The Wilfs

[Pondering Her Percy]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2089 ... ce/page/33

You guys will get a kick out of this.....guess what GM ranked #1???

I dont agree with him being #1, but I'm not the only one that notices what Spielman has been doing since 2012. You can say, the record isn't showing it this year, but like I said, when an offense takes that big of a hit like it did this year, no GM can have coverage for that. Zimmer has done a great job with this defense but how does none of the credit go to Spielman either?? He brought those players in didn't he?? He's showing success on the defensive side of the ball, and the offense lost 4 core players this season and our current average age on our offense is ~25. That's pretty darn young

[The Breeze]

My biggest thing with Spielman is if you look at 2012 and beyond when he did have FULL control, his draft picks have been pretty solid compared to many other GM's. He's made moves such as trading up for Smith and Bridgewater, and the biggest one of all, he swung a 1st, 3rd, and 7th for Harvin which at the time, was figured to be next to impossible. In turn, that gave us Xavier Rhodes who has been very good so far.

Another thing is, some have complained about Joseph and Munnerlyn. However, how does anyone know what went on behind the scenes?? Nobody does. Zimmer could have easily said, "Munnerlyn and Joseph fit my system perfectly, we have to go out and get them". What's Spielman going to say?? "You don't know s###, I'm doing it my way??" No, its a mutual agreement. Some act like Spielman goes out on his own, doesn't consult anyone and just drafts freely. I can bet money that if Zimmer sits there and says, "Rick, this guy doesn't fit in my system", Rick will likely pass on him. I'm not trying to necessarily blame Zimmer or even Turner for anything, but bottom line is, it's a team effort. Spielman doesn't draft guys just to draft them. Everyone has their say on how players fit the scheme, what needs they can fill, etc.

Well, like I said, I'm not calling for his head. I would want for coaches to have a significant say on draft day and team building as per players and system...but the GM has to have a sound philosophy and understanding of the game as far as what pieces are essential and how they fit together. I think the Vikes coaches have that say and I think Spielman's picks and extensions reflect an understanding of the core elements....whether it's the right players is what remains to be seen.

Mine main concern is the glaring years long issue along the o-line. Individual grades aside, this unit has flailed yearly for a deacde in pass protection even in 09. It was Favres uncanny abilities with a great running game that masked it for the better part. Eventually it bit them though and continues to do so.

This team can continue it's efforts to develop QBs all it wants, but until they get it figured out up front they will have a real hard time doing it.

[Pondering Her Percy]

REALLY?!? REALLY??! Are you so blind that you are willing to label the Packers LOOOONG run of excellence as mere luck??? I may HATE the Pack but I am honest enough to admit that they are a far better run organization then the Vikes or most other teams....Hell, they are a tiny market but they are damn efficient. They have consistently been at the top of our division for decades....thats NOT luck.....wake up.

If you think about it though, they went from Favre to Rodgers. Rodgers first few years starting, the Packers weren't very good. If you put Aaron Rodgers on this team, we are contenders. Elite QBs make offenses. Who would Randall Cobb be in Jacksonville?? Who would TY Hilton be in Oakland?? Who would Julian Edelman be in Tennessee?? Just like who is Eric Decker in New York?? They are average AT BEST. How often has Green Bay's defense been top of the league?? Indy's?? New Orleans?? Hardly ever. This is a passing league now.

MOST OF ALL: You saw how downright pitiful the Colts were without Peyton Manning 1 year. However, they were lucky enough to be horrible the same year the best QB over the last decade was coming out. If you look at what the Colts have done personnel wise since Luck has been there, It's not very impressive at all. This past year they only brought in 5 draft picks.....FIVE. Their defense is brutal. They have no running game and their GM made a HORRIBLE trade to get a below average RB. If Spielman made that trade, people on here would be snapping. Yet, since the Colts are good.....their GM is a genius??? I questioned the GM rankings I posted above at first, but they have Grigson at 29th, which I think is actually very accurate

[chicagopurple]

BUT do you think that the Vikes Coaches would have helped Rodgers reach his current potential? I see NO history to suggest that would ever happen.

[Purpnation]

If you think about it though, they went from Favre to Rodgers. Rodgers first few years starting, the Packers weren't very good. If you put Aaron Rodgers on this team, we are contenders. Elite QBs make offenses. Who would Randall Cobb be in Jacksonville?? Who would TY Hilton be in Oakland?? Who would Julian Edelman be in Tennessee?? Just like who is Eric Decker in New York?? They are average AT BEST. How often has Green Bay's defense been top of the league?? Indy's?? New Orleans?? Hardly ever. This is a passing league now.

MOST OF ALL: You saw how downright pitiful the Colts were without Peyton Manning 1 year. However, they were lucky enough to be horrible the same year the best QB over the last decade was coming out. If you look at what the Colts have done personnel wise since Luck has been there, It's not very impressive at all. This past year they only brought in 5 draft picks.....FIVE. Their defense is brutal. They have no running game and their GM made a HORRIBLE trade to get a below average RB. If Spielman made that trade, people on here would be snapping. Yet, since the Colts are good.....their GM is a genius??? I questioned the GM rankings I posted above at first, but they have Grigson at 29th, which I think is actually very accurate

Rodgers first 3 years starting they went 6-10, 11-5, and 10-6 with a SB victory, hardly "not very good".

Its funny how people forget that the Colts, who apparently were only successful due to the QB, won a SB due to their DEFENSE, Manning had a TERRIBLE postseason in 06, per usual, but it was his DEFENSE that carried them to a SB win, so much for just 'getting lucky'. Similarly, the last year the Packers defense was dominant, was the only year they won a SB, Rodgers stat line for the season? 28-11 TD to pick ratio, good but not yet elite, His lone SB win came before he was even att the top if his game. The Saints? Have done crap since having a top 10 D.


It is easy to look at teams with great QBs and say it is only because of the QB that they win, but TEAMS win Championships, not QBs, and that is why Polian and Thompson are in a category that Speilman just doesn't belong in.

[Purpnation]

BUT do you think that the Vikes Coaches would have helped Rodgers reach his current potential? I see NO history to suggest that would ever happen.

Idk, I think it might of taken a little bit longer for him to reach his current form, but he would have reached it eventually, the dude is simply one of the best to ever play and I don't think there is much that would have changed that regardless of which team he landed with.

[Pseudo Everything]

I'd rather have the Wilfs than a cheapskate like Red McCombs or that amorphous blob otherwise known as the Gang of 10.

[Pondering Her Percy]

It is easy to look at teams with great QBs and say it is only because of the QB that they win, but TEAMS win Championships, not QBs, and that is why Polian and Thompson are in a category that Speilman just doesn't belong in.

Polian is one of the best GMs ever in the NFL IMO. But I wasn't talking about Polian. I'm talking about the current Colts and Grigson. As for the Packers, they have been a bottom 7 defense 3 of the last 4 years. In 2011, they were actually dead last and had the worst statistical defense in the league. Yet, they went 15-1 that year. Tell me how that happens??

They have missed on 3 first round picks in a row from 2011-2013.....THREE. Datone Jones, Nick Perry, and Derek Sherrod. Yet, they are still having success year after year with bad defenses and missed picks. There is only one common denominator in all of this.....Aaron Rodgers.

[Purple Reign]

Rodgers first 3 years starting they went 6-10, 11-5, and 10-6 with a SB victory, hardly "not very good".

Its funny how people forget that the Colts, who apparently were only successful due to the QB, won a SB due to their DEFENSE, Manning had a TERRIBLE postseason in 06, per usual, but it was his DEFENSE that carried them to a SB win, so much for just 'getting lucky'. Similarly, the last year the Packers defense was dominant, was the only year they won a SB, Rodgers stat line for the season? 28-11 TD to pick ratio, good but not yet elite, His lone SB win came before he was even att the top if his game. The Saints? Have done crap since having a top 10 D.

I am assuming that you mean in the Rodgers era?

[Purpnation]

Polian is one of the best GMs ever in the NFL IMO. But I wasn't talking about Polian. I'm talking about the current Colts and Grigson. As for the Packers, they have been a bottom 7 defense 3 of the last 4 years. In 2011, they were actually dead last and had the worst statistical defense in the league. Yet, they went 15-1 that year. Tell me how that happens??

They have missed on 3 first round picks in a row from 2011-2013.....THREE. Datone Jones, Nick Perry, and Derek Sherrod. Yet, they are still having success year after year with bad defenses and missed picks. There is only one common denominator in all of this.....Aaron Rodgers.

You kind of prove my point, what happened when Rodgers had a 28-11 TD int ratio with a good defense? They won a SB, what happened when Rodgers was 45-6 and set a record for passer rating? They didn't win a playoff game. It seems like a great QB can only take you so far.

As to their draft record, it is a bit silly to dismiss the entirety of those drafts and focus in on only the first round picks, that team is young, solid and talented all across the board, except for their kryptonite which happens to be run D, outside of they don't have very many weaknesses, and the GM deserves a bit of credit for that. 5 straight playoff appearances, 3 straight division titles, and a SB win all within the last 5 years takes more then just a great QB, otherwise the Saints would have accomplished far more then they have these last few years.

[Purpnation]

I am assuming that you mean in the Rodgers era?

Yep, my apologies, I should have been more clear.

[Pondering Her Percy]

You kind of prove my point, what happened when Rodgers had a 28-11 TD int ratio with a good defense? They won a SB, what happened when Rodgers was 45-6 and set a record for passer rating? They didn't win a playoff game. It seems like a great QB can only take you so far.

As to their draft record, it is a bit silly to dismiss the entirety of those drafts and focus in on only the first round picks, that team is young, solid and talented all across the board, except for their kryptonite which happens to be run D, outside of they don't have very many weaknesses, and the GM deserves a bit of credit for that.

I agree you need the total package to win a SB. In my initial post, I said an elite QB "makes an OFFENSE". Not an entire team in general. I think our posts were both misread along the way which happens. What I'm saying is, if you have a elite QB, of course your team is going to be good. No matter how bad your defense is. Rodgers proved that in 2011. However, my main point is, I feel like an elite QB covers up a lot of flaws in a GM and what a GM has ACTUALLY done for a team. Grigson in Indy is a perfect example. He looks like a good GM why?? Because the Colts are good because they have the best young QB in the game?? Even though he made a terrible trade for Richardson. And you also look at their defense..... and they are pretty pitiful as well. The Colts would be so bad without Andrew Luck its not even funny. What would TY Hilton, Donte Moncrief, and Dwayne Allen be on the Jacksonville Jaguars (I left Wayne out because he was already an established WR)???. They are who they are because of Luck. A QB like that even makes his offensive line look better.

Bottom line is, many (not all) elite QBs, make their GMs look wayyyy better than they actually are. Above you also mentioned how Thompson hit on some mid round picks which is true, he did find some decent talent there....but when you strike out 3 years in a row in the 1st round....thats not a good sign. That is where you find your ELITE talent, not your plug-and-play average talent. People on here would be calling for Spielman's head if that were us in that instance. However, since these guys have elite QBs running the offense, they don't look nearly as bad. There offensive holes don't show nearly as much.

What I like about Spielman is that he has built a top 12 defense. Obviously, with some help from Zimmer but Spielman was the one that brought them in. Guys like Floyd, Joseph, extending Griffen, Barr, Hodges, Munnerlyn, Rhodes, and Smith. 4 of those guys Zimmer didnt even have a hand in. He has a great core group on defense that can only get better with the coaching and future additions. As for the offense, we don't have that elite QB yet. Not saying that won't be Teddy but he's obviously not to that level yet. However, if you put an Andrew Luck or an Aaron Rodgers on this team, how much better does Spielman look?? How much better would our line look?? Our WRs?? Perhaps our running game?? No different when an elite QB like Favre was here. He worked wonders for this offense.

[Purpnation]

I agree you need the total package to win a SB. In my initial post, I said an elite QB "makes an OFFENSE". Not an entire team in general. I think our posts were both misread along the way which happens. What I'm saying is, if you have a elite QB, of course your team is going to be good. No matter how bad your defense is. Rodgers proved that in 2011. However, my main point is, I feel like an elite QB covers up a lot of flaws in a GM and what a GM has ACTUALLY done for a team. Grigson in Indy is a perfect example. He looks like a good GM why?? Because the Colts are good because they have the best young QB in the game?? Even though he made a terrible trade for Richardson. And you also look at their defense..... and they are pretty pitiful as well. The Colts would be so bad without Andrew Luck its not even funny. What would TY Hilton, Donte Moncrief, and Dwayne Allen be on the Jacksonville Jaguars (I left Wayne out because he was already an established WR)???. They are who they are because of Luck. A QB like that even makes his offensive line look better.

Bottom line is, many (not all) elite QBs, make their GMs look wayyyy better than they actually are. Above you also mentioned how Thompson hit on some mid round picks which is true, he did find some decent talent there....but when you strike out 3 years in a row in the 1st round....thats not a good sign. That is where you find your ELITE talent, not your plug-and-play average talent. People on here would be calling for Spielman's head if that were us in that instance. However, since these guys have elite QBs running the offense, they don't look nearly as bad. There offensive holes don't show nearly as much.

What I like about Spielman is that he has built a top 12 defense. Obviously, with some help from Zimmer but Spielman was the one that brought them in. Guys like Floyd, Joseph, extending Griffen, Barr, Hodges, Munnerlyn, Rhodes, and Smith. 4 of those guys Zimmer didnt even have a hand in. He has a great core group on defense that can only get better with the coaching and future additions. As for the offense, we don't have that elite QB yet. Not saying that won't be Teddy but he's obviously not to that level yet. However, if you put an Andrew Luck or an Aaron Rodgers on this team, how much better does Spielman look?? How much better would our line look?? Our WRs?? Perhaps our running game?? No different when an elite QB like Favre was here. He worked wonders for this offense.

Yea I did misread your post man, my bad.

You make very solid points, and that was a good post, I agree 100% an Elite QB covers up many deficiencies, I think that goes without saying, I have just heard alot of people discredit guys like Polian ( I know you were referring to Grigson) and Thompson as being products of an elite QB, when IMO they were/are very solid GMs.

[Mothman]

I'd rather have the Wilfs than a cheapskate like Red McCombs or that amorphous blob otherwise known as the Gang of 10.

What about an actual amorphous blob? That might get interesting!

[maembe]

You make very solid points, and that was a good post, I agree 100% an Elite QB covers up many deficiencies, I think that goes without saying, I have just heard alot of people discredit guys like Polian ( I know you were referring to Grigson) and Thompson as being products of an elite QB, when IMO they were/are very solid GMs.

If they're so good, why haven't they been able to draft as well as our gm who deserves to be fired (referring to Thompson)?