Let's play "Manage the Cap — 2021"

[StanM]

I share concerns over Hunters neck injury as someone who got a two level fusion. He can lead a normal average Joe kind of life post fusion but I’m not so sure about defensive line play. I’ll be watching that situation closely.

As far as offensive line it’s hard to really know how good our good players really are. They’re so overwhelmed trying to compensate for the weakest links that effects everyone’s game. It’s hard to know what we really have when every pass play ends up being a cluster #%*&. Then there is the issue of our QB not having the quickest release.

[StumpHunter]

They don't get passes but all of those positions have turned over during Spielman's tenure. We've had a decade of poor OL play and there's only one common denominator. But his ability to find coaches that can, well coach, may also been an issue aside from his poor scouting but that's hardly a feather in his cap.

Huh? A HUGE common denominator - for 6 years - is Zimmer.

And where did the notion that our GM picks all of our coaches come from? I've seen it in several threads now. I don't know of a GM in the NFL (other than HC/GM combo guys) that picks assistant coaches.

When it comes to head coaches, yes Rick was involved as a peer (two years into GM role) in the process when Zim was hired, but the Wilf brothers absolutely were hip-deep in the process, the candidates, the interviews and the final decision. Anyone who states/implies that Rick, with two GM years under his belt, "hired Zimmer" and then "notified the Wilfs" is misremembering at best.

According to our org chart, both Zim and Rick are peers that report directly to Mark Wilf. All assistant coaches report to Zim. Yes, Rick and Zim seem to be tied at the hip at this point. But to even point in Rick's general direction as the source of our coaching failures the last 8 years is, well, not correct.

It's just insane to me that the mention of our GM as our "OL problem source" is 10,000 times higher on this board than mentions of our pathetic OL coaches the past 8 years. Rick needs to eat his share of the blame, sure. But jeez.

Who are the Olinemen that have gone on to great success after leaving the Vikings? If it was just coaching, the league should be littered with former Viking starting olinemen who improved after leaving the Vikings.

[chicagopurple]

yep, Viking cast offs dont become stars....now, some good players jump ship and leave this organization and go on to good careers...certainly we have seen that with receivers lately, but OL? nope,,,we draft garbage.

[psjordan]

If it was just coaching, the league should be littered with former Viking starting olinemen who improved after leaving the Vikings.

Who said it was just coaching? Look, the concept is very simple. The guys who DIRECTLY affect our OL players are our GM and our coaches. But according to the mantra on this board it's zero percent on the coaches.

Posters complain all day and all night about the GM not drafting good OL. Posters literally never put ANY blame on our OL coaches. Seriously?

And if one of our ex-OL is out there as a backup somewhere, how do you know he hasn't improved since he's been here? Going from getting tossed around like a rag doll and getting cut to even making another roster shows improvement.

And how many of (coached by Zimmers staff) QB's, K's, LB's, DL, etc. have gone on to great careers elsewhere? Latest example Griffin. Sure we've released players and they do well in spurts elsewhere, Alexander had a nice game the other night, but on the whole it's not like our OL is the only group we've cut that are not doing well elsewhere.

Is it just beyond the realm of possibility to imagine our OL coaches are not developing (and in some cases ruining) players? The players certainly seem to be average or suck when they are with us, and they seem to stagnate or get worse over time. What team in their right mind wants to hire that, and then have to turn them into a reclamation project?

I'd ask your question the other way around - how many FA/drafted OL have our coaching staff made better?

[VikingLord]

I really don't see what's unfair. Can you name me a season in the last decade that we had a competent line? If a GM can't produce a competent line in 10-years, I'd say he's fairly incompetent at it.

I can't name a season because my memory isn't that great, but we'll have to define what "competent" means.

Over the last 10 years the Vikings have had some decent OL's. Decent enough to get them division championships in 2015 and again in 2017 and decent enough to make them a playoff team in 2012, 2105, 2017 and 2019.

Now, whether that raises them to the level of "competent" or not, I think for purposes of criticizing Spielman the burden for someone claiming Spielman doesn't know what he's doing falls on the person making that criticism. Going further, you really have to put the criticism in the context of what other GMs have managed over that time period, both in terms of the offensive lines they've put on the field and the success the overall team has had.

Since I'm not the one being critical of Spielman, I'm not going to do that. I admit you could be right and your point could be valid. But the smell test suggests it isn't. If Spielman has been a poor judge of OL talent and put together poor lines consistently, I'd guess on average the offense over the last ten years would have performed relatively poorly when compared to most teams. Some Spielman lines were probably worse than others, and there might have been a year or even two years over the last ten where the Vikings OL was demonstrably bad compared to the rest of the NFL (the start of this year possibly being one of those), but I just don't think Spielman has done that poor of a job.

[S197]

What org chart are you referencing? The whole point of elevating Spielman from director of personnel to GM was to get rid of the “triangle of authority.” And obviously he needs to consult with the owners but Zimmer was his hire.

Spielman has been part of personnel decisions in one capacity or another for 14 years. And over that tenure he has struggled with fielding a decent OL. Other than the Wilfs, no one else has been around that long. He is clearly the primary issue. I never said coaches aren’t responsible, quite the opposite in fact, but the problem starts at the top.

[VikingLord]

He drafted O'Neill, Bradbury and Cleveland and found Reiff in FA.

That is 4/5ths of a below average Oline. Hardly a ringing endorsement for Rick's ability to find Oline talent.

How do you define "below average Oline"?

The Vikings offense this year is ranked #5 overall in yards per game, 18th in passing yards per game, and 5th in rushing yards per game, with team in front of them (barely) being the Kyler Murray-running-QB Arizona Cardinals.

Now that doesn't mean the Vikings OL this year is great by any stretch, but I think it must be closer to average than below average even if you think Cook improves the run stats. Even Cook needs some blocking to get the yardage he's gotten.

I'm not saying Spielman has done a bang-up job with the offensive line to this point, but I don't think he's done such a poor job as to merit the criticism he's getting in this thread. Also, O'Neill, Bradbury and Cleveland are still young players. All are likely to continue to improve. Reiff is the only current OL player who is at or just past his peak, and I don't think he's played all that poorly. You sound like you've already determined that O'Neill, Bradbury and Cleveland won't continue to improve. Any of them, or hopefully all three, could become very consistent and good players at their positions over the next few years.

[S197]

I really don't see what's unfair. Can you name me a season in the last decade that we had a competent line? If a GM can't produce a competent line in 10-years, I'd say he's fairly incompetent at it.

I can't name a season because my memory isn't that great, but we'll have to define what "competent" means.

Over the last 10 years the Vikings have had some decent OL's. Decent enough to get them division championships in 2015 and again in 2017 and decent enough to make them a playoff team in 2012, 2105, 2017 and 2019.

Now, whether that raises them to the level of "competent" or not, I think for purposes of criticizing Spielman the burden for someone claiming Spielman doesn't know what he's doing falls on the person making that criticism. Going further, you really have to put the criticism in the context of what other GMs have managed over that time period, both in terms of the offensive lines they've put on the field and the success the overall team has had.

Since I'm not the one being critical of Spielman, I'm not going to do that. I admit you could be right and your point could be valid. But the smell test suggests it isn't. If Spielman has been a poor judge of OL talent and put together poor lines consistently, I'd guess on average the offense over the last ten years would have performed relatively poorly when compared to most teams. Some Spielman lines were probably worse than others, and there might have been a year or even two years over the last ten where the Vikings OL was demonstrably bad compared to the rest of the NFL (the start of this year possibly being one of those), but I just don't think Spielman has done that poor of a job.

I don't really know what to do with this. You admit your memory is bad, put the onus on me, and then come to your conclusion based on... the poor memory you admit to?

I don't have the time to dissect every year and every team but I'll provide you with a chart that I think helps make the point I'm trying to get across.



You see the dotted line and all the teams it encircles in the lower right? What do all those teams have in common? They're playoff teams. I don't think that's a coincidence. And it shows that in this league, pass protection is more important than run blocking. This is all the more prevalent as the NFL skews towards rules that favor the offense. Now, if you look closer you're going to see some outliers. The Bills, Ravens, and Seahawks are all outside the green bubble. Well, they're playoff teams! How do you explain that? They all have mobile quarterbacks.

Now lets take a look at our team. We have a pocket passer that is basically pressured heavily and an OL that skews towards run blocking over pass protection. This is dysfunctional. We want to run the ball, yet we're paying $45M to a guy who's major knock is he holds onto the ball too long. And this is where history comes into play because we know the Vikings identity and that identity for a very long time has been to run the football. You don't pay a guy a huge sum of money to hand the ball off and take hits behind a line that can't protect. You either 1) get a QB that can extend plays with his legs (like Wilson or Jackson) or you find an OL that can keep your pocket passer upright. When you don't do either of those things, most of the time you end up outside the bubble (aka playoffs). And the Vikings have never had a decent pass blocking line under Spielman.

But you're right, we did make the playoffs a number of times so how did that happen? Well, I think a big part of it is we had a Hall of Fame RB. If you'll recall, Peterson lead the league for many years in the amount he was hit behind the LOS. Not exactly a great endorsement for the OL but when you have a player as good as AD, you can cover up a lot of those shortcomings. It's a similar situation with Cook who is easily a top-3 back in the NFL. Then you add on guys like Diggs, Thielen, Jefferson, Rudolph, etc... there's no denying the Vikings have talent at skill positions but that doesn't mean the O-line is good. I mean, think about when the Vikings went away from the run. When they brought in JDF and Kirk threw the ball 40 times a game. How did that end? Awful. Why? Because the OL can't protect.

I've said it many times before but I guess I need to repeat myself. The Vikings are NOT a bad team. They're inconsistent but they have talent at spots that leads to years where they do better and years where they do not. But what should be abundantly clear is that you can only make it so far without winning in the trenches. They're not winning because of the OL, they're winning in spite of the OL.

[StumpHunter]

If it was just coaching, the league should be littered with former Viking starting olinemen who improved after leaving the Vikings.

Who said it was just coaching? Look, the concept is very simple. The guys who DIRECTLY affect our OL players are our GM and our coaches. But according to the mantra on this board it's zero percent on the coaches.

Posters complain all day and all night about the GM not drafting good OL. Posters literally never put ANY blame on our OL coaches. Seriously?

And if one of our ex-OL is out there as a backup somewhere, how do you know he hasn't improved since he's been here? Going from getting tossed around like a rag doll and getting cut to even making another roster shows improvement.

And how many of (coached by Zimmers staff) QB's, K's, LB's, DL, etc. have gone on to great careers elsewhere? Latest example Griffin. Sure we've released players and they do well in spurts elsewhere, Alexander had a nice game the other night, but on the whole it's not like our OL is the only group we've cut that are not doing well elsewhere.

Is it just beyond the realm of possibility to imagine our OL coaches are not developing (and in some cases ruining) players? The players certainly seem to be average or suck when they are with us, and they seem to stagnate or get worse over time. What team in their right mind wants to hire that, and then have to turn them into a reclamation project?

I'd ask your question the other way around - how many FA/drafted OL have our coaching staff made better?

You make a good point honestly, and I don't think Rick's coaching staffs have done a great job of coaching up Oline with a few exceptions. 2017 we saw a little of the coaching staff coaching up the talent on the line when Zimmer went out and found his guy to coach the Oline. Then we regressed when he died and now we are left with a Kubiak sycophant who doesn't know the first thing about coaching up Oline talent.

Dennison knows how to coach scheme, but we have scene O'Neill regress under Dennison, 0 improvement from anyone who has played guard from him, and the center looks like a huge reach in the 1st playing under Dennison.

He would be the first coach I would fire this offseason, but even if they brought in a great Oline coach, there is only so much coaching can do to hide lack of talent.

[StumpHunter]

That is 4/5ths of a below average Oline. Hardly a ringing endorsement for Rick's ability to find Oline talent.

How do you define "below average Oline"?

The Vikings offense this year is ranked #5 overall in yards per game, 18th in passing yards per game, and 5th in rushing yards per game, with team in front of them (barely) being the Kyler Murray-running-QB Arizona Cardinals.

Now that doesn't mean the Vikings OL this year is great by any stretch, but I think it must be closer to average than below average even if you think Cook improves the run stats. Even Cook needs some blocking to get the yardage he's gotten.

I'm not saying Spielman has done a bang-up job with the offensive line to this point, but I don't think he's done such a poor job as to merit the criticism he's getting in this thread. Also, O'Neill, Bradbury and Cleveland are still young players. All are likely to continue to improve. Reiff is the only current OL player who is at or just past his peak, and I don't think he's played all that poorly. You sound like you've already determined that O'Neill, Bradbury and Cleveland won't continue to improve. Any of them, or hopefully all three, could become very consistent and good players at their positions over the next few years.

I define below average as in struggles against the good defensive lines in pass blocking, and needs a guy having a career year to look good run blocking. I think they run the zone blocking scheme well for Cook for the most part, but if Mattison or Boone were running behind it all year this team wouldn't be top 5 in running the football, and likely aren't even in the top half of the league.

They aren't a BAD oline, but they are certainly a weakness on the offense and below average. A group of underwhelming fat guys that get the job done less often they they succeed. That is this Oline.

[VikingLord]

I don't really know what to do with this. You admit your memory is bad, put the onus on me, and then come to your conclusion based on... the poor memory you admit to?

I was being facetious.

- Neither you nor I can accurately remember the Vikings having a particularly good or bad offensive line over the last 10 years beyond just saying we believe it
- You are the one claiming Spielman sucks at finding offensive line talent and has produced year after year of bad lines as a result. I think the burden falls on you to prove it if you want to convince others you're right

You see the dotted line and all the teams it encircles in the lower right? What do all those teams have in common? They're playoff teams. I don't think that's a coincidence. And it shows that in this league, pass protection is more important than run blocking. This is all the more prevalent as the NFL skews towards rules that favor the offense. Now, if you look closer you're going to see some outliers. The Bills, Ravens, and Seahawks are all outside the green bubble. Well, they're playoff teams! How do you explain that? They all have mobile quarterbacks.

Rodgers moves well in the pocket too. Is this great pass blocking offensive line really the requirement, or just having an experienced vet at QB who can avoid pressure and get rid of the ball in time?

It's just not as simple as you're making it out to be. A lot of passing success comes about because of the play of the QB. A lot of passing success comes from having a credible run threat to force defenses into staying honest. A lot of passing success comes from effective execution on 1st and 2nd downs. A lot of passing success comes from having reliable receivers and creative play calling.

You want to boil it down to the offensive line. You're entitled to do that, but that doesn't convince me.

Now lets take a look at our team. We have a pocket passer that is basically pressured heavily and an OL that skews towards run blocking over pass protection. This is dysfunctional. We want to run the ball, yet we're paying $45M to a guy who's major knock is he holds onto the ball too long. And this is where history comes into play because we know the Vikings identity and that identity for a very long time has been to run the football. You don't pay a guy a huge sum of money to hand the ball off and take hits behind a line that can't protect. You either 1) get a QB that can extend plays with his legs (like Wilson or Jackson) or you find an OL that can keep your pocket passer upright. When you don't do either of those things, most of the time you end up outside the bubble (aka playoffs). And the Vikings have never had a decent pass blocking line under Spielman.

You're not really claiming the OL is all that bad. With a better QB, the Vikings OL is fine? Is that a fair summary of what you just wrote?

... there's no denying the Vikings have talent at skill positions but that doesn't mean the O-line is good.

OK, but you seem to be claiming Spielman's offensive lines have been consistently bad over the last 10 years. Are you saying that Spielman was able to acquire the talent at those offensive skill positions to overcome that?

If you are saying that, at least give him credit for it.

But what should be abundantly clear is that you can only make it so far without winning in the trenches. They're not winning because of the OL, they're winning in spite of the OL.

I think it's a little more nuanced than that. I mean, I agree with the basic premise of what you're saying. I just don't agree that the Vikings have had such issues and consistent failures with their OL over the last 10 years that that explains their failure to get to, much less win, a Superbowl. The OL has not been that much of a liability, at least not consistently.

The interior OL to start this season was for about the first 4 games. But there were other major issues with the team as well during that phase (defensive secondary comes to mind), and over the last 4-5 games special teams has been an equally large issue.

[VikingLord]

I define below average as in struggles against the good defensive lines in pass blocking, and needs a guy having a career year to look good run blocking. I think they run the zone blocking scheme well for Cook for the most part, but if Mattison or Boone were running behind it all year this team wouldn't be top 5 in running the football, and likely aren't even in the top half of the league.

They aren't a BAD oline, but they are certainly a weakness on the offense and below average. A group of underwhelming fat guys that get the job done less often they they succeed. That is this Oline.

So, what offensive lines in the league this year would be able to make Mattison or Boone top 5 in your opinion? Does that OL exist?

You're *certain* they're below average?

That still seems like an opinion more than a fact.

And the comment about them being "fat guys that get the job done less often than they succeed"? You look at O'Neill, Cleveland, Bradbury, and Reiff and the word that comes to mind to describe them is "fat"?

Dozier, maybe, but I don't think any of the others could be characterized as fat.

[psjordan]

What org chart are you referencing? The whole point of elevating Spielman from director of personnel to GM was to get rid of the “triangle of authority.” And obviously he needs to consult with the owners but Zimmer was his hire.

Spielman has been part of personnel decisions in one capacity or another for 14 years. And over that tenure he has struggled with fielding a decent OL. Other than the Wilfs, no one else has been around that long. He is clearly the primary issue. I never said coaches aren’t responsible, quite the opposite in fact, but the problem starts at the top.

This one among others https://theorg.com/org/minnesota-vikings/org-chart
You can't see who reports to each without more digging or paying, but Rick had 10 direct reports (at the time of the chart) and Zim has 21. If you click on a name and then the ellipsis, it shows who they report to and a few direct reports. You can pretty much fill out the direct reports via the Vikes web site. They both have Mark Wilf listed as their manager.

If you go back and read the articles at the time of Zimmers hire, it's crystal clear the Wilfs hired Zim (Rick was only a GM for two years at the time, but of course he led the search, made recommendations and almost surely endorsed Zim). Zim then hired his own staff.

What HC in the NFL would put up with the GM picking his staff?

Yeah, Rick went from personnel to GM to get rid of three guys being forced to share every decision. It did not work then and no one else in the NFL has ever done it to my knowledge. Rick going to GM got pro personnel, scouting, draft and analytics. I believe Rick now has 14 or so direct reports.

Zim has 21 coaches on HIS staff.

Mark Wilf extended Zim and Spielman. Zim's agent negotiated his extension with the COO, Andrew Miller, who also reports to Mark Wilf.

Again we can agree to disagree on the impact a coach has on a player. Many, many drafted players make it or break it based on their coaches. Some fly right to the top no matter who the coach is.

If it continues to be our philosophy to not draft OL early, then we need a coaching staff at the position that's worth more than a pile of beans. And I highly, highly doubt Rick is telling Zim "I'll draft the positions I want to draft in the order I want to draft them". So not picking OL early is CLEARLY ok with Zimmer.

Then again, maybe not anymore. I really don't see how everyone involved in this season stays on board. There HAS to be a change or three, I'd imagine.

[psjordan]

I don't think Rick's coaching staffs have done a great job of coaching up Oline with a few exceptions.

Now you're just toying with me, yes? What source are you using to determine these are "Rick's coaching staffs"? Or was that a typo and you meant Zim?

[StumpHunter]

I don't think Rick's coaching staffs have done a great job of coaching up Oline with a few exceptions.

Now you're just toying with me, yes? What source are you using to determine these are "Rick's coaching staffs"? Or was that a typo and you meant Zim?

I referred to them as that because there have been multiple regimes under Rick.

Rick does get a say in everyone who is hired though.