OL Draft: Vikes vs NFL

[Nunin]

I don't think the draft postiton means as much either.
-
The evalutaion issue matched up with the changing needs is kinda the crux to me. The Vikes, for whatever reason, seem to be behind the curve.
-
One thing I noticed when looking at the numbers was how many teams had several UDFAs on their rosters. Lots of them getting playing time.
Boone, if i remember correctly is an example.
-
When looking at injuries: Phil , Sully and Kalil are of their own category IMO....vets with injury history. While the injuries to these younger guys might be exacerbated by poor technique/fundamentals....not being ready?
goes back to coaching and development if so.
-
they definitely got to rethink their whole approach IMO....especially if there are no real gems on the market.

[Demi]

This might be confirmation bias, but your work reflects my pet theory which is that the issue causing the Vikings to have poor results from this position group hasn't been their drafting strategy (where they take guys) but poor talent evaluation and/or poor development & coaching of said talent.

Don't you dare bring up the guy ultimately responsible for choosing these players! And hiring these coaches!
I blame Davidson.

[mansquatch]

Don't you dare bring up the guy ultimately responsible for choosing these players! And hiring these coaches!
I blame Davidson.

You should have read my next paragraph before rushing to post...

[mansquatch]

I don't think the draft postiton means as much either.
-
The evalutaion issue matched up with the changing needs is kinda the crux to me. The Vikes, for whatever reason, seem to be behind the curve.
-
One thing I noticed when looking at the numbers was how many teams had several UDFAs on their rosters. Lots of them getting playing time.
Boone, if i remember correctly is an example.
-
When looking at injuries: Phil , Sully and Kalil are of their own category IMO....vets with injury history. While the injuries to these younger guys might be exacerbated by poor technique/fundamentals....not being ready?
goes back to coaching and development if so.
-
they definitely got to rethink their whole approach IMO....especially if there are no real gems on the market.

Those guys are vets with history for sure, but for some reason all of our homegrown vets have injury history, which is my point on the training staff. It could be bad luck. It could be something else?

I think at least part of it is the changing landscape. Zimmer has been big on bringing in coaches with A LOT of experience. That has strengths, but it also can have weaknesses where guys are set in what they do. Could it be that when it comes to OL, the changing CBA and College landscape has rendered what worked in the past ineffective. I think that is likely, but rather than just reach the conclusion I phrase it as a question because we simply don't know enough to know if that is the case. It just as likely be that we've done a bad job of picking guys who can't handle the current learning environment, for whatever reason. I think that is less likely, but it can't be ruled out.

One thing we've seen with this organization is that they will go after a problem once they recognize it and they tend to figure it out. The problem is they seem to have a tendency to let the problem get pretty bad before fixing it. We've seen that with WR, QB, Secondary, and OL since 2010.

[Nunin]

those are good points.
especially in regards to them seeming slow to react to the problems. as wel as the coaching approach being behind if not systematically obsolete.
-
the injury issue is totally confounding and i would imagine all the factors you mentioned...(talent eval, coaching/development, weight training/conditioning and luck)...have played some role.
-
it's definitely the front burner issue as it has significantly marred, if not completely wrecked, a promising season.

[chicagopurple]

not only do we just have 3, but those 3 are garbage an wouldnt start on any other team. The true number of NFL quality OL guys on our team is 0......

[mansquatch]

not only do we just have 3, but those 3 are garbage an wouldnt start on any other team. The true number of NFL quality OL guys on our team is 0......

Berger, Boone, and even Kalil are all viable NFL starters. Talent is certainly a concern, especially at RT, but the major contributing force to this season's debacle was lack of durability. Change has been a constant enemy of performance for our OL all season.

We have to keep some perspective in that we never got to see what this line could do once it had some time to gel. We started the season with 2 brand new starters and our RG had moved from LG. That change alone added up to early season challenges. We never get to come out of the hole as the injuries started piling up. This season it has felt like almost every 2 games there is another change as someone on the OL goes down.

I'm not discounting talent, we obviously have gaps, but talent is not the only problem.

[chicagopurple]

Berger is nothing but a journeyman back up, Kalil had forever to prove himself and all he proved to be was a liability and penalty vending-machine.

[mansquatch]

OK, so cut them both. So next year we need to find starters at LT, C, RG, and RT. I'm sure that will work out well.

[Mothman]

Berger, Boone, and even Kalil are all viable NFL starters

Berger and Kalil are the kind of viable starters they should look to replace. Berger, in particular, has spent most of his career as a backup for good reason. He had arguably his best season in 2015 but he's struggled this year along with everybody else.

Kalil just can't stay healthy.

Boone would be okay if surrounded by 4 other starters but he hasn't been worth what they paid him and as far as I'm concerned, his season is best described as a disappointment.

Talent is certainly a concern, especially at RT, but the major contributing force to this season's debacle was lack of durability. Change has been a constant enemy of performance for our OL all season.

We have to keep some perspective in that we never got to see what this line could do once it had some time to gel.

While it's likely they would have been better of healthy all year, I think the idea that it was ever going to be a good line is basically a fantasy.

I'm not discounting talent, we obviously have gaps, but talent is not the only problem.

That's true. Management is a problem as well!

Seriously, injuries have obviously made things worse but the Vikings set themselves up to fail on the OL so the outcome shouldn't surprise anyone.

[Mothman]

OK, so cut them both. So next year we need to find starters at LT, C, RG, and RT. I'm sure that will work out well.

Probably not (and I understand your sarcasm) but how well is it going to work out keeping those guys in the starting lineup?

Honestly, it wouldn't be a bad idea to find or at least start developing new starters at those positions next year if it's even possible. Remember, they have to actually re-sign Kalil to keep him on the line. Berger will be in the last year of his contract and will be 35 next season. They'll need to replace him soon if not in 2017. Fusco will probably stick around but he sure hasn't played like a deserving starter.

Do you begin to see why I think the Vikings need a new GM? This line has been botched beyond badly. It's crippled the team this year and repairing it looks like a monumental task. They literally don't have a starting-caliber tackle signed for 2017 or a player on the depth chart who looks ready to take on such a role!

Just thinking about it makes me want to

[mansquatch]

Jim: My view on the OL is that yes they all need to be better and probably some replaced. However, it isn't going to happen all at once simply because the resources required to successfully pull off such a wholesale change do not exist. I think that some of these guys are viable if surrounded by better talent. Ergo not having the walking setback, TJ Clemmings, starting.

I'm not convinced on management change:

This management has shown some ability to adapt to change, but it has never been a change leader. Change leaders are RARE in any industry and the NFL is no exception. In the NFL I would say that NE is the obvious change leader and a less obvious one is SEA. Beyond that, there isn't much out there. So I think if we are going to can Spielman in hopes of getting change leader, then we are smoking something.

The ability to adapt is a strength in it's own right. The issue I have with Spielman is that he has shown an issue in which it takes the organization perhaps too long to uncover problems before they become a debacle. What I'm not sure of is how much of it is on Rick and how much of it is elsewhere? My concern is that I'm not convinced that we can reliably bring someone else in who will be better better than Rick. I think that road is full of risk and in most cases probably not that much reward unless they hit a homerun an find the next Belicik. The problem I have is what happens if they don't hit the home run? My sense is that most of those "base hits" are likely worse than Rick.

I can completely see why some disagree.


The more I've thought about this, the more I think the issue is that our offensive coaching staff just isn't competitive. Zimmer on defense is a competitive, cutting edge coach. We don't have that same sideline talent on the offensive side of the ball. We are not getting the most out of our talent. Our scheme and production is mundane. We've brought in all this experience and yet the best offensive performance we've seen was 2013 under then unknown Bill Musgrave who is now coaching one of the most exciting offenses in Oakland. The OL mess is to me the biggest sign of this. We simply are not up to speed on dealing with the current league environment in the same way other teams are.

My gut has been stuck on the idea that we need to find Zimmer's offensive equivalent on the offensive side of the ball. Again, I can see why other disagree this is is just where my head is at.

Given the performance this year I suspect we'll see change.

[Nunin]

I think Spielman considers himself a change leader...just based on many of his home run swing draft picks. Patterson, Barr, Hunter, Clemmings, the unicorn guy, Yankey, Childs etc. I think he is a free swinger and a gambler.
-
He has a history that suggests that maybe he thinks he's smarter than other guys by the way he drafts players with athletic upside along with glaring questions in the capability department.
-
Personally, if you're going to take a chance, I'd prefer a guy who is a proven commodity with character concerns over a good guy who lacks significantly at the position he's being considered for. Whether it's size, experience or injury etc. -
What I find interesting is that since Zimmer ha been here nearly everyone of these types of picks on defense has panned out. Which suggests to me that Zimmer has had a big hand in who is being picked there.
-
On offense pretty much none of them have worked out well....for a variety of debatable reasons (see patterson for example).
-
The most alarming to me is the Clemmings pick. They(he) fell in love with his size and athleticism and let that overule the fact that the kid had one year of expeirence, period, at the position he was being drafted for...which is one of the toughest to play period. In fact he was a D lineman his whole life.
Add to that, their extremely questionable history of developing o-line players to begin with and it looks like someone trying to hit a homerun who would be far better served on just connecting for base hits.You can't steal first base. Especially at positions as critical as o-line.
-
I think Spielman is an average GM who has a bad tendency to gamble and Zimmer has made him look good....but the offense is revealing how fatal a flaw it may be. Signing expensive middling FAs is not a solution for craptastic drafting/developing...it's a band-aid. And if the band-aid falls(injury) off the bleeding begins.
-
The injuries compound the issue for sure. It makes it almost impossible to evaluate what you have. And coaches input on picks will help, if they are the right coaches. Do they have those coaches and evaluators? It's a mystery.
-
what a mess..

[Mothman]

Jim: My view on the OL is that yes they all need to be better and probably some replaced. However, it isn't going to happen all at once simply because the resources required to successfully pull off such a wholesale change do not exist. I think that some of these guys are viable if surrounded by better talent. Ergo not having the walking setback, TJ Clemmings, starting.

I agree that transforming the entire OL into a quality unit in one offseason would be a tall task. However, they're going to have to sign at least 2 tackles, even if those 2 tackles are Kalil and Smith again. Maybe they can find 2 better options. Between free agency and the draft they should have a chance to add several quality o-linemen. With the right moves, they could improve the line in one offseason and lay the groundwork for to field a far superior line in 2018 and beyond. They need to make that happen , even if it means scouring the waiver wires, the CFL, small colleges, big schools and every NFL practice squad and depth chart.

I'm not convinced on management change:

This management has shown some ability to adapt to change, but it has never been a change leader. Change leaders are RARE in any industry and the NFL is no exception. In the NFL I would say that NE is the obvious change leader and a less obvious one is SEA. Beyond that, there isn't much out there. So I think if we are going to can Spielman in hopes of getting change leader, then we are smoking something.

The ability to adapt is a strength in it's own right. The issue I have with Spielman is that he has shown an issue in which it takes the organization perhaps too long to uncover problems before they become a debacle. What I'm not sure of is how much of it is on Rick and how much of it is elsewhere? My concern is that I'm not convinced that we can reliably bring someone else in who will be better better than Rick. I think that road is full of risk and in most cases probably not that much reward unless they hit a homerun an find the next Belicik. The problem I have is what happens if they don't hit the home run? My sense is that most of those "base hits" are likely worse than Rick.

I can completely see why some disagree.

You're essentially saying "It's hard and they might fail so they shouldn't try".

Honestly, that's not a compelling argument and I say that because fear of failure is a particularly weak reason for sticking with an approach that has continually failed to produce a team that advances and succeeds in the postseason. If they cling to Spielman, to what are they clinging? Lopsided rosters? Lack of postseason success? A decade of sub-par passing in a league where the rules favor the passing game? In the past decade, the Vikings have only been able to field a passing game ranked higher than #23 once. However, counting this year, they've been ranked 28th or lower in passing 5 times. That begs the question: does Spielman even know how to build a quality NFL passing game? It sure doesn't seem like it.

It's certainly possible that replacing him could lead to a situation that's even worse but it's also possible it could lead to something better. There's no reason to believe that's impossible because we've seen that scenario play out for other NFL teams and result in championships. I don't think anybody needs to be smoking anything to think a "change leader" might be out there and might be found. Such leaders may be rare but there's no reason to believe they are extinct and consequently, there's someone out there who will be the next GM to help transform an NFL team into a champion. That's virtually a given so the question isn't if that person exists but how to find them. Finding them certainly seems worth the risk and effort since the Vikings have yet to win a Super Bowl.

The more I've thought about this, the more I think the issue is that our offensive coaching staff just isn't competitive. Zimmer on defense is a competitive, cutting edge coach. We don't have that same sideline talent on the offensive side of the ball. We are not getting the most out of our talent. Our scheme and production is mundane. We've brought in all this experience and yet the best offensive performance we've seen was 2013 under then unknown Bill Musgrave who is now coaching one of the most exciting offenses in Oakland. The OL mess is to me the biggest sign of this. We simply are not up to speed on dealing with the current league environment in the same way other teams are.

My gut has been stuck on the idea that we need to find Zimmer's offensive equivalent on the offensive side of the ball. Again, I can see why other disagree this is is just where my head is at.

It's certainly possible that finding that coach could lead to greater success IF the talent is there. Maybe, like Zimmer, that offensive coach would have the vision Spielman and Zimmer seem to lack and an ability to identify the talent that would thrive in his system (much as Zimmer has on defense). Of course, finding an individual with those qualities to be the offensive coordinator could prove as difficult as finding the right GM.

[Mothman]

I think Spielman considers himself a change leader...just based on many of his home run swing draft picks. Patterson, Barr, Hunter, Clemmings, the unicorn guy, Yankey, Childs etc. I think he is a free swinger and a gambler.
-
He has a history that suggests that maybe he thinks he's smarter than other guys by the way he drafts players with athletic upside along with glaring questions in the capability department.
-
Personally, if you're going to take a chance, I'd prefer a guy who is a proven commodity with character concerns over a good guy who lacks significantly at the position he's being considered for. Whether it's size, experience or injury etc. -
What I find interesting is that since Zimmer ha been here nearly everyone of these types of picks on defense has panned out. Which suggests to me that Zimmer has had a big hand in who is being picked there.
-
On offense pretty much none of them have worked out well....for a variety of debatable reasons (see patterson for example).
-
The most alarming to me is the Clemmings pick. They(he) fell in love with his size and athleticism and let that overule the fact that the kid had one year of expeirence, period, at the position he was being drafted for...which is one of the toughest to play period. In fact he was a D lineman his whole life.
Add to that, their extremely questionable history of developing o-line players to begin with and it looks like someone trying to hit a homerun who would be far better served on just connecting for base hits.You can't steal first base. Especially at positions as critical as o-line.
-
I think Spielman is an average GM who has a bad tendency to gamble and Zimmer has made him look good....but the offense is revealing how fatal a flaw it may be. Signing expensive middling FAs is not a solution for craptastic drafting/developing...it's a band-aid. And if the band-aid falls(injury) off the bleeding begins.
-
The injuries compound the issue for sure. It makes it almost impossible to evaluate what you have. And coaches input on picks will help, if they are the right coaches. Do they have those coaches and evaluators? It's a mystery.
-
what a mess..

... and that's why it really is time for a change.