Spielman's performance

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

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
S197
Fenrir
Posts: 12469
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Hawaii
x 551

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by S197 » Wed Dec 30, 2020 4:57 pm

psjordan wrote:
Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:39 pm
Mothman wrote:
Wed Dec 30, 2020 2:35 pm
I think that makes it worse. He wasn't prepared to lose his starter to injury for any significant length of time (an indictment in itself) so when it happened, he panic-traded for Bradford.
I just don't see this as the monumental indictment that you and a few others do, for Rick or any other GM. Not many teams in the NFL have a "win ready" backup QB, no matter the team's composition.

I guess you could make the point that Vikes team was at the stage of this year's Broncos team (who simply shrugged when every single QB on the roster went out), and Rick thought we were a lot closer to competing in the playoffs. But again, I don't see that as a monstrous offense against the GM profession. He took a swing and felt great about it for roughly a week.

No matter, we always come back to the job needs doing, and this combo ain't doing it.
A common argument but I've already given examples of the Patriots, Steelers and Packers who are all much more successful franchises than the Vikings with better starting QBs yet they have all put more consideration into the backup QB position than our GM.

Two more examples that hit closer to home would be Nick Foles with the Eagles and our very own Kirk Cousins in Washington.
2 x

psjordan
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1662
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 8:01 am
x 64

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by psjordan » Wed Dec 30, 2020 6:41 pm

S197 wrote:
Wed Dec 30, 2020 4:57 pm
A common argument but I've already given examples of the Patriots, Steelers and Packers who are all much more successful franchises than the Vikings with better starting QBs yet they have all put more consideration into the backup QB position than our GM.

Two more examples that hit closer to home would be Nick Foles with the Eagles and our very own Kirk Cousins in Washington.
Again, a common dig with common examples, and strangely one team struggling to find a QB and two examples that are not exactly touted as top QB's at the moment.

But all these threads are talking in terms of "Rick simply HAS to be fired" offenses. You put this as a main/top reason on the list. Has he been great at managing the QB position? Clearly not to the point we have our franchise guy. Should it be grounds for firing? The NFL as a whole doesn't treat GM's that way.

Sometimes it takes teams a LONG time to find a "SB QB" - it took KC literally 50 years between Len Dawson and Mahomes.

And before we go down the "you won't get one if you don't try" path, it's a lot easier to whiff on a first round flyer like Love if Rodgers is your starter. It's been 15 years since GB "hit" on a QB in the draft. You can't afford to keep whiffing if Matt Flynn, Scott Tolzien, Seneca Wallace, Brian Brohm, B.J. Coleman, Ingle Martin and Brett Hundley are your quarterbacks (all the QB's drafted by GB after drafting Rodgers).

So I don't see that as a top reason to fire a GM, and if the NFL saw it that way there would be 15-20 GM openings every year. Not to say there are not other things on the "Rick should be fired" list.

I'm OK with change but I'm not grabbing the pitchforks to meet up in Rick's front yard because of our QB situation.
1 x

User avatar
S197
Fenrir
Posts: 12469
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Hawaii
x 551

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by S197 » Wed Dec 30, 2020 7:30 pm

psjordan wrote:
Wed Dec 30, 2020 6:41 pm
S197 wrote:
Wed Dec 30, 2020 4:57 pm
A common argument but I've already given examples of the Patriots, Steelers and Packers who are all much more successful franchises than the Vikings with better starting QBs yet they have all put more consideration into the backup QB position than our GM.

Two more examples that hit closer to home would be Nick Foles with the Eagles and our very own Kirk Cousins in Washington.
Again, a common dig with common examples, and strangely one team struggling to find a QB and two examples that are not exactly touted as top QB's at the moment.

But all these threads are talking in terms of "Rick simply HAS to be fired" offenses. You put this as a main/top reason on the list. Has he been great at managing the QB position? Clearly not to the point we have our franchise guy. Should it be grounds for firing? The NFL as a whole doesn't treat GM's that way.

Sometimes it takes teams a LONG time to find a "SB QB" - it took KC literally 50 years between Len Dawson and Mahomes.

And before we go down the "you won't get one if you don't try" path, it's a lot easier to whiff on a first round flyer like Love if Rodgers is your starter. It's been 15 years since GB "hit" on a QB in the draft. You can't afford to keep whiffing if Matt Flynn, Scott Tolzien, Seneca Wallace, Brian Brohm, B.J. Coleman, Ingle Martin and Brett Hundley are your quarterbacks (all the QB's drafted by GB after drafting Rodgers).

So I don't see that as a top reason to fire a GM, and if the NFL saw it that way there would be 15-20 GM openings every year. Not to say there are not other things on the "Rick should be fired" list.

I'm OK with change but I'm not grabbing the pitchforks to meet up in Rick's front yard because of our QB situation.
Common examples? New England did it when Brady was still in his prime. As did Pittsburgh. People laughed at how stupid the Packers draft was, and now they're the top seed in the NFC.

Foles destroyed the Vikings in the NFCC and we're going to pay $45M to a guy who was drafted as a backup to RG3.

Those are prime examples. And the goal posts keep moving all over the place. First I was told no one drafts a QB when they have their franchise guy. I shot that down pretty easily with the first 3 examples so now it's only teams with franchise QBs have the luxury of taking chances?

And if that's the case, if Cousins is the guy then who have we taken a chance on in the last 3 years? Stanley? You'll be able to add on year 4 when Rick passes on every QB for at least the first 5 rounds I can guarantee you that. Plenty of picks to waste on a LB converted to FB or a feel good story of a Vikings fan playing in Germany. But even taking a chance on the most important position on the field? Nope can't do that!

You mean to tell me that over the last 10 years Rick hasn't seen a single prospect worth higher than a 7th round pick at QB? Ponder was picked because Rick failed to see a 41 year old QB was about to retire. Bridgewater was picked because his panic pick Ponder didn't work out. Other than that? Nothing.

And of course the culmination of his ten year run was the epically stupid extension given to Cousins that will cripple this team for years. So yeah, hand me the pitchfork.
5 x

CharVike
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1241
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:28 pm
x 219

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by CharVike » Wed Dec 30, 2020 7:36 pm

S197 wrote:
Wed Dec 30, 2020 4:57 pm
psjordan wrote:
Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:39 pm


I just don't see this as the monumental indictment that you and a few others do, for Rick or any other GM. Not many teams in the NFL have a "win ready" backup QB, no matter the team's composition.

I guess you could make the point that Vikes team was at the stage of this year's Broncos team (who simply shrugged when every single QB on the roster went out), and Rick thought we were a lot closer to competing in the playoffs. But again, I don't see that as a monstrous offense against the GM profession. He took a swing and felt great about it for roughly a week.

No matter, we always come back to the job needs doing, and this combo ain't doing it.
A common argument but I've already given examples of the Patriots, Steelers and Packers who are all much more successful franchises than the Vikings with better starting QBs yet they have all put more consideration into the backup QB position than our GM.

Two more examples that hit closer to home would be Nick Foles with the Eagles and our very own Kirk Cousins in Washington.
The Patriots put consideration into the backup QB position. This year they opened the backup QB drawer and it was empty. They put zero consideration into the backup. So they sign Newton in June. Why waste time with that. Speilman lost his starter in 2017 and opened the backup QB drawer and yanked out a guy that lead his team to the NFC champ game. But Speilman never thinks about the backup. At least he knew Case wasn't a decent starter. Elway gave Case a dam good contract for a backup. Elway had no backup to take over either. The Eagles picked Wentz with the 2nd overall draft pick. Whoever there GM is has no idea about QBs and should be canned. Wasted the 2nd pick in the draft. Now they have Hurts starting. Who? Jeff Goff 1st overall pick. 90 rating this year and 86 last year. Not the best pick in the world. Maybe we should get that GM.
1 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38250
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 368

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by Mothman » Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:03 pm

psjordan wrote:
Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:39 pm
I just don't see this as the monumental indictment that you and a few others do, for Rick or any other GM. Not many teams in the NFL have a "win ready" backup QB, no matter the team's composition
We can debate what "win ready" means but there should at least be a backup they're willing to play for more than one game if the starter goes down.
I guess you could make the point that Vikes team was at the stage of this year's Broncos team (who simply shrugged when every single QB on the roster went out), and Rick thought we were a lot closer to competing in the playoffs. But again, I don't see that as a monstrous offense against the GM profession. He took a swing and felt great about it for roughly a week
I wouldn't call it a "monstrous offense against the GM profession" but it's a fine example of Spielman's poor management of resources, lack of preparedness and a costly knee-jerk reaction. He took a swing but it was a reckless swing.
2 x

User avatar
Passepartout
Rookie
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2019 3:33 pm
x 5

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by Passepartout » Thu Dec 31, 2020 1:04 am

Just hope that Spielman in the 2021 draft will live and learn. And in the knowing that it is about winning and in the making sure you have players that are clutch down the line. But really the guy is on his last leg if he does not produce. Win big or go home. Or lose job in his case possibly
0 x
Ready for 2021!

StumpHunter
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2237
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
x 360

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by StumpHunter » Thu Dec 31, 2020 10:17 am

Mothman wrote:
Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:03 pm
psjordan wrote:
Wed Dec 30, 2020 3:39 pm
I just don't see this as the monumental indictment that you and a few others do, for Rick or any other GM. Not many teams in the NFL have a "win ready" backup QB, no matter the team's composition
We can debate what "win ready" means but there should at least be a backup they're willing to play for more than one game if the starter goes down.
I guess you could make the point that Vikes team was at the stage of this year's Broncos team (who simply shrugged when every single QB on the roster went out), and Rick thought we were a lot closer to competing in the playoffs. But again, I don't see that as a monstrous offense against the GM profession. He took a swing and felt great about it for roughly a week
I wouldn't call it a "monstrous offense against the GM profession" but it's a fine example of Spielman's poor management of resources, lack of preparedness and a costly knee-jerk reaction. He took a swing but it was a reckless swing.
Most teams do not have a backup QB who can step in and save a season.

That wasn't Spielman's problem in 2016. His problem was not recognizing that the Eagles didn't have a backup QB capable of saving his season either. That QB just isn't available a week before the season starts, something every other GM who has been put in a similar spot has recognized.

A 1st round pick for the worst statistical full time starter in the 2000's. There is just no excuse for that. A 1st round pick pick in a draft with Mahomes and Watson. That is franchise changing and he still has a job and will have a job after this losing season.
0 x

StanM
Rookie
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Jan 01, 2019 11:46 am
x 25

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by StanM » Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:14 am

These are general questions about how the draft process works as far as our owners, GM, scouting and coaching staffs interact that is relevant to this discussion. How much input does ownership have and do they influence or override draft decisions? Who decides that our strategy will be run first and how much input does our GM have? Why does our coaching staff think this 2010 model is the way to build a winning team in 2020? Does are GM defer to coaches and scouts snout which specific players to select?

An interesting list would be to take each first round bust and look at players at the same position after we made our pick. How have they performed as compared to our picks?

Before I join in the cry for Ricks replacement it would be good to know how much was actually his idea. I realize that he oversees everything so he does share the blame but as much as I like Zimmer I am more frustrated with coaching and team philosophy as to what is the best model to build a team around today and not a decade or two ago.
0 x

psjordan
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1662
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 8:01 am
x 64

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by psjordan » Thu Dec 31, 2020 1:30 pm

I’m going to throw my own form out the window for the rest of this (loooong) post, in that IRL Rick does NOT make all these decisions by himself. But for brevity and at risk of repeating myself for the 37th time, let’s just say Rick makes all these decisions by himself.

Most of you have valid points. To make it clear, I am NOT stumping to keep Rick as our GM. If I am stumping for anything, it’s that the criteria used in getting rid of (or keeping) Rick be somewhat fair and reasonable.

To that end, IMO there is plenty of “NFL evidence” to fire Rick. There is also plenty such evidence to keep Rick.

IMO there is NOT plenty of evidence to fire Rick because of our backup QB position – I mean, should we fire Rick for:
A) Taking high-risk chances at the quarterback position (Bradford, Cousin’s contract)?
B) NOT taking high-risk chances at the quarterback position (he’s only drafted two)?
C) Drafting a Pro-Bowl QB in the first round BUT we don’t like Rick’s reasons for doing so?
D) Signing and extending a FA QB who has started 47 of the 48 games he has been here BUT we don’t feel like we have an adequate backup QB?

I guess the emotional response is that Rick has not “solved” our QB position (leaving OL for another post). And I am here to tell you, if the above reasoning in any way dictates the Wilfs fire him, AND word gets out that is why, we will have ZERO decent GM types who want anything to do with this franchise. Because firing a GM based on what Rick has done with the backup QB position VIA THE DRAFT (and the starting QB contract position) is unfair at best and nuts at worst.

[I do not subscribe to the “Rick has crippled the franchise with Cousins’ contract” rhetoric, but that’s another thread entirely.]

Let’s take the last 15 years, going back to the 2005 draft and look at the QB’s. I lost track of all kind of stuff while writing this, interupted 41 times, I'm an old fart, so don't crucify me if I missed a player or divided incorrectly.

I tried to include teams below that have had their guy for a long time (GB, PIT, NE), teams that recently found their guy and teams that have yet to find their guy. Please note I realize some of the points made in this thread surround Rick’s inability to find an adequate backup QB?, and I admit to not knowing what is meant by that. Maybe his inability to find the heir apparent? I’m not sure there is a huge definable difference, so I did not try.

I mean, if you want to consider drafting a guy like Mason Rudolph 3rd round in 2018 a “win” for the Steelers, OK I guess. I don’t. PIT passed on Lamar Jackson in the first round that year. And we, WEEEEE snapped up Mike Hughes two picks before Lamar Jackson! Fire Rick for THAT ALONE if anything. But I digress.

“Non-descript” below means you wouldn’t even recognize at least half of their names, and on the whole I would guess that zero of the players I don’t name would excite anyone on this board if we had drafted them. Would drafting Mason Rudolph in 2018 instead of Brian O’Neill make Rick a much better GM today? Would drafting Jordan Love instead of Justin Jefferson? I realize that is cherry picking of the highest order, but the Rudolph/O’Neill tradeoff is a realistic one.

I’m using the term “hit rate” below to denote any QB that has shown the ability to start a string of games and help their team. Starter, decent backup, heir apparent, etc. They are all “hits”. All of my metrics are arguable of course.

Anyways, going back to 2005:

GB has drafted nine QB’s, leading the list. Rodgers, Love (highly touted) and seven non-descript. Leave Love out as a TBD and that’s a hit rate of 11%. Throw Love in there as the next Rodgers and you get up to 22%. If that happens (only using picks 24 and 25 in the draft), that would be a FANTASTIC hit rate for top-rate starters, maybe best in the NFL.

NE has drafted eight QB’s. Cassell did OK with NE when needed, five non-descript, Brissett and Garoppolo traded. Leave Cassell out and that’s a 0% hit rate for actually helping the NE roster survive the Brady departure. Throw Cassell on the hit list and say he beats our backups? You get up to 12.5%.

PIT has drafted five QB’s. All non-descript unless you think Rudolph is a thing. Roethlisberger drafted 2004. Hit rate 0%.

CHI has drafted four QB’s. Don’t even know what to say. At this point most would say a 0% hit rate but I don’t even know how to evaluate Trubisky as the 2nd pick in the draft. As a starter or a backup. That’s quite a foible if he gets cut.

DET has drafted five QB’s. Stafford first pick of his draft and four non-descript. Hit rate of 20%.

KC has drafted six QB’s. Mahomes and five non-descript. Hit rate 16.6%.

BUF has drafted seven QB’s. Allen 7th pick of his draft and six non-descript. Hit rate 14.3%.

MIN has drafted five QB’s. Bridgewater (late 1st round) and four non-descript. Admittedly shaky hit rate of 20% for the franchise. But that’s 15 years. Rick has only drafted Bridgewater and Nate Stanley at the QB position in his 12 years as GM. Definitely low man on the totem pole in terms of draft volume. I personally have no idea what kind of player (Rams 3rd rounder) Sean Mannion actually is, so I am not entirely sure what the grounds are for saying we don’t have an adequate backup.

Obviously, the QB hit rates go WAY up if you are drafting early in the first round.

Picking QB’s outside of the first round is a high-risk, little-reward endeavor EVEN IF you are just looking for adequate backups. Basically 80-85% failure rate. A fair number of current backups were acquired via trade, they washed out with some other team and were signed as FA’s, or became FA’s on their own, etc.

If anything, my biggest beef with Rick and the QB spot is that he has not been creative enough nor has he taken ENOUGH risk with the QB position. IMO at least two of the last 12 years he should have gone for broke and traded up in the first round, even if it cost several #1’s. If he tried, IMO he didn’t try hard enough.

Having said all that, the Ponder year of 2011 could possibly be the worst Vikings draft of all time, and I will blame Rick until my dying day for wasting that pick on Ponder. The only defense Rick has is that that year was a steaming pile for QB’s, outside of Newton (1st pick) and Dalton. But why oh why pull a hammy reaching with the 12th pick? Couldn’t have traded it for a future #1?

And OBTW, Rick’s drafts in 2011, 2012 and 2013 stunk to high heaven for the most part. We had SIX FIRST ROUND DRAFT PICKS those three years, chose 29 players and we ended up with Harrison Smith and Kyle Rudolph for the effort.

If you want(ed) Rick fired, it certainly should have been January 2014.

But back to today, I also think the organization as a whole, and Rick+staff+coaches in particular, give this a WHOLE LOT of thought over and above things we even remotely discuss as fans. For instance, I can definitely see a discussion (both before and after Cousins extension) that covered when in Cousins contract do we want to draft our “shoot our shot” QB, such that we have our QB’s on contracts that mesh together (veteran at end of extension, rookie on rookie contract, maybe overlap only one year). All else being equal, we certainly don’t want our stud to be here for three of Cousins high paid guaranteed years. Maybe they are discussing the QB of the future right now in terms of keeping Jefferson happy and on board. Don’t laugh, who knows. But I guarantee those types of discussions happen – they have to - and are taken into the big picture of the QB position. No matter how smarmy your response along the lines of “Are you kidding me? They NEVER discuss drafting QB’s!!! Rick is against it!!”.

In actuality, I bet they’ve discussed it more than any other position the last 10 years. Whether that resulted in a plan none of us are privy to, I don’t know. If there is no plan, the whole lot should be fired three minutes into the year-end meeting with the Wilfs.
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38250
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 368

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by Mothman » Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:08 pm

StanM wrote:
Thu Dec 31, 2020 11:14 am
These are general questions about how the draft process works as far as our owners, GM, scouting and coaching staffs interact that is relevant to this discussion. How much input does ownership have and do they influence or override draft decisions? Who decides that our strategy will be run first and how much input does our GM have? Why does our coaching staff think this 2010 model is the way to build a winning team in 2020? Does are GM defer to coaches and scouts snout which specific players to select?
— Ownership makes the final say on hiring and firing the head coach. Presumably, they factor Rick Spielman's recommendations and advice into their choice but they make the final call.

— To the best of my knowledge, Vikings ownership does not influence draft decisions. They leave those decisions to Rick Spielman.

— Zimmer would probably decide on a "run first" philosophy but there might very well be some consultation with the GM involved. Their goal is to be on the same page.

— I don't know why the Vikings favor that approach. It may be because Zimmer's background is in defense and he wants to lean on that squad and win with the offense playing conservative, clock-chewing, complementary football.

— Rick Spielman definitely consults with the coaching staff about draft strategy. Whether he defers to them or not is hard to say. Based on the priority given to DB picks during the Zimmer era, I'd say there's a pretty good chance Zimmer'sopinion carries significant weight on draft day. If I remember correctly, the Vikings also chose Bridgewater based in part on Norv Turner's evaluation.
An interesting list would be to take each first round bust and look at players at the same position after we made our pick. How have they performed as compared to our picks?
I don't have time to do that research right now but it would be pretty easy to do. There are several sites out there where you could find the info you need.
Before I join in the cry for Ricks replacement it would be good to know how much was actually his idea. I realize that he oversees everything so he does share the blame but as much as I like Zimmer I am more frustrated with coaching and team philosophy as to what is the best model to build a team around today and not a decade or two ago.
Zimmer was Rick's choice to be head coach and they've worked to be on the same page philosophically over the past 7 seasons so I doubt it's possible to entirely separate what was Rick's idea from what was Zimmer's. However, Zimmer's still there. Unless Rick has been pleading with ownership to replace him and they've been ignoring his pleas, the results we have are Rick Spielman results. He chose the coach, he's worked closely with him and if Zimmer was defiantly at odds with the direction Spielman wanted to take the team, it seems unlikely Zimmer would survive that confrontation. Ownership has placed their faith in Rick. I think it's essentially his team. In that sense, it's ALL his idea.
0 x

User avatar
S197
Fenrir
Posts: 12469
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Hawaii
x 551

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by S197 » Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:30 pm

Lets look at it this way. Let's look at all the QB's we've had here after Tarvaris Jackson (since he was drafted by Fran Foley, not Spielman). Keep in mind these are guys that started games for the Vikings, not 3rd stringers or guys who held the clipboard their entire career.

Gus Frerotte
Brett Favre
Joe Webb
Christian Ponder
Donovan McNabb
Matt Cassel
Josh Freeman
Teddy Bridgewater
Sam Bradford
Shaun Hill
Case Keenum
Kirk Cousins

Mannion started a game as well but it was basically a pointless game where they threw in a backup. So we'll leave him out. That's the list, that's the QB carousel that we're comparing our GM against the Patriots, Steelers, Packers, etc.

My point has always been first and foremost contingency planning. The QB position is the most important on the field so you should have a plan no matter who your QB is because players get injured. NE is a prime example. Tom Brady is the GOAT and they still drafted Cassel, Garoppolo, and Brissett. Turns out they didn't need them because Brady managed to stay healthy but that's hindsight driven. What's important is they had the best QB in football but still understood that #### happens and you need to be ready in the event Brady goes down. Plus, they received draft capital in return for trading away two of these guys. It's like life insurance, it's prudent to have for planning purposes. You don't say, "oh man I didn't die, what a stupid waste!" That's not the point.

So lets go back in time and see how Rick planned this all out. Favre had a great season in 2009. But he was 41 and his body was broken. He was done, he said he was done. It took 3 players flying on an airplane to his house and begging him to play another season to come back. Suffice to say, the writing was on the wall that Favre wasn't going to be around for much longer. Despite all of this, Spielman drafted NO ONE. I know, Joe Webb. Well let's not forget that Joe Webb was drafted to be a WR. It was CHILDRESS in training camp that converted him back to QB.

Favre ends up retiring to no one's surprise (except I guess Rick) and now it's full panic mode. We got no one. So the 11th pick rolls around and we grab Christian Ponder. Passing on Robert Quinn, Mike Pouncey, Ryan Kerrigan, and Nate Solder because of the failure to plan with Favre. And we all know how that went. After 2 full seasons it's pretty obvious Ponder isn't the guy. McNabb is throwing balls in the dirt because he's way past his prime. We are in Favre situation 2.0. So in 2013, once again, Spielman drafts NO ONE. Not even a Joe Webb this time. So we enter 2013 with lame duck Ponder, Cassel (servicable backup), and Josh Freeman throwing footballs into the upper deck.

Now it's 2014 and we're in the same position, we have no QB. So the Vikings trade back into the 1st round for Teddy Bridgewater. At this point Rick has seen what failing to plan has done. 7 different starters in the span of 4 years. Surely now he's going to have a backup plan right? I mean fool me once, fool me twice, now we're going on fool me 3 times! But... nope. Rick, once again, drafts NO ONE, and goes all-in on Bridgewater. And sadly, Teddy has a freak accident in practice.

So do we give up on 2015? We don't, we go all-in again with a big trade for Sam Bradford. Sam Bradford, the guy who's #1 knock his entire career is durability. It's very well known the guy is made of glass but when healthy he's a great QB. So you take the risk on Bradford, controversial amongst fans but lets give Rick the benefit of the doubt here. But now we're up to QB #9 and Bradford is by far the most injury prone of all. Rick has failed to plan for 3 consecutive starters now. What's the plan in case the most injury prone QB in the NFL goes down? Shaun Hill! Yes, we get to see the great Shaun Hill make an appearance in 2016 where the guy can barely throw the ball 20-yards because his arm is shot to hell.

Now comes 2017 and Rick finally catches lightning in a bottle. That's right, I'm saying Keenum was pure dumb luck. What's my evidence? See the last four paragraphs and the 10 QB's we've brought in prior to Case. Case to his credit, has a magical year, topped off by a miracle win over the Saints. But lets not kid ourselves, this team wasn't close to a championship. The Eagles made that abundantly clear. This team was close in 2008, 2017 was a season that far exceeded expectations but it was a once in a lifetime event.

And so now we have Cousins. Finally a guy who is durable. But that's all hindsight. Despite being snake bitten over, and over, and over, Rick still stubbornly plows ahead with his all-in move at QB. I mean, we drafted a long snapper before a QB in Cousins 3 years for crying out loud. It took an NFL record 15 picks for Rick to finally draft Stanely, and he was a late 7th round pick.

So that's my long-winded recap of why I think Rick has failed at the QB position. He had clear and obvious points where he should have been looking to the future and did absolutely nothing. And then he double and triple downed on that strategy despite it burning him and the team again and again. The Vikings are not unlucky, they are not cursed, they fail to plan and when you fail to plan, you plan to fail. Rick's tenure here needs to be over, not just because of the QB position, but it's definitely top 3 for me.
2 x

User avatar
RandyMoss84
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1190
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 2:12 pm
x 404

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by RandyMoss84 » Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:40 pm

S197 wrote:
Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:30 pm

So that's my long-winded recap of why I think Rick has failed at the QB position. He had clear and obvious points where he should have been looking to the future and did absolutely nothing. And then he double and triple downed on that strategy despite it burning him and the team again and again. The Vikings are not unlucky, they are not cursed, they fail to plan and when you fail to plan, you plan to fail. Rick's tenure here needs to be over, not just because of the QB position, but it's definitely top 3 for me.
Speilman also failed at building a good offensive line, he needs to go
0 x

YikesVikes
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1404
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:04 am
x 188

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by YikesVikes » Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:45 pm

psjordan wrote:
Wed Dec 30, 2020 9:04 am
YikesVikes wrote:
Wed Dec 30, 2020 8:40 am
I think I'll do the ground work. I'm going to pick a random team whose GM has had some time on the clock and see if their record. My earlier point was that he has had more attempts at bat that anyone else and has fielded worst results.
If you are taking requests, I'd vote for Colbert/Steelers (traditionally better than us) and Telesco/Chargers (traditionally worse than us). By "traditionally" I mean last 7-10 years.

No idea what those results will show, other than Colbert/Tomlin/Sarrett (groomed by Munchak) winning on the OL.
Sold. I have a newborn but will try to get a list together. The biggest issue is trying to nail the guys you have not really heard of from other teams. Prior to this season we were all on the Dru Samia train. I am sure their fanbase has guys that are unheralded but great and full of potential but horrible.
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38250
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 368

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by Mothman » Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:46 pm

psjordan wrote:
Thu Dec 31, 2020 1:30 pm
I’m going to throw my own form out the window for the rest of this (loooong) post, in that IRL Rick does NOT make all these decisions by himself. But for brevity and at risk of repeating myself for the 37th time, let’s just say Rick makes all these decisions by himself.

Most of you have valid points. To make it clear, I am NOT stumping to keep Rick as our GM. If I am stumping for anything, it’s that the criteria used in getting rid of (or keeping) Rick be somewhat fair and reasonable.

To that end, IMO there is plenty of “NFL evidence” to fire Rick. There is also plenty such evidence to keep Rick.

IMO there is NOT plenty of evidence to fire Rick because of our backup QB position – I mean, should we fire Rick for:
A) Taking high-risk chances at the quarterback position (Bradford, Cousin’s contract)?
B) NOT taking high-risk chances at the quarterback position (he’s only drafted two)?
C) Drafting a Pro-Bowl QB in the first round BUT we don’t like Rick’s reasons for doing so?
D) Signing and extending a FA QB who has started 47 of the 48 games he has been here BUT we don’t feel like we have an adequate backup QB?
Come on ... Teddy "Pro Bowl" Bridgewater was a sub that year when the actual selections couldn't and wouldn't go to the game.

Is anybody actually suggesting Rick should be fired for a singular "offense" like mismanaging the backup QB position? I may have missed that but it's definitely not my point of view. That mishandling is emblematic of why he should be fired but it's not the reason he should be fired. There is no singular reason. That's the whole point of taking a broader view of his performance as GM.

The simplest way to express why the Vikings should replace Spielman is: he doesn't appear capable of building a Super Bowl winning team.
I tried to include teams below that have had their guy for a long time (GB, PIT, NE), teams that recently found their guy and teams that have yet to find their guy. Please note I realize some of the points made in this thread surround Rick’s inability to find an adequate backup QB?, and I admit to not knowing what is meant by that. Maybe his inability to find the heir apparent?
My criticism on this front has always been:

1.) The backup QB should be capable of stepping and playing for the starter, at a respectable level, for as long as necessary. Whether that's one game or 15, if a team doesn't have a backup that can at least step in and give them a chance to win every week, that's a failure of management. Joe Webb was an inadequate backup. Shaun Hill was an inadequate backup because the Vikes clearly thought he was too old to step in for the majority of a season.

Cassell and Keenum were solid backups.

2.) Ideally, if a team lacks a well-established starter, I think it's a good idea to have a "Plan B", a potential heir apparent if their top guy doesn't pan out. The Vikings didn't do this when Jackson was QB or when Ponder and TB were QB (unless anyone really thinks Joe Webb had the potential to develop into a quality NFL starter). I think it's unwise for a team to put all of their eggs in a young starter's basket without a backup plan.
NE has drafted eight QB’s. Cassell did OK with NE when needed, five non-descript, Brissett and Garoppolo traded. Leave Cassell out and that’s a 0% hit rate for actually helping the NE roster survive the Brady departure.
But it wasn't a 0% benefit to the Patriots. Both Cassel and Garoppolo stepped in to help them win games while on the roster and they received value in trade for those players. There was an overall benefit to the franchise and, for example, if Brady had retired or suffered a career-ending injury while Garoppolo was still on the roster, the Pats would have had a good potential successor on their bench. They had the right idea and Brady himself was a quality backup that came off the bench even though the team had a high-profile starter. That they weren't able to keep finding guys like that and didn't have one available when Brady finally left doesn't mean they weren't taking a smart approach along the way.
MIN has drafted five QB’s. Bridgewater (late 1st round) and four non-descript. Admittedly shaky hit rate of 20% for the franchise. But that’s 15 years. Rick has only drafted Bridgewater and Nate Stanley at the QB position in his 12 years as GM.
9 years as GM (2012-2020). :)
Picking QB’s outside of the first round is a high-risk, little-reward endeavor EVEN IF you are just looking for adequate backups. Basically 80-85% failure rate.
Definitely... and yet teams can find starters or even a Hall of Famer outside of the first round so it's worth looking and it's worth drafting the position, especially if you see something special in a player.
In actuality, I bet they’ve discussed it more than any other position the last 10 years. Whether that resulted in a plan none of us are privy to, I don’t know. If there is no plan, the whole lot should be fired three minutes into the year-end meeting with the Wilfs.
Fire 'em anyway because if what we've seen unfold was the plan, the plan stunk.
0 x

psjordan
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1662
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 8:01 am
x 64

Re: Spielman's performance

Post by psjordan » Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:57 pm

S197 wrote:
Thu Dec 31, 2020 2:30 pm
And so now we have Cousins. Finally a guy who is durable. But that's all hindsight. Despite being snake bitten over, and over, and over, Rick still stubbornly plows ahead with his all-in move at QB.
The only question I have from your post is does Sean Mannion count as a third round pick? He's been our backup for two years now, had quite the college career, and a GM other than Rick felt he was worth a 3rd. Just so happens the Rams drafted him. If we had drafted him in the third instead of signing him as a FA, would that make a difference?

I realize we have no idea what he can and can't do on a sustained basis, but on paper is he not the ideal Cousins backup? Maybe Rick "learned" two seasons ago?
0 x