Vikings Message Board.Com

fiestavike wrote:

TSonn wrote:If we're able to get Cousins, Richardson, and Siemian that would be a fantastic free agency. Plus we can mainly focus on OL and developmental guys in the draft. Also, if the Siemian reports are correct, we essentially traded Keenum, Bradford, Bridgewater, and a 5th rounder for Cousins, Siemian, a 3rd rounder, 4th rounder, and a 7th rounder. That's amazing.

Question: Does the fact that the vikings traded for Siemian mean that his addition won't be factored in to compensatory picks? In other words, did trading a 5th for him (instead of signing, say, Osweiler) protect whatever compensatory picks the vikings might get from losing Teddy or McKinnon? In other words, is it possible that the Vikings essentially got Siemian and a 7th rounder for nothing?

Hmm - not sure how all that works. But for the sake of talking about it on a message board I guess we could say we "traded" Keenum, Bradford, and Bridgewater for Cousins, Siemian, a 3rd rounder, and a 7th rounder.

mansquatch wrote: FWIW, I think GB is in decline. They've added no real talent, have only one legitimate WR, and their defense continues to decline. It's all about Rogers and thats it, but he has come down to earth a bit from 5 years ago. They could be a 3rd place team in this division next year if Bears or Lions become more of a threat.

Agreed 100%. I get SO sick of listening to these analysts saying "GB this and GB that" and "Well they have Rodgers back so they are the favorites in the north". NO they are not. I dont care who their QB is. You need a defense to get anywhere in this league. THe packers prove that to be true. You have the best QB in the game and you cant go all the way. Matter of fact you've had this QB for how long and havent even been back to the SB in ~9 years. But every year they are "SB favorites. Give me a break. They draft AWFUL. Did getting Jimmy Graham help? Sure. But Wilkerson is an underwhelming signing IMO. He's dirt lazy and plays when he wants. But that idiot DT for the packers, Mike Daniels (who I cant stand) is going around saying they have one of the best DLs in the league Yaaaa. Not even close. You have a good DT and one that plays when he wants. No less their DBs are atrocious. They truly have a bad team without Rodgers. Just like Washington did without Cousins. They are on the decline. No doubt

Pondering Her Percy wrote:

mansquatch wrote: FWIW, I think GB is in decline. They've added no real talent, have only one legitimate WR, and their defense continues to decline. It's all about Rogers and thats it, but he has come down to earth a bit from 5 years ago. They could be a 3rd place team in this division next year if Bears or Lions become more of a threat.

Did getting Jimmy Graham help? Sure.

I'm not so sure about that. Of course Rodgers is great so he'll most likely get Graham involved, but they'll need to do a fairly severe offensive revamp to get the TE position more involved in the offensive scheme for that signing to be significant. The TE in their scheme is typically a 3rd or 4th read. Graham has only been successful when he's the 1st or 2nd read. Plus he's awful at blocking.

Pondering Her Percy wrote:

mansquatch wrote: FWIW, I think GB is in decline. They've added no real talent, have only one legitimate WR, and their defense continues to decline. It's all about Rogers and thats it, but he has come down to earth a bit from 5 years ago. They could be a 3rd place team in this division next year if Bears or Lions become more of a threat.

Agreed 100%. I get SO sick of listening to these analysts saying "GB this and GB that" and "Well they have Rodgers back so they are the favorites in the north". NO they are not. I dont care who their QB is. You need a defense to get anywhere in this league. THe packers prove that to be true. You have the best QB in the game and you cant go all the way. Matter of fact you've had this QB for how long and havent even been back to the SB in ~9 years. But every year they are "SB favorites. Give me a break. They draft AWFUL. Did getting Jimmy Graham help? Sure. But Wilkerson is an underwhelming signing IMO. He's dirt lazy and plays when he wants. But that idiot DT for the packers, Mike Daniels (who I cant stand) is going around saying they have one of the best DLs in the league Yaaaa. Not even close. You have a good DT and one that plays when he wants. No less their DBs are atrocious. They truly have a bad team without Rodgers. Just like Washington did without Cousins. They are on the decline. No doubt

McCarthy and Thompson have been failures in my opinion. Even with a poor supporting cast, the Packers HAVE been contenders year after year, and they'll always be a tough beat with Rodgers out there at QB, but its hard to believe they haven't had more success with such elite QB play.

I'm really hoping Suh doesn't go to the Saints.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: Like I said before, I'd much rather draft quality OL then to spend more money there. Even if we dont land a DT or OL in FA, I still feel confident come draft time. It would just be nice to know one is already taken care of if we do it now.

If Berger retires, who do you think the Vikings could add at G in FA for a relatively discount contract. what do you think of Ryan Jensen? I feel like his nasty attitude could make him a fit with Sparano. Are there any other veteran Guards you could see being a fit?

If Berger retires, then OG is the team's biggest need. I hope they can get Richardson at DT, that would be huge. I wonder if the Vikes are thinking Rashod Hill / Mike Remmers is sounds at Tackle/Guard (respectively.). Not sure if I'm a fan of that, but too early to say that is their plan.

mansquatch wrote:If Berger retires, then OG is the team's biggest need. I hope they can get Richardson at DT, that would be huge. I wonder if the Vikes are thinking Rashod Hill / Mike Remmers is sounds at Tackle/Guard (respectively.). Not sure if I'm a fan of that, but too early to say that is their plan.

Trade up for Quinton Nelson. I'm serious. Offensive line getting Kirk killed is the only thing that could derail the season. Nelson will be the next Steve Hutchinson. That is worth giving up an entire draft of Alexander and Kearse type players. Have to protect our 84 million dollar investment.

Maelstrom88 wrote:

mansquatch wrote:If Berger retires, then OG is the team's biggest need. I hope they can get Richardson at DT, that would be huge. I wonder if the Vikes are thinking Rashod Hill / Mike Remmers is sounds at Tackle/Guard (respectively.). Not sure if I'm a fan of that, but too early to say that is their plan.

Trade up for Quinton Nelson. I'm serious. Offensive line is getting Kirk killed is the only thing that could derail the season.

You could trade up, but There are 5 or 6 guys who could be worthy of 1st-2nd round selection at G/C this year. I'm a big fan of addressing positions of real weakness via FA and not being forced to draft for a particular position anyway though.

Anybody have a take on Josh Andrews? Is he a longshot or did the Vikings get a steal with this guy. He fits my theory that given the spread college offense and the practice restrictions in the NFL, guys who have 3-4 years of development on other teams are prime breakout candidates. Guys like Easton/Hill/Remmers might be examples of this currently on the team. Jansen seemsd to break out for the Ravens last year. I hope the Vikings keep prioritizing bringing in this kind of player.

Per Pelissero, Sheldon Richardson is in Minnesota.

fiestavike wrote:Per Pelissero, Sheldon Richardson is in Minnesota.

Mike Garafolo reporting on NFL Network Seattle has offered Sheldon Richardson $11 million a year and that he wants $15 million.

For that price? Hell no

fiestavike wrote:

Pondering Her Percy wrote:

mansquatch wrote: FWIW, I think GB is in decline. They've added no real talent, have only one legitimate WR, and their defense continues to decline. It's all about Rogers and thats it, but he has come down to earth a bit from 5 years ago. They could be a 3rd place team in this division next year if Bears or Lions become more of a threat.

Agreed 100%. I get SO sick of listening to these analysts saying "GB this and GB that" and "Well they have Rodgers back so they are the favorites in the north". NO they are not. I dont care who their QB is. You need a defense to get anywhere in this league. THe packers prove that to be true. You have the best QB in the game and you cant go all the way. Matter of fact you've had this QB for how long and havent even been back to the SB in ~9 years. But every year they are "SB favorites. Give me a break. They draft AWFUL. Did getting Jimmy Graham help? Sure. But Wilkerson is an underwhelming signing IMO. He's dirt lazy and plays when he wants. But that idiot DT for the packers, Mike Daniels (who I cant stand) is going around saying they have one of the best DLs in the league Yaaaa. Not even close. You have a good DT and one that plays when he wants. No less their DBs are atrocious. They truly have a bad team without Rodgers. Just like Washington did without Cousins. They are on the decline. No doubt

McCarthy and Thompson have been failures in my opinion. Even with a poor supporting cast, the Packers HAVE been contenders year after year, and they'll always be a tough beat with Rodgers out there at QB, but its hard to believe they haven't had more success with such elite QB play.

Its because of how bad their defense is I would say. That's why when fans bring up records of QBs it means nothing to me. The best QB in the game should be winning more than 1 SB right? Look at Peyton in his prime. He didnt get his second until he was nearing his death bed. Indy had A LOT of bad defenses. GB has had A LOT of bad defenses. Even the best in the biz cant carry their teams to winning a SB when their surrounding cast and/or defense is that bad. At least those two QBs had a lot of offensive weapons. Cousins had very little compared to them. And still pulled of .500 records a season

Maelstrom88 wrote:

fiestavike wrote:Per Pelissero, Sheldon Richardson is in Minnesota.

Mike Garafolo reporting on NFL Network Seattle has offered Sheldon Richardson $11 million a year and that he wants $15 million.

For that price? Hell no

Maybe if they can do a 1 year deal. I don't want his contract to get in the way of keeping our own players.

What about Mike Pouncey? Could he play guard or would Elflein move to guard?

Maelstrom88 wrote:What about Mike Pouncey? Could he play guard or would Elflein move to guard?

I thought about that but he's been injured a ton lately and his play has dipped. Could be a good flier but thats it.