The Spielman/ Frasier Era: Can it work?

[mansquatch]

If anything can be said about this week, it is that it has been quite tumultuous for us Vikings fans. I’ve tried to take a very neutral view of the events that are unfolding and as a result I think an interesting topic for discussion is emerging, that being the approach of the Vikings in their effort to create an NFL dynasty.

Spielman has never minced words about his philosophy, he has stated many times that he wants to build a team via the draft, resigning their own players, and being very conservative in Free Agency. Part of this, which we are learning this week, is a very business like approach to the roster, culminating in the release of Winfield. What is interesting is although this is considered new in MN, it is how NE has done things for over a decade. Witness the recent treatment of Wes Welker, who is just the latest of a long line of Patriots who were shown the door in a rough way. So while the Winfield move certainly leaves a sour taste, it is not without precedent within the league.

The comparison to NE doesn’t end there. Spielman has stated he wants to grow in a manner similar to NE and GB. This brings up the first discussion point. Both NE and GB have a HOF QB as the heart of their respective teams. The Vikings by contrast have a HOF RB as their heart. Can the method work with this difference in today’s NFL? Perhaps more importantly, how patient will Zygi Wilf be to let this run it’s course?

One other critical question on Spielman’s approach: The success of his philosophy is highly dependent on scouting and player eval. Are they up to the task? What is the turnaround on late round guys or the expected hit rate? Again how long?

Going even deeper, the GM’s growth philosophy is linked to both the coaching and the scheme of the team. Whether this be Tampa 2 or Run First, these things are an integral component of how the squad is built. So part of the above questions is whether the Run First/Strong Defense model can be successful in the NFL over the long term?

I know there will be temptation by some to say it is a Passing League. To some extent they might be right. IMO, this is the follow the leader mentality, and it certainly can work. However, for the Vikings to adopt this path would require a dramatic rebuild of the team, starting obviously with QB, but also with a defense built more towards the Turnover than the 3 and out. Think GB, NO, and NE.

I think the Vikings have taken a riskier path in terms of scheme. They have decided to buck the trend and do something innovative. That being a heavy run first offense designed around power and a big, athletic mauling OL. This is used in conjunction with a Cover 2 defense designed to control an offense and keep it off the field. Physical football, playing the TOP game. It is the antithesis of the pass happy offenses we see above. The question is can it work?

[Purple bruise]

If anything can be said about this week, it is that it has been quite tumultuous for us Vikings fans. I’ve tried to take a very neutral view of the events that are unfolding and as a result I think an interesting topic for discussion is emerging, that being the approach of the Vikings in their effort to create an NFL dynasty.

Spielman has never minced words about his philosophy, he has stated many times that he wants to build a team via the draft, resigning their own players, and being very conservative in Free Agency. Part of this, which we are learning this week, is a very business like approach to the roster, culminating in the release of Winfield. What is interesting is although this is considered new in MN, it is how NE has done things for over a decade. Witness the recent treatment of Wes Welker, who is just the latest of a long line of Patriots who were shown the door in a rough way. So while the Winfield move certainly leaves a sour taste, it is not without precedent within the league.

The comparison to NE doesn’t end there. Spielman has stated he wants to grow in a manner similar to NE and GB. This brings up the first discussion point. Both NE and GB have a HOF QB as the heart of their respective teams. The Vikings by contrast have a HOF RB as their heart. Can the method work with this difference in today’s NFL? Perhaps more importantly, how patient will Zygi Wilf be to let this run it’s course?

One other critical question on Spielman’s approach: The success of his philosophy is highly dependent on scouting and player eval. Are they up to the task? What is the turnaround on late round guys or the expected hit rate? Again how long?

Going even deeper, the GM’s growth philosophy is linked to both the coaching and the scheme of the team. Whether this be Tampa 2 or Run First, these things are an integral component of how the squad is built. So part of the above questions is whether the Run First/Strong Defense model can be successful in the NFL over the long term?

I know there will be temptation by some to say it is a Passing League. To some extent they might be right. IMO, this is the follow the leader mentality, and it certainly can work. However, for the Vikings to adopt this path would require a dramatic rebuild of the team, starting obviously with QB, but also with a defense built more towards the Turnover than the 3 and out. Think GB, NO, and NE.

I think the Vikings have taken a riskier path in terms of scheme. They have decided to buck the trend and do something innovative. That being a heavy run first offense designed around power and a big, athletic mauling OL. This is used in conjunction with a Cover 2 defense designed to control an offense and keep it off the field. Physical football, playing the TOP game. It is the antithesis of the pass happy offenses we see above. The question is can it work?

When you have AD then you can bet that this team is a rush first offense and the passing game is secondary. That being said, I love the way this team is developing. Frazier seems to be learning and getting better each year (he was nominated for coach of the year this last year). I like his calm demeanor and the respect that he probably gets from his players knowing that he has played in the league. If Spielman is half as succesful with this years draft then he will most assuredly be carving out a name for himself as a top flight GM.
So my answer to your question would be absolutely the Spielman/Frazier can, has and will work.

[The Breeze]

I think they are building around a future vision and making the most, or at least trying to, of what they have now. I think the Ravens and Niners have shown what a TOP system can become as different pieces and tweaks become available. Their main foundation was/is built on a stifling D and ball control...whether it be running the ball or short passing game. It's what you do when you don't have the elite QB ala GB and NE.

I don't think the Vikes can center around AD and be sustainable. They can be successful while he's healthy and in his prime, but RBs don't have a long career. Especially at his level of performance. They definitely need a QB who, at minimum, can make consistent plays to keep drives going while not turning the ball over, and who gradually/rapidly becomes more dynamic as time goes by and new weapons are acquired. Not sure they have or don't have that guy here in Ponder.

Over the last few years the Ravens and Niners offenses have evolved into units that score lots of points when needed because of new additions and familiarity with the systems they run. Two very fundamentally sound teams. Their defenses haven't wavered much, if any, at all for years.

It's amazing to me how long the Ravens defense has been so good at everything they do. All that may change next season due to key losses.

But I really think that's what you have to do regardless of the QB. Build up your lines, preach/teach defense and mistake free football. You got to have that stuff anyway if you wanna win. Build a system and the right QB will come along...if he's not here already.

That's the philosophy, and as Jim has stated, it remains to be seen whether or not this group, Spielman/Fraizer, can pull it off. I actually think they're off to a decent start. I have no idea how long they have...but I would imagine that next season starts with this FA period, and for Spielman, Ponder, and Fraizer it will be a defining year. I expect the long term picture will be way more clear next December.

I doubt I said anything that wasn't fairly obvious....but there ya go.

[mondry]

I'm a huge fan so far, I think it can work. One of the interesting dynamics is because it is a pass happy league, you've got a LOT of teams drafting pass defenders and pass rushers. Not to mention practice and film study is going to be 90% about the QB / WR's against most teams. Some of these guys don't want to tackle either, especially not a guy like AD. I don't think our window instantly closes when AD retires either, we've seen new backs like Doug Martin come in and light it up. That's not to say it'd be easy to replace AD but I think a running offense has a LOT to do with proper blocking. If someone terrible like Chris Johnson can rush for 2000 yards it's definitely about the blocking.

This draft will definitely be more critical than the last one. Having the 3rd overall pick and then a 2nd rounder that's basically a late first and so on through out the rounds probably helps a lot. I know WR is the hot topic and rightfully so but I'm really hoping for some more defensive upgrades. Like you guys mentioned the 49ers and the Ravens have some pretty good defenses and I really think that is key for the ball control style / running game offense to really be effective.

That's not to say the passing game can be non-existent, it has to do enough and make some plays as well. I think we've seen that be the case from time to time with Ponder and company but they'll need to improve a bit more in the consistency department. All in all I'm pretty happy with how the offense is designed but it clearly needs a couple more play makers if it's going to be super bowl worthy. I do have some slight concerns about musgrave over all but if AD can rush for 2k+ with no WR's on the team that's gotta mean something...

As for the defense I'm fine with what they're doing now as well but we need a dramatic upgrade at MLB and could certainly upgrade the other S spot, and I guess nickel CB now. For the most part, on both sides of the ball I think we just need a couple more upgrades / play makers to really solidify everything.

[Eli]

I found it about as tumultuous as a hangnail. They traded a guy who was a headache and they released a guy who was getting old and expensive. Sorry, but I won't shed a tear over either one. Just another day in the NFL. If the moves help the Vikings win one Super Bowl in the next 52 years, I'm all for them.

[TeamChaplain]

Yeah, here's the problem. Rick Spielman can say he is building through the draft until the cows come home. Saying it doesn't mean it's true and we need to be a bit more critical of words and take his words with a major grain of salt. If he's "building through the draft" then why were we in the Mike Wallace sweepstakes? Why are we in the last two teams remaining fighting over Greg Jennings? Why is he in contact with Brian Urlacher? If he's building through the draft then why did he sign John Carlson, Zack Bowman, and a few other guys last year?

Building through the draft isnt' a philosophy its a PR buzzword you say during interviews to make people think you're not reckless. Proven by the fact that the Patriots are one of the most active teams in free agency year in and year out, yet people still post in forums that they are an example of "building through the draft". When you don't pursue anyone in March, then you are building through the draft. And there are a lot of teams like the Saints for instance who have done that. But when you try to sign guy after guy but only sign guys who end up getting cut in the summer, or outright fail to sign guys in March, you're just a GM who makes bad decisions or can't close a deal. Now I happen to like Spielman's performance as GM even if a lot of his signings last year didn't pan out, but don't fool yourself into believing Spielman is a legit "build through the draft" guy because he's not.

I believe we will see a different Carlson this year, he was hampered by his pre-season injury all season. I was surprised that we didn't bring in Wes Welker maybe a 2 year $14 mil. Jennings might be asking too much. Does Urlacher have anything left in the tank (decline in his speed)? Or maybe we have tried to bring in wrs and they have balked because of Ponder's inconsistency,,,, he just hasn't performed up to standards yet. I say yet because I believe this year will be completely different. I am a glass half full guy. For the most part I agree with your assessment of Spielman's performance. He has as much to prove as Ponder. I like Frazier as a coach.

[jackal]

The Steelers have this method and it works out well for them .. well see

[TheCoolerOne]

Yeah, here's the problem. Rick Spielman can say he is building through the draft until the cows come home. Saying it doesn't mean it's true and we need to be a bit more critical of words and take his words with a major grain of salt. If he's "building through the draft" then why were we in the Mike Wallace sweepstakes? Why are we in the last two teams remaining fighting over Greg Jennings? Why is he in contact with Brian Urlacher? If he's building through the draft then why did he sign John Carlson, Zack Bowman, and a few other guys last year?

Building through the draft isnt' a philosophy its a PR buzzword you say during interviews to make people think you're not reckless. Proven by the fact that the Patriots are one of the most active teams in free agency year in and year out, yet people still post in forums that they are an example of "building through the draft". When you don't pursue anyone in March, then you are building through the draft. And there are a lot of teams like the Saints for instance who have done that. But when you try to sign guy after guy but only sign guys who end up getting cut in the summer, or outright fail to sign guys in March, you're just a GM who makes bad decisions or can't close a deal. Now I happen to like Spielman's performance as GM even if a lot of his signings last year didn't pan out, but don't fool yourself into believing Spielman is a legit "build through the draft" guy because he's not.

Why are you taking that term so literally? "Building through the draft" doesn't mean "we a literally, and I'm not kidding, signing one free agent to the roster." You sign quality depth from the free agency and place much of your focus into finding the roster guys in the draft.

I said this before but we have has our years where we signed everyone we wanted and owned the free agency market in the past. Where'd that get us? Tight salary cap pants and 9-7 records. A., we're we ever surely in the Mike Wallace race, and B., How much better do you think the dolphins will be this year by overpaying every player they picked up?

Mike Wallace would have potentially been a great toy, but I am glad it isn't our sixty mill commited to him.

[mansquatch]

The funny thing about Wallace and all the other guys the Dolphins signed is sustainability. That organization is the polar opposite of what we are trying to do. The issue they are going to have (and probably Seattle as well) is that in the next 2-3 years those FA are going to have to be either restructured or released. The salary cap will demand it.

IMO, a key component to what Spielman wants to do is a smart, patient owner. So far Zygi seems to be that type. If he turns out that way we should feel very blessed as fans.

[TheCoolerOne]

Y'know I really hope you're right about Carlson. I was thinking about what a waste of time, space, and money the Carlson signing was and how we're stuck with him and how he really added nothing last season. Maybe there was some sort of an issue with him last year either mental or physical that stopped him from playing to his potential. That would be a nice bonus if he ended up playing at least half decent this season.

I agree the wrong picking the wrong players are the problem, but don't forget around the same time we signed Fred Smoot, Travis Taylor, and a couple other guys that were just not cutting it. The excitement going into that year was probably second to only the Favre year one.

You can't blame Spielman for trying on Carlson, the kid showed a lot of promise in his first two years as a Seahawk, I remember watching him as a rookie thinking he was going to be a rising star. Did we overpay? So far, yes, is the fairly evident answer. However, if our dream was to run a Hernadez/Gronkowski lineup, and one would think that was the plan, it was at least a good attempt to do so. Maybe Spielman got scared as he did with Loadholt and overpaid because the Chiefs were breathing down Carlson's neck, but if he hadn't been hampered by nicks and nacks, who knows how he would have preformed.

I doubt Carlson will go for more that 500 yards and 5 TDs, especially with Rudolph looking like the next big thing, but I still don't bash the signing as hard as some.

[losperros]

I think the Vikings have taken a riskier path in terms of scheme. They have decided to buck the trend and do something innovative. That being a heavy run first offense designed around power and a big, athletic mauling OL. This is used in conjunction with a Cover 2 defense designed to control an offense and keep it off the field. Physical football, playing the TOP game. It is the antithesis of the pass happy offenses we see above. The question is can it work?

I don't find the heavy run first offense to be innovative at all, especially with a Cover 2 base D. In fact, I think it's a throwback to years past.

OTOH, I'm not unhappy with that approach because Adrian Peterson is a different breed of RB. I mean, he's a Terminator more than an average NFL back.

That said, the most important ingredient missing is balance. The Vikings need to greatly improve their passing game, even if it plays second fiddle to the running attack. If they do that and shore up the gaps in the D, then yeah, the Spielman/Frazier era will work.

As it is now, I have great respect for Leslie Frazier, who I see as a man of his word. I don't have a problem with Spielman yet, though I wouldn't mind smacking him along side the head for dumping my two favorite players from the team.

[PurpleKoolaid]

No

[Mothman]

Can the approach Spielman and Frazier are taking work? Absolutely. I have no doubt. Will it work? Theres definitely room for doubt there!

Regardless of whether a team builds through the draft or free agency, builds around a QB or an RB, etc., the fundamental aspects of building a successful team remain the same: good cap management, talent acquisition and good coaching.

That's a tremendous simplification, of course, but in simple terms, it really does boil down to those things. Talent acquisition is the most important element. Without sufficient talent, a team won't be successful. Managing the cap enables talent to stay in place long enough to create stability and maintain success. Good coaching puts talent to work wisely and leads to wins. See how easy football is? Anyone can do it!

The Vikes have managed the cap well for years. Robski knows what he's doing in that department so it really comes down to talent and coaching. I think Frazier has shown he can coach so IF Spielman can get the job done in terms of talent acquisition, I see no reason why this combo can't work and it's off to a good start. I'm not saying Frazier has proven all he has to prove, just that he looks like a coach who can win if given the talent to get the job done. I'm not suggesting Spielman has nothing to prove either so if the question is really "Can Spielman/Frazier lead the Vikings to a Super Bowl win?"... I don't think anyone can answer that with certainty but philosophically speaking I see nothing in their approach that would prevent that from happening.

[PurpleKoolaid]

Can the approach Spielman and Frazier are taking work? Absolutely. I have no doubt. Will it work? Theres definitely room for doubt there!

Regardless of whether a team builds through the draft or free agency, builds around a QB or an RB, etc., the fundamental aspects of building a successful team remain the same: good cap management, talent acquisition and good coaching.

That's a tremendous simplification, of course, but in simple terms, it really does boil down to those things. Talent acquisition is the most important element. Without sufficient talent, a team won't be successful. Managing the cap enables talent to stay in place long enough to create stability and maintain success. Good coaching puts talent to work wisely and leads to wins. See how easy football is? Anyone can do it!

The Vikes have managed the cap well for years. Robski knows what he's doing in that department so it really comes down to talent and coaching. I think Frazier has shown he can coach so IF Spielman can get the job done in terms of talent acquisition, I see no reason why this combo can't work and it's off to a good start. I'm not saying Frazier has proven all he has to prove, just that he looks like a coach who can win if given the talent to get the job done. I'm not suggesting Spielman has nothing to prove either so if the question is really "Can Spielman/Frazier lead the Vikings to a Super Bowl win?"... I don't think anyone can answer that with certainty but philosophically speaking I see nothing in their approach that would prevent that from happening.

Jim, what approach CANT work? Childress and Favre got us one INT from a SB. This thread is silly because any can. Thats why I answered with a simple no, to see if people could prove it wrong, and thus show any approach could work. I dont see how tearinf down a 10-6 team, and rebuild with a bunch a kids, treating vets like crap when letting them go, is a good way to start it.

[Mothman]

Jim, what approach CANT work? Childress and Favre got us one INT from a SB. This thread is silly because any can. Thats why I answered with a simple no, to see if people could prove it wrong, and thus show any approach could work. I dont see how tearinf down a 10-6 team, and rebuild with a bunch a kids, treating vets like crap when letting them go, is a good way to start it.

I'd say there are plenty of approaches that can't work or are at least unlikely to work without the benefit of truly exceptional circumstances. For example, a philosophy that embraces an imbalanced team is likely destined to fall short. I'm not talking about a team that prefers to pass a bit more than run or run a bit more than pass but rather about neglect. For example, when Buddy Ryan coached the Eagles, the philosophy there seemed to prize defense and neglect offense. Ryan was almost completely indifferent to offense and it showed. Consequently, those teams were doomed to fall short of their ultimate goal even though they put some great defenses on the field.

As I said, I simplified things greatly in my earlier post because I was talking about basics of team-building and the philosophy associated with it, not specifics. If the coach is no good, if the team mismanages the cap and can never put together a balanced enough roster to sustain winning, if there's a flawed or inadequate (as the Vikings had under McCombs) talent evaluation process in place, those things can cripple a team's efforts to build a winner. I'd say a philosophy that focuses too much on skill players and neglects sufficient attention to line play is probably doomed too.There's no shortage of ways to screw things up.

As for the Vikings, I think you're exaggerating if you're describing what's happened so far this week as "tearing down a 10-6 team and rebuilding with a bunch of kids". Trading Harvin and releasing Winfield hardly qualifies as tearing down the team and we still don't know who will replace those players.