Vikings Message Board.Com

I have often heard NFL Coordinators/GMs say that great OL talent doesnt need to come from high level draft picks, ie that OL players are frequently created from late draft picks and that its wasteful to use a high pick for an OL player. I wonder if this is true? When you look at the top end OL players, are they high draft picks?? Or are they mostly projects from lower rounds of the draft? Clearly Spielman thinks the position doesnt warrant much investment.

Mothman wrote:More to the point (and the reason I included the Vikes OL draft history above), at this stage I question whether Spielman considers the o-line the priority it should be. Some of his actions, (drafting Loadholt and Kalil, re-signing the former) suggest he does but overall, I wonder... it seems like he's satisfied to invest mid-to-late round picks in the line and stick with a starter like Johnson for years. Meanwhile, we've seen Peterson have to break a LOT of tackles behind the line of scrimmage. We saw Favre take a beating in 2010. Ponder took a beating from 2011-2013 and Vikings QBs were sacked 51 times last season. The Vikes have been in the bottom third of the league in sacks allowed 3 of the last 4 years.

I'm not trying to sound unfair but I am frustrated, especially when I hear Turner talking about the offense being thin up front. I know they're dealing with injuries but this is a problem they could have taken more steps to avoid. It was apparent to everyone going into the offseason.

Here's a question for the board, and it relates to your point, Jim.

I wonder sometimes if GMs in general regard offensive linemen as players who can be developed, no matter where they're drafted. Not saying that's MY point of view ... I'm just wondering.

You see cases all the time of late-round linemen developing into solid NFL starters. With such a huge premium on QBs, WRs, DEs, CBs and rush LBs thanks to the modern passing game, those players tend to go first in the draft unless there's a "franchise" left tackle available.

The question isn't meant as an excuse for Spielman. I just wonder if he's really that different than most GMs when it comes to drafting O-linemen. The prevailing wisdom seems to be, "Draft your franchise left tackle high ... otherwise, develop the rest." That's not to say guards are never taken early, but it seems to be more rare. Am I wrong here?

chicagopurple wrote:I have often heard NFL Coordinators/GMs say that great OL talent doesnt need to come from high level draft picks, ie that OL players are frequently created from late draft picks and that its wasteful to use a high pick for an OL player. I wonder if this is true? When you look at the top end OL players, are they high draft picks?? Or are they mostly projects from lower rounds of the draft? Clearly Spielman thinks the position doesnt warrant much investment.

Holy cow ... I submitted my question before I saw this post.

Great minds think alike!

we are just crusty old timers......
The OL is not glamorous,but they are the bedrock of a good team......

The injuries stink, but they could not be predicted. Spielman can't be blamed for bad luck. He's in the business of finding the best talent available. If it becomes obvious the Vikes need another OL, he'll be the one who has to come up with the trade to meet the need at this point, but he shouldn't be held to account for the fact he didn't anticipate the current state of affairs in the last draft, especially considering he's not one guy making the decisions that lead up to who is ultimately selected when in a given draft. The scouting department and the coaches have a lot of say in that too. If enough voices felt OL was a priority, I'm sure the draft board would have changed accordingly.

I think most everyone who follows the Vikes has felt pretty strongly that the OL has been a weak link for a while. The injuries dont really figure as the main issue. The real issue is that even when healthy, the current core hasnt been close to top notch. Injuries just magnify how thin the talent pool is on the Vikes OL.

LT Matt Kalil
LG Brandon Fusco Zac Kerin
C John Sullivan Joe Berger
RG Mike Harris Jeremiah Sirles
RT T.J. Clemmings Austin Shepherd

Anyone have concerns about the depth chart? I guess with carrying 4 TE's, does Norv plan to run a ton of two TE sets?

The draft is a risk-reward scenario. I think the big "problem" (so to speak) is that we've had such good luck in the 6th round. Fusco and Sullivan might be our two best linemen. You don't find many other positions where you can get that kind of return on low round picks, so maybe (I might have speculated this during the draft) Rick figures he needs to address the other positions in the early rounds (which he has done well IMO) and can pick up a few OL prospects late, one of which will hit every two or three years.

That isn't to say that I don't want to draft OL early. I do. But at the moment I'm in a "in Rick we trust" phase so I'm going to wait and see. Another thing is that the first round offensive linemen have really been struggling lately. If I'm remembering correctly, I wanted Jonathan Cooper a couple years back and Brandon Scherff this year, and both are not quite the players I was thinking they were (or any team drafting them in the top 10 was thinking).

Even if Sullivan is out for a while, I feel confident with our left side. I'm drinking the koolaid on Kalil and Berger is a very capable replacement, even if he isn't as good as Sullivan.

The entire right side appears to be a train wreck, but you never know. It's entirely possible that they gel enough to be competent and at least it is t Teddy's blindside.

REALLY?? You are buying into Khalil this year? Wow. Well, I am a cynic by nature and this guy has given me NO reason to change my mind. I really hope you get a chance to say "Ï told you so!", DK.......

chicagopurple wrote:REALLY?? You are buying into Khalil this year? Wow. Well, I am a cynic by nature and this guy has given me NO reason to change my mind. I really hope you get a chance to say "Ï told you so!", DK.......

The cynacism is warranted by his play the last two years, but I believe that based on his play this preseason he's rebounding. Whether it was injuries or something else, it's clear that he regressed for two years, but it's also clear that he has plenty of potential. I just think he's returning to USC/2012 form instead of continuing his plummet. Besides, I love purple koolaid.

I hope I get to tell people "I told you so", too.

Every year guys in the NFL come out of nowhere. Before the injury bug hit we were in a situation where the team was hoping (gambling) that the guy at RG would be one of these emerging players. Given the history of the organization, both Sullivan and Fusco are such players, this was not entirely unreasonable.

Now, post injuries we are hoping Joe Berger and the guy at RT also can "emerge." As I said earlier, my guess is that one of them probably will come along and be serviceable to good. All of the doing that seems unlikely. However, if the skill guys can step it up, ie AP/Bridgewater, then that should take some pressure off of them.

I think the week 5 bye week might end up being a good thing for the offense.

chicagopurple wrote:I think most everyone who follows the Vikes has felt pretty strongly that the OL has been a weak link for a while. The injuries dont really figure as the main issue. The real issue is that even when healthy, the current core hasnt been close to top notch. Injuries just magnify how thin the talent pool is on the Vikes OL.

I just can't imagine that Spielman, Zimmer and Turner are sitting there gambling their futures if they feel OL is such a priority and they choose to ignore it. I think they went into this season feeling comfortable with the players they had along the OL. And while one can make a case that they haven't spent a lot of *high* picks on the OL, that doesn't mean they haven't spent picks on OL players or extended guys they wanted to keep.

I'm not trying to be a Spielman apologist here, but I do find it hard to criticize him in this situation. All teams end up making compromises and have some thin spots. Put another way, I doubt there are any teams in the NFL that would not miss a beat if two of their starting offensive linemen went down at the same time. Most would be in the same situation as the Vikings in that case. Heck, there are a sizeable number of NFL teams that end up starting rookies along the OL every year. It's really a luxury (and a lot of good fortune) for an NFL team to be able to field quality backups at every OL position, much less quality starters.