Norv Turner Resigns as OC

[chicagopurple]

I would argue that Teddy regressed a little bit if anything. Certainly he didn't show any big improvement. Coming from Chicago, I am automatically suspicious of ANY coach who gets their job thru nepotism. Norv Jr should never have gotten the job . It reeks of nepotism.

[Mothman]

I would argue that Teddy regressed a little bit if anything.

I would too but others saw it differently.

Certainly he didn't show any big improvement. Coming from Chicago, I am automatically suspicious of ANY coach who gets their job thru nepotism. Norv Jr should never have gotten the job . It reeks of nepotism.

Zimmer's son Adam is the LB coach too.

[Purple Martin]

Hiring friends is also fraught with danger. I can't help but think that Turner would have been fired long ago if he wasn't old chums with Zimmer. Certainly almost any other head coach would have fired him by now.

[S197]

The thing with the NFL is you have very small windows of opportunity. Just look at the Cardinals, Panthers, and Seahawks this year compared to last year and the year before. The NFC in particular has been a proverbial rotating champion. This year it looks like Dallas. Dallas was terrible last year.

You have outliers like New England but even they have shown their weakness without their best player on the field.

I think a good GM builds a team that is in the hunt every year. With the salary cap, contracts, and free agency you simply cannot build a team that gets to the top and stays there for years and years. This isn't the SEC. That's why I say this team is good, I think the nucleus is there for the team to be talked about with the best of them for years to come. But when you lose your best player and the majority of your offensive line, it's going to hurt! Look at the Patriots vs the Bills with and without Brady. Night and day.

I think what the team needs to strive to be is a team that's talked about year in and year out. A Green Bay, Seattle, Denver, etc. It's any given Sunday so once you get to the playoffs, anything can happen. Just look at last year, we lost on paper but did we really lose that game? Hell no. We lost on a missed chip shot FG. We had Seattle beat.

This is why I'm a little easier on Spielman than some others. You want to build a contender and I think that's what we have. 11 wins last year and what should have been a playoff win. Top of the division right now despite the injuries. That's hard for me to shrug off.

[mondry]

It's certainly possible but is Shurmur actually a better coach than Turner? I don't know.

I see them about equal as far as football knowledge and coaching probably goes but hopefully Shurmurs ideas and strategies can mesh better with our current roster.

The thing with the NFL is you have very small windows of opportunity. Just look at the Cardinals, Panthers, and Seahawks this year compared to last year and the year before. The NFC in particular has been a proverbial rotating champion. This year it looks like Dallas. Dallas was terrible last year.

You have outliers like New England but even they have shown their weakness without their best player on the field.

I think a good GM builds a team that is in the hunt every year. With the salary cap, contracts, and free agency you simply cannot build a team that gets to the top and stays there for years and years. This isn't the SEC. That's why I say this team is good, I think the nucleus is there for the team to be talked about with the best of them for years to come. But when you lose your best player and the majority of your offensive line, it's going to hurt! Look at the Patriots vs the Bills with and without Brady. Night and day.

I think what the team needs to strive to be is a team that's talked about year in and year out. A Green Bay, Seattle, Denver, etc. It's any given Sunday so once you get to the playoffs, anything can happen. Just look at last year, we lost on paper but did we really lose that game? Hell no. We lost on a missed chip shot FG. We had Seattle beat.

This is why I'm a little easier on Spielman than some others. You want to build a contender and I think that's what we have. 11 wins last year and what should have been a playoff win. Top of the division right now despite the injuries. That's hard for me to shrug off.

Nice post, they certainly have their issues but I think it's safe to say we're basically a couple solid O-lineman from where we want to be. Of course getting those lineman is proving to be a daunting task....

[chicagopurple]

NOt that I want to praise GB ( it gives me hives) but much like the Pats, they have a knack for always finding unknown, mid-range salary guys to work their OL....if they lose one, they find one. Not superstars, no big salary commitment...just solid guys. It important, its an unavoidable necessity, and Spielman has shown no interest or ability to do so.

[Mothman]

The thing with the NFL is you have very small windows of opportunity. Just look at the Cardinals, Panthers, and Seahawks this year compared to last year and the year before. The NFC in particular has been a proverbial rotating champion. This year it looks like Dallas. Dallas was terrible last year.

You have outliers like New England but even they have shown their weakness without their best player on the field.

I think a good GM builds a team that is in the hunt every year. With the salary cap, contracts, and free agency you simply cannot build a team that gets to the top and stays there for years and years. This isn't the SEC. That's why I say this team is good, I think the nucleus is there for the team to be talked about with the best of them for years to come. But when you lose your best player and the majority of your offensive line, it's going to hurt! Look at the Patriots vs the Bills with and without Brady. Night and day.

Yes, but they were down to their 3rd string QB and they only lost 1 of 4 games without Brady. New England absolutely shows that with the right combination of coaching, personnel management and talent a team still can get to the top and stay there for years and years. They've had 15 straight winning seasons and they're well on their way to a 16th. Heck, the last time they finished with fewer than 10 wins was in 2002.

To a lesser extent, there are other teams that show sustained, competitive success is possible in this era. Green Bay has made 8 playoff appearances in 9 years and won a Super Bowl during that span. The Steelers have also been in playoff contention for most of the past decade and they've won 2 Super Bowls in that span. In other words, you're right that windows of opportunity to win a championship can be small but they don't have to be small, even in this era.

I think what the team needs to strive to be is a team that's talked about year in and year out. A Green Bay, Seattle, Denver, etc. It's any given Sunday so once you get to the playoffs, anything can happen. Just look at last year, we lost on paper but did we really lose that game? Hell no.

Hell yes. The Vikings really lost that game. Close doesn't count as a win. It's just close.

This is why I'm a little easier on Spielman than some others. You want to build a contender and I think that's what we have. 11 wins last year and what should have been a playoff win. Top of the division right now despite the injuries. That's hard for me to shrug off.

Being on top of the division right now gets them nothing. I'm not shrugging it off but I am keeping it in perspective. The struggles they've had on offense this season and the two decisive losses they've just suffered aren't easy to shrug off either. We both know the season's not over at 7 games. 5 wins is just 5 wins. It doesn't guarantee a playoff spot or a division title or a winning season. Those are all goals I hope they will achieve but the season's not a success because the team started it on a winning streak. 5-2 makes them contender at this point in the season, but it doesn't make them one at the end of the season.

11 wins last year was great. They had a playoff team for one season under Frazier too. They made the playoffs 2 seasons in a row under Childress. Can they sustain it this time? Can they build on it? That remains an open question and it sure looks to me like it could go either way. I want to see them build a team that's in the hunt every year. I hope they're on their way to doing that but it remains a goal, not an accomplishment they've actually achieved. Only time will tell if that's the trajectory they're on.

Spielman's made a number of good draft picks over the years. He and Zimmer have put together an impressive defense but it's one thing to draft talented players and build up one unit on a team. It's another to fill in the gaps on a roster and put together a team that's a legitimate contender for a good 7+ years or more importantly, a team that will actually win a Super Bowl. I'm far from convinced he can do that.

[Raptorman]

The thing with the NFL is you have very small windows of opportunity. Just look at the Cardinals, Panthers, and Seahawks this year compared to last year and the year before. The NFC in particular has been a proverbial rotating champion. This year it looks like Dallas. Dallas was terrible last year.

You have outliers like New England but even they have shown their weakness without their best player on the field.

I think a good GM builds a team that is in the hunt every year. With the salary cap, contracts, and free agency you simply cannot build a team that gets to the top and stays there for years and years. This isn't the SEC. That's why I say this team is good, I think the nucleus is there for the team to be talked about with the best of them for years to come. But when you lose your best player and the majority of your offensive line, it's going to hurt! Look at the Patriots vs the Bills with and without Brady. Night and day.

I think what the team needs to strive to be is a team that's talked about year in and year out. A Green Bay, Seattle, Denver, etc. It's any given Sunday so once you get to the playoffs, anything can happen. Just look at last year, we lost on paper but did we really lose that game? Hell no. We lost on a missed chip shot FG. We had Seattle beat.

This is why I'm a little easier on Spielman than some others. You want to build a contender and I think that's what we have. 11 wins last year and what should have been a playoff win. Top of the division right now despite the injuries. That's hard for me to shrug off.

The thing with New England is that everyone thinks Brady is the best player on the team. I disagree. Brady is good. But how many time has he been on the sideline and the Pats not miss a beat? They are put together as a team, no real superstars that have to be there. Sure Gronk is important, but without him they can still win. Same with Brady. Take him out and they still win. Name one WR that ever left New England that went on to big season elsewhere? Not many. New England is a team built for the long haul, built up defensively, (they have a consistent top 10 defense year in and year out) with complimenting players. Thing is, once Belicheat leaves, they are screwed.

The Vikings appear to be trying to build the team like New England. One for the long haul.

[S197]

The thing with New England is that everyone thinks Brady is the best player on the team. I disagree. Brady is good. But how many time has he been on the sideline and the Pats not miss a beat? They are put together as a team, no real superstars that have to be there. Sure Gronk is important, but without him they can still win. Same with Brady. Take him out and they still win. Name one WR that ever left New England that went on to big season elsewhere? Not many. New England is a team built for the long haul, built up defensively, (they have a consistent top 10 defense year in and year out) with complimenting players. Thing is, once Belicheat leaves, they are screwed.

The Vikings appear to be trying to build the team like New England. One for the long haul.

Well they lost to the Bills 16-0 without Brady and beat the Bills 41-25 with Brady. They've certainly showed they can win without him but the outcome of those games speak for themselves. My main point being anytime you lose your "MVP" player, you're bound to struggle. Green Bay isn't the same without Rodgers, Seattle isn't the same with a gimpy Wilson, and the Vikings are not the same without Peterson. That's all I'm saying.

I think everyone wants to emulate the Patriots, it's certainly a goal worth shooting for. This team right now feels like the Falcons. They can go on long winning streaks and look very good at times but for whatever reason fall just short of putting it all together. Hopefully they can continue to improve to the point where they are a NE or GB type of franchise.

[Boon]

Thielen has definitely improved and Line has too. Actually, Patterson's route running has improved too.

Patterson didn't improve. He had 9 touchdowns under musgrave, he only has one this year and hasn't really played the last two years. He might improve now but turner had nothing to do with anything. In that same breath im calling treadwell getting significant snaps vs detroit. watch.

[MrPurplenGold]

Spielman's made a number of good draft picks over the years. He and Zimmer have put together an impressive defense but it's one thing to draft talented players and build up one unit on a team. It's another to fill in the gaps on a roster and put together a team that's a legitimate contender for a good 7+ years or more importantly, a team that will actually win a Super Bowl. I'm far from convinced he can do that.

Even the teams that compete year in and year out, like the Patriots, packers and Seahawks have holes on their rosters. The one thing the Vikings haven't had under Spielman is a franchise QB. I agree with the philosophy that they have utilized in building a dominant defense and a capable offense. In regards to the O line, they are terrible this year but remember, Peterson did win the rushing title last year. There were also times where people blamed Bridgewater for not getting the ball out quick enough. So this sentiment that Spielman has done nothing to improve the O Line just isn't true. I was always told you can never argue how a person feels, so I'll just argue the facts. In the first three years under Zimmer they have made improvements. No team could survive what the Vikings have survived this year and look their best. it's almost irrelevant to compare this year to other teams because no team has the depth to survive the rash of injuries they survived.

[Boon]

http://www.startribune.com/circumstance ... 399757541/

Someone called this the moment shurmur got hired. Can't remember who but this is pretty much what reusse is insinuating

[Mothman]

Patterson didn't improve. He had 9 touchdowns under musgrave, he only has one this year and hasn't really played the last two years.

I said his route-running has improved, not his production.

[Purple Martin]

Thielen has definitely improved and Line has too. Actually, Patterson's route running has improved too. McKinnon and Diggs came in as rookies but they've played like they're well-coached and McKinnon is in a system quite different than the one he played in as a college player.

Some would argue that Bridgewater showed improvement too.
It's certainly possible but is Shurmur actually a better coach than Turner? I don't know.

I don't think Bridgewater passes the test, he just had a couple good highlights in preseason play. I don't see that much "improvement" in McKinnon or Diggs. Diggs was excellent from the start. McKinnon was also pretty good out of the gate, and I haven't seen anything I'd call significant improvement in his play that you wouldn't expect just from getting experience. I'm encouraged by Patterson's attitude and very hopeful he has turned a corner, but the jury is still out on whether he'll be a regular long term contributor (and if he isn't, his improvement isn't really "significant", its meaningless). Even if I accepted all of these nominees as "improved", my real point was the comparitive dearth of players who seem well-coached compared with the defense. Zimmer came in and turned the whole D around. So did Norv, but in the opposite direction. The evidence for the offense being coached upward is sparse.

[Muqali]

Kind of sad but it badly needed to happen. I wonder if Zimmer had a conversation with Norv and this was the end result.

I don't know what Shurmur can do but I hope he can at least see the big picture, adapt the offense to play to its strengths (yes, it has some) and compensate for the weaknesses. And I hope there won't be any more pounding players into a system that doesn't fit.

If nothing else, looking ahead there is now room for a better placed offensive philosophy going into the next draft and free agency.