Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

[CharVike]

For what? Our goal needs to be slowing Rodgers down. That means pass rush and coverage.

Maybe we can get as good of a pass rush and cover guys as LA had?

Needs to be better than what they showed. They showed it against the Hawks. Maybe hitting the road back to back against good teams took the wind out of their sails. The 49ers took it to Rodgers with pressure. Only way I see to do it.

[StumpHunter]

Maybe we can get as good of a pass rush and cover guys as LA had?

Needs to be better than what they showed. They showed it against the Hawks. Maybe hitting the road back to back against good teams took the wind out of their sails. The 49ers took it to Rodgers with pressure. Only way I see to do it.

Arguably the best coverage and pass rush team in the NFL just got walloped by the Packers, because they couldn't keep up with them on offense. Mostly because their QB isn't good enough. I am not going to say for certain LA wins that game with Watson under center instead of Goff, but it at least would have been a game.

You look at the remaining teams in the playoffs, and it is the 3 of the 4 best QBs this year, along with the GOAT. Not the 3 of 4 best remaining defenses, only TB is in the top 10 at #6 in scoring, but the best at QB. Defenses are important, only GB has a below average D of the teams that are left, and they are 17th, but in the end the most difficult to stop offense will win it this year.

[RandyMoss84]

Im not good with off season talk but I was wondering, should we take a shot at acquiring Deshaun Watson?

For what? Our goal needs to be slowing Rodgers down. That means pass rush and coverage.

They already did their goal, Vikings defeated the Packers at Lambeau Field remember?

[YikesVikes]

For what? Our goal needs to be slowing Rodgers down. That means pass rush and coverage.

They already did their goal, Vikings defeated the Packers at Lambeau Field remember?

We won't always be playing in 40 mph winds

[RandyMoss84]

They already did their goal, Vikings defeated the Packers at Lambeau Field remember?

We won't always be playing in 40 mph winds

So? A win is a win so enjoy it!

[YikesVikes]

We won't always be playing in 40 mph winds

So? A win is a win so enjoy it!

The DL didn't really do its job if they didn't have to play the pass.

[CharVike]

Needs to be better than what they showed. They showed it against the Hawks. Maybe hitting the road back to back against good teams took the wind out of their sails. The 49ers took it to Rodgers with pressure. Only way I see to do it.

Arguably the best coverage and pass rush team in the NFL just got walloped by the Packers, because they couldn't keep up with them on offense. Mostly because their QB isn't good enough. I am not going to say for certain LA wins that game with Watson under center instead of Goff, but it at least would have been a game.

You look at the remaining teams in the playoffs, and it is the 3 of the 4 best QBs this year, along with the GOAT. Not the 3 of 4 best remaining defenses, only TB is in the top 10 at #6 in scoring, but the best at QB. Defenses are important, only GB has a below average D of the teams that are left, and they are 17th, but in the end the most difficult to stop offense will win it this year.

The Rams D didn't show up. Zero sacks. Hello. Pass D starts with pressure. The 49ers pressured Rodgers and he didn't play at his usual level. The game was 27-0 at halftime. It was over. Grap attempted 8 passes because they ran the ball down their throat. Grap's not as good as the Ram guy. The Pack are at home which is a tremendous advantage. The Bucs kicked the Packs #### once this year and they did it getting after the QB. Rodgers looked liked the average joe blow because they got after him. He was sacked 5 times. Say good night at that point and they did. They should beat this Buc team because they are at home. But if the Bucs show up and get after Rodgers like they did in October they have a chance. If they get zero sacks and apply zero pressure they will get destroyed. That's the way it works. Always did always will. And yes the best QBs are there. It's been that way for a long time. You do get some outliers like Grap and Goff and Foles. Nothing to write home about there.

[StumpHunter]

Arguably the best coverage and pass rush team in the NFL just got walloped by the Packers, because they couldn't keep up with them on offense. Mostly because their QB isn't good enough. I am not going to say for certain LA wins that game with Watson under center instead of Goff, but it at least would have been a game.

You look at the remaining teams in the playoffs, and it is the 3 of the 4 best QBs this year, along with the GOAT. Not the 3 of 4 best remaining defenses, only TB is in the top 10 at #6 in scoring, but the best at QB. Defenses are important, only GB has a below average D of the teams that are left, and they are 17th, but in the end the most difficult to stop offense will win it this year.

The Rams D didn't show up. Zero sacks. Hello. Pass D starts with pressure. The 49ers pressured Rodgers and he didn't play at his usual level. The game was 27-0 at halftime. It was over. Grap attempted 8 passes because they ran the ball down their throat. Grap's not as good as the Ram guy. The Pack are at home which is a tremendous advantage. The Bucs kicked the Packs #### once this year and they did it getting after the QB. Rodgers looked liked the average joe blow because they got after him. He was sacked 5 times. Say good night at that point and they did. They should beat this Buc team because they are at home. But if the Bucs show up and get after Rodgers like they did in October they have a chance. If they get zero sacks and apply zero pressure they will get destroyed. That's the way it works. Always did always will. And yes the best QBs are there. It's been that way for a long time. You do get some outliers like Grap and Goff and Foles. Nothing to write home about there.

Nope. Rodgers was pressured more in the Rams game than in the SF game. Pressured on 19% of his drop backs in that 2019 game versus 24 % in 2020.

[CharVike]

The Rams D didn't show up. Zero sacks. Hello. Pass D starts with pressure. The 49ers pressured Rodgers and he didn't play at his usual level. The game was 27-0 at halftime. It was over. Grap attempted 8 passes because they ran the ball down their throat. Grap's not as good as the Ram guy. The Pack are at home which is a tremendous advantage. The Bucs kicked the Packs #### once this year and they did it getting after the QB. Rodgers looked liked the average joe blow because they got after him. He was sacked 5 times. Say good night at that point and they did. They should beat this Buc team because they are at home. But if the Bucs show up and get after Rodgers like they did in October they have a chance. If they get zero sacks and apply zero pressure they will get destroyed. That's the way it works. Always did always will. And yes the best QBs are there. It's been that way for a long time. You do get some outliers like Grap and Goff and Foles. Nothing to write home about there.

Nope. Rodgers was pressured more in the Rams game than in the SF game. Pressured on 19% of his drop backs in that 2019 game versus 24 % in 2020.

Zero sacks means no pressure. Regardless of some pct somebody made up. Sacks aren't made up. They happen or they don't. These people make up stats and they don't even know what the line call was or audibles made for the line during the play. It's a worthless pct. Sacks tell the story. The Bucs had 5 sacks this year against Rodgers and he wilted. They all do that. The Rams this year had zero sacks and were sent home easily. Why is that so hard to see?

[StumpHunter]

Nope. Rodgers was pressured more in the Rams game than in the SF game. Pressured on 19% of his drop backs in that 2019 game versus 24 % in 2020.

Zero sacks means no pressure. Regardless of some pct somebody made up. Sacks aren't made up. They happen or they don't. These people make up stats and they don't even know what the line call was or audibles made for the line during the play. It's a worthless pct. Sacks tell the story. The Bucs had 5 sacks this year against Rodgers and he wilted. They all do that. The Rams this year had zero sacks and were sent home easily. Why is that so hard to see?

You wrote "Pass D starts with pressure. " I gave you the pressure stats for both games.

Rodgers dropped back 42 times in that game, passed 39 times, but it was the 3 sacks on those 42 dropbacks that decided the game?

[Pondering Her Percy]

This implies the odds of success in the 5th, 6th and 7th round are the same as in the 2nd, 3rd or 4th. I can see some wisdom in trading down, especially if you are in a spot in the 1st round where you like 5 guys equally, and a team 3 spots back offer to trade up with you. Lots of teams do stuff like that, but I wonder why Rick is the only GM in the NFL who seems to value 6th and 7th rounders so much and if that might be part of the reason he is the only GM in the NFL to only have 2 playoff wins in 9 seasons of being a GM? 3 playoff wins since he got here?

Well I must say, it came out the George Paton was the big "trade down" guy. So maybe that's where Spielman got it from? I dont know. All I know is the more picks you have, the more chance you have of bringing in contributors to this team. The difference between a 5th rounder and 7th rounder talent wise usually isnt a whole lot different. If someone asked me would you rather have 1 5th round pick or maybe an extra 6th and two extra 7ths, I would take the latter any day of the week. No less I like what he did this year by moving some of the picks we had into next year and advanced them a round. We have an extra 4th and an extra 5th because of that. So I would almost look at that as a trade up if anything. So we currently have 10 picks going into this draft not counting compensatory picks. The draft is like roulette. If you only play 1 number at the table, your chances of hitting are 1:38. If you play 3 numbers, your chances to hit are roughly 1:12. With these mid to late round picks especially, sure there is a greater chance of hitting on a 5th rounder than a 6th or 7th but that greater chance is EXTREMELY slim. So why not play the odds there is what I'm saying. You act like he's missed out on all this 5th round talent and went with 7th round talent instead.

First of all, I didn't say Dantzler was only good because Gladney's guy was always open. I said he benefitted from it.

I don't disagree with most of that article above btw. It wasn't all bad with the rookies and it is way too early to write them off. It is just also way to early to claim that it was a good draft outside of JJ. We will see if these rookies who for the most part played poorly end up growing into quality starters.

Regardless of what you said, I just dont see that as being true in any way. Did you ever say Rhodes benefited from Waynes guy always being open? No. I honestly didnt see much of a difference between Gladney and Dantzler by years end. Gladney's coverage seemed much tighter, his tackling was superb and lets be honest, his play against Evans should've 100% been a pick 6 if it was for a crap call. What I saw with Gladney was improvement each week. The more experience he got the better. In week 9 he had the best coverage grade of any nickel corner in the league.

Every time I glance at the Vikings game, Jeff Gladney is around the ball. I know he's struggled a bit in coverage, but I feel he's getting better as the year goes on (CB is a lot to acclimate to in the NFL). For now, he's learning and his run support has been fantastic.

^and I feel the same exact way. Like the guy is a rookie corner that was thrown into the fire with zero veteran leadership to lean on. If he continued to struggle or go backwards as the year went on, yeah that's concerning to an extent. Again, he was a rookie. But the experience that both him and Dantzler got this year is more than normal rookie corners. That just puts them that much more ahead of the game going into next year. Both Gladney and Dantzler are the least of my worries on this team. I think they will be a much better CB group next year and even better beyond that.

I was mostly happy with the 2017 season but really dissapointed with how it ended when we went up against a team with a lot more talent than ours. I was very unhappy with the 2019 season, because somehow a single WC round win followed by the Vikings getting destroyed by a clearly superior team resulted in more years of Spielman, Zimmer and Cousins. Baffling, but that is what happened. It was a season where the Vikings beat exactly 1 team with a winning record in the regular season a year after they beat exactly 1 team with a winning record. Oh and look, we did the same thing this year. Seems like a pattern has developed, but probably because of all the talent Rick has put on the field

Again, how did Philly have "a lot" more talent than the Vikings in 2017? The Vikings underperformed and we outcoached. It had nothing to do with talent. They had the #1 defense in the entire league which was absolutely stacked and plenty of talent on offense. Hell even our OL overachieved that year. Keenum was just as big of a question mark as Foles was. So I dont know where you're coming up with Philly having a lot more talent. That is just simply false no matter what you say. As for the 49ers game, yeah I'll give you that that they had more talent. Especially on the defensive side of the ball. Our talent was there but many aging veterans. SF had such a young elite DL which was no match for our OL.

Everyone should get fired because our GM has 2 playoff wins in 9 seasons as GM and our HC only has 2 in 6 seasons.

Rick Spielman provides the players. It's Zim's job to coach them. And as the years have gone on, he does that in a more and more conservative manner and has continued to shoot himself in the foot. I guess every analyst (many that have actually played in the NFL) must not know what they are talking about then. Because so many in the past 5 years have brought up the talent on this team. Two of them that have always raved about the talent on this roster are Bucky Brooks and Daniel Jeremiah. Two former NFL scouts (and brooks played in the NFL as well). Guys that are actually paid to evaluate talent. And I can tell you they do it much better than any of us on a message board, that includes you

This defense is still really bad in the secondary and only has one pass rusher worth a damn. It is still a bad team with all those guys 100 % healthy (because that happens so often in the NFL, starters don't miss any time), but a bad team that blows out Houston, Carolina and Jacksonville instead of just barely beating them.

Underlined are the guys we had on D for 12 games of the seasons. Underlined is the defense that was on the field when we lost to the Cowboys.

lol dude give me a break. You're really going to say this is "still a bad team" when healthy. If anything they were a bad defense, not a bad team. You dont have a bad team when you're 4th in the league in total offense. If they even had an average defense they are a playoff team.

And this is classic you Like how is the score of the Houston, Carolina and Jacksonville games relevant.....like at all? The Jets beat the Rams and Browns. Two playoff teams. The Jaguars beat the Colts....a playoff team. The Bengals beat both the Titans and Steelers.....both playoff teams. Those are 3 of the worst teams in the entire NFL. The Raiders beat the #1 team in the NFL. The Vikings beat the Packers in Lambeau....currently a top 4 team in the NFL. Point is, I dont care who is playing who, anyone can beat anyone any given Sunday. It can be a blowout, it can be a tight game that goes into OT, doesnt matter. This is probably one of the worst arguments you try and make every single year. You bring up a few games and basically act like they dont count because we didnt beat them by enough or lost to them. It's just a very, very weak argument and proves absolutely nothing. If you really want to go that route I suppose I can say the Browns and Rams are the worst teams in the NFL because they lost to the ....worst team in the NFL.

This team is NOT "bad". They went 7-9 and were downright depleted on defense. Yeah injuries do happen. But how many teams get nailed with losing 4 of their 5 best players on defense? Some that are arguably the best players on the entire team? There's many times where teams have to face adversity. I've seen it a million times. I've seen the Vikings do it. How some adversity is too hard to overcome. And in our situation, that's exactly what happened defensively. Outside of our safeties, this defense didnt have a single 2019 starter play the entire season. I'm losing my faith in Zimmer but one thing I will say is he usually has a pretty good to excellent defense. I think you're drastically underestimating the impact that Danielle Hunter, Michael Pierce, Anthony Barr and Eric Kendricks have when playing. Granted Pierce hasnt played for us yet but is one of the elite run stuffers in the NFL. It's like practically losing Linval in his prime. Hunter is in my opinion the best player on the entire roster. He drastically improves the pass rush and drastically improves the run defense. Losing Kendricks during the most critical time of the year is also a massive killer along with not having Barr all season. And I think many not only underestimate the loss of all these players but the COMBINATION of losing all of them when we did. Outside of Harrison Smith, those 3 are the heart of this defense and I'm sure Pierce would fall right in line as well.

Either way, you just sound like a sour fan right now. Like there is valid reason to be upset after this season but let's be honest, it wasnt a true representation of the talent on this team, especially defensively. If you really think that the Vikings are "still a bad team" with Hunter, Kendricks, Barr and Pierce in the fold, I really dont know what to tell you other than discussing this with you is a lost cause. Because until Spielman and Cousins are out the door you will forever be bitter. Yet you somehow sit here and defending Zimmer of all people

[Pondering Her Percy]

You look at the remaining teams in the playoffs, and it is the 3 of the 4 best QBs this year, along with the GOAT. Not the 3 of 4 best remaining defenses, only TB is in the top 10 at #6 in scoring, but the best at QB.

History proves that to be irrelevant.

In 2017 the final 4 QBs were:

Tom Brady
Nick Foles
Case Keenum
Blake Bortles

There is a perfect example of 3 of the 4 best remaining DEFENSES.

[RandyMoss84]

Gary Kubiak has officially retired, now please take Klint with you and please hire Gase to be the offensive coordinator so offensive coordinators can stop leaving every year

[YikesVikes]

Gary Kubiak has officially retired, now please take Klint with you and please hire Gase to be the offensive coordinator so offensive coordinators can stop leaving every year

Gase? We will be begging to fire him by Oct. The dude's run offense is so predictable. No motions, and they almost always run to the strong side.

[RandyMoss84]

Gary Kubiak has officially retired, now please take Klint with you and please hire Gase to be the offensive coordinator so offensive coordinators can stop leaving every year

Gase? We will be begging to fire him by Oct. The dude's run offense is so predictable. No motions, and they almost always run to the strong side.

I doubt Gase is worse than DiFLOPio