Vikings Message Board.Com

mansquatch wrote: I dissagree with the OP that Kalil and Loadholt will be cap casualities this offseason. After the season Clemmings it would be shocking that they drop Loadholt unless he has an injury issue.

What makes it tricky is that they will have free agency and the draft BEFORE they will know whether Loadholt will have an injury issue.

There' is real uncertainty at LT, LG, C, and RT, not to mention the RG is a free agent. Can the Vikings afford not to settle some of those positions going into the season? Loadholt, Sully, Fusco and Kalil could all return to peak form, but if they don't, the Vikings will be handcuffed to lousy players with no backup plan. If they keep Kalil, Sullivan and Loadholt at current salaries, it will be hard to address the OL in free agency, leaving them having to draft a backup plan instead of going BPA, or go completely without a backup plan.

I tend to be pretty risk averse, but it seems like there might be more risk in keeping those players and hoping for the best than there is in moving on, and building a unit with a higher floor, even if they have a lower ceiling in the short term. Look at what the Raiders did last season for an example.

fiestavike wrote: What makes it tricky is that they will have free agency and the draft BEFORE they will know whether Loadholt will have an injury issue.

There' is real uncertainty at LT, LG, C, and RT, not to mention the RG is a free agent. Can the Vikings afford not to settle some of those positions going into the season? Loadholt, Sully, Fusco and Kalil could all return to peak form, but if they don't, the Vikings will be handcuffed to lousy players with no backup plan. If they keep Kalil, Sullivan and Loadholt at current salaries, it will be hard to address the OL in free agency, leaving them having to draft a backup plan instead of going BPA, or go completely without a backup plan.

I tend to be pretty risk averse, but it seems like there might be more risk in keeping those players and hoping for the best than there is in moving on, and building a unit with a higher floor, even if they have a lower ceiling in the short term. Look at what the Raiders did last season for an example.

I agree completely. It'd be one thing if we were like the #1 line in football pre injuries but the bottom line is that they weren't very good to begin with and now there is injury concern. It's riskier to try and maintain status quo to hopefully be average than it is to just start over trying to be great.

By moving on you can wipe the slate clean. With a new o-line coach we should go all out on getting the guys he wants and rebuild the whole thing if necessary. Chemistry and cohesion shouldn't even be a factor for a line that was mediocre under more ideal circumstances.

With that said if Sparano likes a guy, then of course we can keep him. But imagine Sparano says he doesn't want any of these guys or half of them or whatever. We gotta make moves to inspire change and stop aiming for "hopefully we can be mediocre" and instead try and be great.

fiestavike wrote:What makes it tricky is that they will have free agency and the draft BEFORE they will know whether Loadholt will have an injury issue.

Do you mean issues surrounding his recovery? I wouldn't worry too much about that. Loadholt will keep the medical (and the others that need to know) up to date regarding his recovery, which, by the way, seems to be right on track.

There' is real uncertainty at LT, LG, C, and RT, not to mention the RG is a free agent. Can the Vikings afford not to settle some of those positions going into the season?

I'm pretty sure they'll have settled those positions once the season starts.

I tend to be pretty risk averse, but it seems like there might be more risk in keeping those players and hoping for the best than there is in moving on, and building a unit with a higher floor, even if they have a lower ceiling in the short term.

I don't know if it's any more risk keeping those guys vs. moving on and hoping a new unit performs better. Especially when we know how important continuity, communicaiton and familiarity is with the offensive line.

mondry wrote: It'd be one thing if we were like the #1 line in football pre injuries but the bottom line is that they weren't very good to begin with

Injuries have played a huge role in not getting the most out of this line. I'm not sure we've ever seen what the "top" offensive linemen we have on our roster can all do together as a healthy unit.

2012:

LT Matt Kalil (Pro Bowl)/asset
LG: Charlie Johnson (awful) liability
C: John Sullivan (Pro Football Writers Association's All-Pro team)/asset
RG: Brandon Fusco (below average in first seasons starting)/liability
RT: Phil Loadholt (average player at this point, not great in pass protection & above-average run-blocker)/neutral-asset

2013:

LT Matt Kalil: Injury-plagued/liability
LG: Charlie Johnson: liability
C: John Sullivan: asset
RG: Brandon Fusco (improving)/asset
RT: Phil Loadholt (improving)/asset

2014:

LT: Matt Kalil: Injury-plagued/liability
LG: Charlie Johnson (older/awful)/liability
C: John Sullivan (top-5 center)/asset
RG: Brandon Fusco (3 games)/Vladimir Ducasse (awful/liability)
RT: Phil Loadholt (12 games)/Mike Harris (average/neutral)

2015:

LT: Matt Kalil: (healthy-ish): Average/neutral
LG: Brandon Fusco (playing out of primary position): liability
C: Joe Berger: asset
RG: Mike Harris: asset
RT: TJ Clemmings: liability

We have yet to see what a healthy line of Kalil, LG, Sullivan, Fusco/Harris, Loadholt looks like. The LG spot has been a liability since 2009. It's possible that if they shore up the LG spot (and Kalil stays healthy) that the rest of those guys can actually field a good-great unit.

By moving on you can wipe the slate clean. With a new o-line coach we should go all out on getting the guys he wants and rebuild the whole thing if necessary. Chemistry and cohesion shouldn't even be a factor for a line that was mediocre under more ideal circumstances.

I'm not sure how losing two of your top offensive linemen can be considered ideal circumstances. And it's really, really unlikely a team fields the type of change many have advocated over the course of a single offseason. If we see two new starters come opening day I'd be pretty surprised, actually.

With that said if Sparano likes a guy, then of course we can keep him. But imagine Sparano says he doesn't want any of these guys or half of them or whatever. We gotta make moves to inspire change and stop aiming for "hopefully we can be mediocre" and instead try and be great.

We also must be careful to change for the sake of change. If anything I think what we've also seen are depth limitations. Losing two starters really screwed a lot up. Getting Sullivan and Loadholt back could be/feel like signing two of the league's top offensive linemen (conservatively top-10 at their respective positions), assuming their full recoveries.

http://www.vikings.com/news/lunch-break ... 3b97380dcb

Vikings Not Expected to Use Franchise Tag

Not anything earth-shattering here.

Also, I forgot to ask: Can a moderator or Cliff sticky this post? That way, it doesn't have a chance to be lost on the board. Thank you.

Looks like Kelechi Osemele is set to become a free agent I think we need to sign him, at 26 he is at the perfect age and could replace Kalil, or Loadholt for close to the same price. Also with ridding ourselves of Wallace's cap space it shouldnt be an issue. Osemele seems like a guy the vikings would bring in.

The cap raises this offseason right? 12 million increase?

dead_poet wrote: Injuries have played a huge role in not getting the most out of this line. I'm not sure we've ever seen what the "top" offensive linemen we have on our roster can all do together as a healthy unit.

2012:

LT Matt Kalil (Pro Bowl)/asset
LG: Charlie Johnson (awful) liability
C: John Sullivan (Pro Football Writers Association's All-Pro team)/asset
RG: Brandon Fusco (below average in first seasons starting)/liability
RT: Phil Loadholt (average player at this point, not great in pass protection & above-average run-blocker)/neutral-asset

2013:

LT Matt Kalil: Injury-plagued/liability
LG: Charlie Johnson: liability
C: John Sullivan: asset
RG: Brandon Fusco (improving)/asset
RT: Phil Loadholt (improving)/asset

2014:

LT: Matt Kalil: Injury-plagued/liability
LG: Charlie Johnson (older/awful)/liability
C: John Sullivan (top-5 center)/asset
RG: Brandon Fusco (3 games)/Vladimir Ducasse (awful/liability)
RT: Phil Loadholt (12 games)/Mike Harris (average/neutral)

2015:

LT: Matt Kalil: (healthy-ish): Average/neutral
LG: Brandon Fusco (playing out of primary position): liability
C: Joe Berger: asset
RG: Mike Harris: asset
RT: TJ Clemmings: liability

We have yet to see what a healthy line of Kalil, LG, Sullivan, Fusco/Harris, Loadholt looks like. The LG spot has been a liability since 2009. It's possible that if they shore up the LG spot (and Kalil stays healthy) that the rest of those guys can actually field a good-great unit.
I'm not sure how losing two of your top offensive linemen can be considered ideal circumstances. And it's really, really unlikely a team fields the type of change many have advocated over the course of a single offseason. If we see two new starters come opening day I'd be pretty surprised, actually.
We also must be careful to change for the sake of change. If anything I think what we've also seen are depth limitations. Losing two starters really screwed a lot up. Getting Sullivan and Loadholt back could be/feel like signing two of the league's top offensive linemen (conservatively top-10 at their respective positions), assuming their full recoveries.

Good breakdown poet! Honestly, at this point I don't think we'll ever see Kalil, Fusco, Sullivan, Harris and Loadholt all healthy at the same time. And two of them, Sullivan and Loadholt are aging. Although I feel like an offensive linemans age can go much further than other positions. Lineman can still be very solid into their low-mid 30's.

We need to sign a good guard or tackle in FA and draft the other early. Get some depth signings along the way. Center is a huge question mark right now because you don't know if Sully can recover from this back issue or not. Harris is the only one that is a must keep right now IMO. It's going to be a crap shoot with everyone else. One tackle definitely has to go (Kalil/Loadholt), I have no problem keeping Sully if he's healthy, Fusco probably needs to be cut at this point (too much money and I think Harris is a better RG and Fusco can't stay at LG)

dead_poet wrote: Do you mean issues surrounding his recovery? I wouldn't worry too much about that. Loadholt will keep the medical (and the others that need to know) up to date regarding his recovery, which, by the way, seems to be right on track.

I don't think the doctors, the team, or Loadholt will fully know how it will affect him until he's in OTAs. He's not a guy who can afford to lose a nanosecond of reaction time. He's always been whipped pretty good by speed rushers as it was. Where is his strength and how long will it take him to get it back. In the interview posted with Fusco, he said he never got his strength up to snuff all season long after recovering from a torn pectoral the season before. The same might well be the case for Sullivan and Loadholt too.

The Vikings may have the same take you do, and feel like they can plan on Loadholt, Sully and Kalil coming back and playing at starting caliber.
I just think thats a recipe for a very poor offensive line. I'm pretty risk averse, and I just find that plan to be too risky for my taste.

Looks like the Eagles are signing MBT

10 Players Who Could Surprise in NFL Free Agency

9. Mitchell Schwartz, RT, Browns (age 26)
He’s not a dark horse to NFL insiders. A majority of teams could use an upgrade at right tackle. The fifth-year pro, who was drafted in the second round by the Browns and quietly improved each season, is as steady as they come. The rise in shotgun formations has diminished the whole blindside thing, making left tackles only nominally more valuable than right tackles. Don’t decry your team if it signs Schwartz to a nearly eight-figure annual deal with more than $25 million guaranteed.

vatusay wrote:Looks like the Eagles are signing MBT

http://www.csnphilly.com/football-phila ... l-thompson

Pondering Her Percy wrote:Honestly, at this point I don't think we'll ever see Kalil, Fusco, Sullivan, Harris and Loadholt all healthy at the same time.

Just because we haven't seen that yet doesn't mean it can't happen. I still maintain that it's in the realm of possibility that Loadholt and Sullivan are ready to go by week 1. Fusco is over a year removed from his pec injury and Harris doesn't have any kind of injury that I'm aware of. Kalil and his knees are the wild card but if he can avoid any type of surgery this offseason it's possible he actually improves from 2015 (when he wasn't a complete liability and actually and some good games against tough pass rushers like Ansah). Frankly, getting rid of Clemmings at RT should immediately upgrade the line.

And two of them, Sullivan and Loadholt are aging. Although I feel like an offensive linemans age can go much further than other positions. Lineman can still be very solid into their low-mid 30's.

Exactly! People are acting like they're both 37. Phil and Sully are both just 30! I wouldn't characterize them yet as being "injury prone." Sullivan has had a couple concussions but other than Phil's pec and now healing Achilles they don't strike me as guys that have any kind of "chronic" issues, at least perhaps none more than the average NFL player (with the caveat that Sullivan's back makes me a bit nervous, just because I don't know a lot about the injury). They could both just as easily be starting (and effective) for the next three years.

We need to sign a good guard or tackle in FA and draft the other early. Get some depth signings along the way. Center is a huge question mark right now because you don't know if Sully can recover from this back issue or not. Harris is the only one that is a must keep right now IMO. It's going to be a crap shoot with everyone else. One tackle definitely has to go (Kalil/Loadholt), I have no problem keeping Sully if he's healthy, Fusco probably needs to be cut at this point (too much money and I think Harris is a better RG and Fusco can't stay at LG)

[/quote]

I disagree that a tackle "has to go." We can get buy with Kalil playing like he did in weeks 1-12. OTs have come back and played very well after Achilles injuries as well so I'm not cutting Phil unless it's clear the injury affected him more than others, rendering him a liability. I'm OK with grooming Clemmings. We have to remember he had very limited OT experience prior being drafted so he has the "raw" label that could be Phil's replacement in a few seasons (or a decent backup). Fusco was abysmal on the left side but more than competent on the right. As I pointed out in a separate post, it took Fusco a few seasons to make the transition from college center to good NFL RG. It's not beyond the realm of possibility that if the Vikings want Fusco to stay at LG that he improves. His contract isn't excessive. I'd prefer he compete with Harris at RG and sign an above-average LG in FA or, at worst, no later than R3 in the draft if the right guy falls. I do agree that we need to draft a rookie center, though. Unless they have a young guy on the roster they're really excited about (though I'm not sure the UDFA guy(s) can be penciled in to start in a few years even if they make the 53 this season).

Vikings have to be the front-runners for Iloka, right? Assuming they're interested, but I don't see why the heck they wouldn't be.