freak accident, but we still should have prepared for E,F,G,and H. If you're saying that scenario was widely discussed on this forum then I'd love to see it.

Sure we had discussion on drafting an O-lineman. Mostly a guard if I recall correctly, but I'm sure tackle was in there. But was it more than the talk of drafting Josh Doctson or Will Fuller? Myles Jack or Jaylon Smith? Like I told someone else, if you were pounding the table to draft two tackles, a guard, and a center, show me. I'll give credit where credit is due, I just don't recall that discuss nor do I think it ever happened.

It's easy to play the hindsight game. Lets say we grabbed a guy like Jack Conklin. He went way before the Vikings pick, but for hypothetical sake, lets say we did. What if Diggs went down? He's known to have injury issues too. It would have been, "Spielman is such an idiot! Who goes into a season with Diggs, an UDFA in Thielen, and a non-producer like Johnson! Why didn't he draft a #1 receiver?"

It works all over the field. Linval, Shariff, and Tom Johnson all have injury history. What if they all went down? Same deal. There's only so much you can plan for. Losing the vast majority of your offense isn't one of them. That's not me giving Spielman a pass on everything, just this particular instance.


Tue Apr 11, 2017 8:38 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
Landon, I don't know what to tell you. I don't have the time or inclination to spend hours digging up past discussions just to prove they occurred. If you check last year's draft thread you will find that I wanted them to draft Whitehair and that I wanted them to draft o-linemen. That wasn't the only place I expressed that but I know I expressed it there.

I've tried hard to articulate a clear point of view on pretty much all of this over the past few years but it rarely seems to make even the slightest dent. To say that's discouraging would be an understatement. :(


Tue Apr 11, 2017 9:36 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4396
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
S197 wrote:
Quote:
PurpleMustReign wrote:
I think you missed Jim's point, Landon... He is saying how every season people come up with excuses for Spielman on why his teams don't perform well on the field.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


No, I got it. All I'm saying is for me this isn't a rebuilding year and that isn't an acceptable excuse should the Vikings underperform this year. The differentiator is I do give Spielman a pass for 2016, not because they were rebuilding, but because they lost, what, 7 starters on the offense? To me that's an extraordinary circumstance, not rebuilding. I understand the argument of having starters with injury history but that wasn't the case for everyone. Teddy suffered a freak injury that I don't think has ever happened before. AD's injury was equally unavoidable. You lose your Hall of Fame weapon and starting QB, that's some major hurdles. Then pile on the O-line injuries. Did anyone see Harris getting injured? Another freak occurrence. Okay so Kalil, Loadholt, Smith, Fusco, etc., had injury history so maybe you expect one or two of them to not last the season. But all of them?

The Vikings offense was a black swan event. When you plan a season you prepare for contingencies, but you can't prepare for a black swan. I don't care how good of a GM you are.

Quote:
The black swan theory or theory of black swan events is a metaphor that describes an event that comes as a surprise, has a major effect, and is often inappropriately rationalized after the fact with the benefit of hindsight. The term is based on an ancient saying which presumed black swans did not exist, but the saying was rewritten after black swans were discovered in the wild.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory


Agreed again. Exactly how I feel

_________________
Image


Tue Apr 11, 2017 9:51 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4396
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: Rick Spielman hasn't lost faith in himself or his system
S197 wrote:

It's easy to play the hindsight game. Lets say we grabbed a guy like Jack Conklin. He went way before the Vikings pick, but for hypothetical sake, lets say we did. What if Diggs went down? He's known to have injury issues too. It would have been, "Spielman is such an idiot! Who goes into a season with Diggs, an UDFA in Thielen, and a non-producer like Johnson! Why didn't he draft a #1 receiver?"

It works all over the field. Linval, Shariff, and Tom Johnson all have injury history. What if they all went down? Same deal. There's only so much you can plan for. Losing the vast majority of your offense isn't one of them. That's not me giving Spielman a pass on everything, just this particular instance.


Exactly. I said before, we desperately needed a WR going into last years draft. And that seems to be often overlooked on here. Instead, we just want to say, "why didn't he draft OL". Last year we had an interior of Boone, Berger and Harris going into the draft. That's a good interior. We had next to nothing at WR. No less none of those 3 OL were labeled injury prone. Whitehair wasn't going to play tackle. So there wasn't much of a need for him. There was a huge need at WR. It's so easy to sit back and say he should've done this and that. But at the time, our WRs were not good at all. I still to this day, agree with the move we made. I think Treadwell can be a good WR. He just needs the chance. Either way, this is far from a rebuilding year. Like I said, it's became one of the most overused/out of context words on here. And what we are doing is nowhere near rebuilding. It's quite frustrating knowing that some fans actually think that's what they're doing. Left scratching my head

_________________
Image


Tue Apr 11, 2017 10:02 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.   [ 215 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: halfgiz and 4 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.