Vikings cut Kline

[fiestavike]

lol you're just trying to make the argument you had for him last offseason valid when you still have nothing to go on. They cut him over a contract dispute. That has already surfaced. YOU just think he was that bad. When he gave up the 2nd fewest pressures on the OL behind O'Neill. He was a very serviceable pass blocker. A whole lot better than Bradbury or Elflein. Nobody is saying he was an all world lineman but he was average IMO and slightly above average as a pass blocker. We were only paying him $5.25 million a year. That's fairly cheap for an average guard. But at this point, again maybe Rick Spielman should listen to you regarding every move he makes. Because you sure do act like you're an expert in all fields.

RG's giving up the 2nd fewest pressures (in the fewest starts on the line I might add) is not a good thing. I bet if you look up and down the NFL the RG spot gives up the fewest or 2nd fewest on most teams, behind only the center.

I made that argument last season, and was proven 100% to be correct. You can claim he played well last year all you want but it is just silly at this point. He was a below average RG in TN, and was a below average RG in MN. Now he is a below average RG with no team.

Our line wasn't great last year, but people seem to forget how much worse it was for several seasons prior. To put it in context, last year was the BEST the vikings OL has been for years. Yikes!

[VikingsVictorious]

That is a lot for a RG who missed multiple games. A lot for a RG period.

It's really not. So if Kline is considered "THAT bad" by you because he gave up 22 pressures in 13 games (1.7 pressures a game), then what was someone like Mike Remmers at guard? He gave up 25 pressures in his first 5 games at guard (that's 5 pressures a game). For example, Kline's one truly BAD year was 2018 in Tennessee where he gave up 38 pressures on the year (2.4 pressures per game) and that was the year you were hung up on when we signed him. However, the 2 previous years in Tennessee he gave up 22 pressures both of those years and average 2.5 sacks given up each season. And then you have 22 pressures again this year with 2 sacks given up. That is equivalent to Joe Berger's numbers in 2017. Again, nobody was saying Kline was a stalwart guard, but he was a good stop gap and average enough to hold up. But he was not a "bad" guard by any means.

IMO there has to be something behind the scenes and maybe it's just personal. Saving 1.5 million isn't worth it even if he's only going to be a backup. From the information we have cutting Kline is completely devoid of any sense.

[VikingsVictorious]

RG's giving up the 2nd fewest pressures (in the fewest starts on the line I might add) is not a good thing. I bet if you look up and down the NFL the RG spot gives up the fewest or 2nd fewest on most teams, behind only the center.

I made that argument last season, and was proven 100% to be correct. You can claim he played well last year all you want but it is just silly at this point. He was a below average RG in TN, and was a below average RG in MN. Now he is a below average RG with no team.

Our line wasn't great last year, but people seem to forget how much worse it was for several seasons prior. To put it in context, last year was the BEST the vikings OL has been for years. Yikes!

Absolutely correct. In my entire time of being a Vikings fan I think all of our worst O Line play has been in the last however many years going back to the last big season by Peterson. He did it all on his own even then. Last year was the best of these many pathetic seasons of O Line play.

[StumpHunter]

It's really not. So if Kline is considered "THAT bad" by you because he gave up 22 pressures in 13 games (1.7 pressures a game), then what was someone like Mike Remmers at guard? He gave up 25 pressures in his first 5 games at guard (that's 5 pressures a game). For example, Kline's one truly BAD year was 2018 in Tennessee where he gave up 38 pressures on the year (2.4 pressures per game) and that was the year you were hung up on when we signed him. However, the 2 previous years in Tennessee he gave up 22 pressures both of those years and average 2.5 sacks given up each season. And then you have 22 pressures again this year with 2 sacks given up. That is equivalent to Joe Berger's numbers in 2017. Again, nobody was saying Kline was a stalwart guard, but he was a good stop gap and average enough to hold up. But he was not a "bad" guard by any means.

IMO there has to be something behind the scenes and maybe it's just personal. Saving 1.5 million isn't worth it even if he's only going to be a backup. From the information we have cutting Kline is completely devoid of any sense.

The behind the scenes is that he isn't a very good RG who has injury concerns and 0 upside.

[VikingsVictorious]

IMO there has to be something behind the scenes and maybe it's just personal. Saving 1.5 million isn't worth it even if he's only going to be a backup. From the information we have cutting Kline is completely devoid of any sense.

The behind the scenes is that he isn't a very good RG who has injury concerns and 0 upside.

I agree with you totally that he isn't VERY GOOD. However, for 1.5 million in the NFL an O Lineman doesn't have to be VERY GOOD.

[halfgiz]

Pro Football Focus rated Josh Kline as a middle-of-the-pack guard last season for the #Vikings. He was No. 41 out of 86 NFL guards rated.

[VikingsVictorious]

Pro Football Focus rated Josh Kline as a middle-of-the-pack guard last season for the #Vikings. He was No. 41 out of 86 NFL guards rated.

That's the way I see it and to cut him to save 1.5 million as I have stated many times makes zero sense.

[fiestavike]

Pro Football Focus rated Josh Kline as a middle-of-the-pack guard last season for the #Vikings. He was No. 41 out of 86 NFL guards rated.

That's the way I see it and to cut him to save 1.5 million as I have stated many times makes zero sense.

1.5 this year, plus 6.3 next year, which could also be a tight one under the salary cap.

[VikingsVictorious]

That's the way I see it and to cut him to save 1.5 million as I have stated many times makes zero sense.

1.5 this year, plus 6.3 next year, which could also be a tight one under the salary cap.

If we kept him this year and cut him next year what would be the dead cap at that time? I don't believe it would be the full 6.3 Million, but I could be wrong.

[J. Kapp 11]

1.5 this year, plus 6.3 next year, which could also be a tight one under the salary cap.

If we kept him this year and cut him next year what would be the dead cap at that time? I don't believe it would be the full 6.3 Million, but I could be wrong.

Cutting him this year costs the Vikings $4.47 million in dead cap and saves $1.6 million against the cap.

Keeping him this year and cutting him next year would have cost $1.33 in dead cap and saved $5 million against the cap.

As others have said ... very puzzling move by the Vikings.

[VikingsVictorious]

If we kept him this year and cut him next year what would be the dead cap at that time? I don't believe it would be the full 6.3 Million, but I could be wrong.

Cutting him this year costs the Vikings $4.47 million in dead cap and saves $1.6 million against the cap.

Keeping him this year and cutting him next year would have cost $1.33 in dead cap and saved $5 million against the cap.

As others have said ... very puzzling move by the Vikings.

Thank you. With that known now it makes even less sense and it made no sense in the first place.

[fiestavike]

Cutting him this year costs the Vikings $4.47 million in dead cap and saves $1.6 million against the cap.

Keeping him this year and cutting him next year would have cost $1.33 in dead cap and saved $5 million against the cap.

As others have said ... very puzzling move by the Vikings.

Thank you. With that known now it makes even less sense and it made no sense in the first place.

The only sense I can make of it is either a) they viewed him as a very poor player, or b) he wasn't in their plans past this year, they don't think they can win this year, and accordingly, would rather give reps to a player who is (potentially) part of their plan beyond this year.

[Mothman]

Thank you. With that known now it makes even less sense and it made no sense in the first place.

The only sense I can make of it is either a) they viewed him as a very poor player, or b) he wasn't in their plans past this year, they don't think they can win this year, and accordingly, would rather give reps to a player who is (potentially) part of their plan beyond this year.

I'm betting it's option B.

[VikingsVictorious]

The only sense I can make of it is either a) they viewed him as a very poor player, or b) he wasn't in their plans past this year, they don't think they can win this year, and accordingly, would rather give reps to a player who is (potentially) part of their plan beyond this year.

I'm betting it's option B.

It will be interesting to see if the Vikings go full rebuild with so many thinking that Spielman and Zimmer are going all in on this year and mortgaging the future in an effort to save their jobs.

[fiestavike]

The only sense I can make of it is either a) they viewed him as a very poor player, or b) he wasn't in their plans past this year, they don't think they can win this year, and accordingly, would rather give reps to a player who is (potentially) part of their plan beyond this year.

I'm betting it's option B.

I hope so. That would actually aid my optimism about the future a bit. Get out of 'win now' mode long enough to be making decisions that move this franchise toward true contention.