Vikings Message Board.Com

Eli wrote: Haven't you heard? Fusco is great.
And Sullivan might one day be in the Hall of Fame.

I dunno... I'm hoping they go back to mostly zone blocking. Despite his size, Kalil seems to be much more of a finesse player. The only "road grader" out there these days is Loadholt, as Sullivan and Fusco are both a little undersized and get pushed around a lot.

Lol, I have been Fusco's biggest critic and I repeated get slammed for criticizing his play. He isn't a great player by any measure. He is better than Artis Hicks and Anthony Herrera, but that ain't saying too much. Fusco could easily be replaced, but he will not be. I hope this team is at least smart enough to get a stud left guard in the fold again.

Also, I will extremely disappointed if this team deviates from a zone blacking scheme. Every lineman we have except Phil fits the zone scheme.

PurpleMustReign wrote: Yep. PFF had an article about every Viking lineman and said that he was the best, or in the top 5, at their position. If it were even remotely true, the QBs would have had way mroe time to throw the ball than what they did. The OL was pathetic.

The oline may have had a few games that were bad, as most every oline in the league will. But a lot of what appeared to be poor oline play was simply poor QB play. Nobody was complaining about the oline when Cassel was playing QB. Why? Because Cassel could throw on time or could step up or away to avoid pressure if the play wasn't open immediately. Ponder had a horrible pocket presence, it may have been his worse trait as a QB. He panicked under pressure, dropped his eyes, altered his stance into a more running stance. That is if he felt the pressure at all. He caused this myth of poor oline play by holding the ball too long or running directly into pressure. He made it very hard on the Oline

CbusVikesFan wrote: You cannot go wrong with a Sheltie. But be forewarned, them and Border Collies are not for the lazy, or mostly shy people. They are excitable and loveable. Very high energy. Loyal and highly intelligent.
We used to play this game when I was busy and he was bored. GO GET...
the stick
the ball
the blue ball
the rope
the Frisbee
the bone
He started off just grabbing whatever, but soon, he had the words down and always brought the right one. Then to mess with him, I would hide some of those things, ask him to go get one of the items and he would look at me with this face. "Dude, it's not in here". Then I would ask where it was at and he would look until he found it. Then there were hours of entertainment with a flashlight or pointer.

I love my Shelties! They are so good (for the most part) and get along very well, just like brothers.

SHELTIES RULE!!!

saint33 wrote:The oline may have had a few games that were bad, as most every oline in the league will. But a lot of what appeared to be poor oline play was simply poor QB play. Nobody was complaining about the oline when Cassel was playing QB. Why? Because Cassel could throw on time or could step up or away to avoid pressure if the play wasn't open immediately. Ponder had a horrible pocket presence, it may have been his worse trait as a QB. He panicked under pressure, dropped his eyes, altered his stance into a more running stance. That is if he felt the pressure at all. He caused this myth of poor oline play by holding the ball too long or running directly into pressure. He made it very hard on the Oline

No offense, but heaping the responsibility on Ponder seems like an overly simple explanation to me. I don't think the o-line issues were a myth and they weren't confined to plays involving pass protection either. Cassel was better at recognizing the blitz and better in the pocket than Ponder and that reduced some of the negative plays that resulted from inadequate protection but there were still times when both QBs were back there when there were inexcusable breakdowns in protection. There were also far too many plays where the run-blocking was just plain lousy. There are reasons why Kalil's second season was considered a disappointment, why the right tackle position sometimes looked like a turnstile and why left guard is widely considered an area the team needs to upgrade and they extend well beyond Christian Ponder.

Mothman wrote:
No offense, but heaping the responsibility on Ponder seems like an overly simple explanation to me. I don't think the o-line issues were a myth and they weren't confined to plays involving pass protection either. Cassel was better at recognizing the blitz and better in the pocket than Ponder and that reduced some of the negative plays that resulted from inadequate protection but there were still times when both QBs were back there when there were inexcusable breakdowns in protection. There were also far too many plays where the run-blocking was just plain lousy. There are reasons why Kalil's second season was considered a disappointment, why the right tackle position sometimes looked like a turnstile and why left guard is widely considered an area the team needs to upgrade and they extend well beyond Christian Ponder.

Obviously I am not saying the Oline was perfect in every facet of the game and every negative play can be blamed on Ponder. I think everyone knows that Charlie Johnson was overall pretty lousy this season. Matt Kalil struggled badly in a few games earlier in the season (the Dallas game especially). Phil Loadholt had a rough first couple games. These are not things that are all on Ponder obviously.

But there is a misconception from the fans that this offensive line was well below average this season, especially in pass protection. And that's simply not true. Your quote about RT being a turnstile for example. Loadholt had a really rough start to the season, but after a certain game (I can't remember which game it was, maybe the 3rd) he did not give up a single sack for the rest of the season. There is also a running misconception from a large group of fans that Brandon Fusco is a below average player.

I guess I just feel it comes down to a lot of fan's ability to realistically assess offensive line play. Most fans, and I'm not suggesting you or any other specific person, see pressure on a QB and automatically chalk it up to a failure in protection. Or they see a RB get stuffed at the line and again, failure for the oline. But that's not always the case, and the fact that we saw what appeared to be significant improvements from the oline when Matt Cassel was the QB is not a coincidence. And if you don't believe me, go back to the game day threads about those games or different threads about those games and compare them to the ones when Ponder was playing. You'll see a significant difference in the assessment of our line play.

I don't think Ponder is completely incompetent like others do, although he was at times this season. But if there is one thing that he is completely incompetent at, it's playing within the pocket. He's just not good at all the aspects it requires to be a good pocket passer. He struggles to read blitzes, which result in free men coming through the line and sacking him, something that is almost always blamed on the oline by fans, but in reality is a QB miscue. Ponder should recognize where his blitzers are coming from presnap, and should be able to exploit that, instead the blitz hits home more often than not. And the same can be said for Ponders feel for the pocket, it's just simply very poor. There have been countless times throughout his career when Ponder has simply run into pressure. It's a subtle difference, but the good QBs in the league will make just a shuffle one way or another and find that sweet spot in a pocket, where as Ponder will find a spot that makes it easy for defenders to tackle him.


Anyways, to sum up what I'm trying to say is that while you may think I'm just trying to "cop out" and excuse the line play on the QB, I'm not. In fact what I'm suggesting is that those who believe our line play, especially our pass protection, was horrible this season are actually copping out some glaring mistakes from our QB and putting the majority of the blame on an offensive line that was given a much larger task than many other lines in the league. And this is why there seems to be such a disconnect when you read what fans have to say about the line, and then look at website who actually evaluate the play of our oline (like PFF or the ESPN positional breakdowns). The "analysts" give out positive grades for the season to players like Fusco, Sullivan and Loadholt, and that doesn't fit at all what the fan's general beliefs are. And I think that's simply a misconception by the fans who are not as well versed, nor do they put in the amount of time it takes to truly analyze how well an offensive line is performing.

saint33 wrote:Obviously I am not saying the Oline was perfect in every facet of the game and every negative play can be blamed on Ponder. I think everyone knows that Charlie Johnson was overall pretty lousy this season. Matt Kalil struggled badly in a few games earlier in the season (the Dallas game especially). Phil Loadholt had a rough first couple games. These are not things that are all on Ponder obviously.

But there is a misconception from the fans that this offensive line was well below average this season, especially in pass protection. And that's simply not true. Your quote about RT being a turnstile for example. Loadholt had a really rough start to the season, but after a certain game (I can't remember which game it was, maybe the 3rd) he did not give up a single sack for the rest of the season. There is also a running misconception from a large group of fans that Brandon Fusco is a below average player.

I guess I just feel it comes down to a lot of fan's ability to realistically assess offensive line play. Most fans, and I'm not suggesting you or any other specific person, see pressure on a QB and automatically chalk it up to a failure in protection. Or they see a RB get stuffed at the line and again, failure for the oline. But that's not always the case, and the fact that we saw what appeared to be significant improvements from the oline when Matt Cassel was the QB is not a coincidence. And if you don't believe me, go back to the game day threads about those games or different threads about those games and compare them to the ones when Ponder was playing. You'll see a significant difference in the assessment of our line play.

I don't think Ponder is completely incompetent like others do, although he was at times this season. But if there is one thing that he is completely incompetent at, it's playing within the pocket. He's just not good at all the aspects it requires to be a good pocket passer. He struggles to read blitzes, which result in free men coming through the line and sacking him, something that is almost always blamed on the oline by fans, but in reality is a QB miscue. Ponder should recognize where his blitzers are coming from presnap, and should be able to exploit that, instead the blitz hits home more often than not. And the same can be said for Ponders feel for the pocket, it's just simply very poor. There have been countless times throughout his career when Ponder has simply run into pressure. It's a subtle difference, but the good QBs in the league will make just a shuffle one way or another and find that sweet spot in a pocket, where as Ponder will find a spot that makes it easy for defenders to tackle him.

Anyways, to sum up what I'm trying to say is that while you may think I'm just trying to "cop out" and excuse the line play on the QB, I'm not. In fact what I'm suggesting is that those who believe our line play, especially our pass protection, was horrible this season are actually copping out some glaring mistakes from our QB and putting the majority of the blame on an offensive line that was given a much larger task than many other lines in the league. And this is why there seems to be such a disconnect when you read what fans have to say about the line, and then look at website who actually evaluate the play of our oline (like PFF or the ESPN positional breakdowns). The "analysts" give out positive grades for the season to players like Fusco, Sullivan and Loadholt, and that doesn't fit at all what the fan's general beliefs are. And I think that's simply a misconception by the fans who are not as well versed, nor do they put in the amount of time it takes to truly analyze how well an offensive line is performing.

Good post. I understand where you're coming from, although I have to quibble a bit with your comment that a free blitzer coming through the line and sacking the QB is a QB miscue. Sometimes that's true and sometimes it isn't... but I suspect you know that already.

Anyway, we're probably not far apart on this. I reacted to your comment about the "myth of poor oline play" because I definitely don't see it as a myth but I'm not among fans who think the o-line was horrible all season either. I do think that overall, they were average-to-below average. That's a personal assessment based on what I saw from them while watching every game so please, take it for what little it's probably worth. To me, their play was as inconsistent and unreliable as the performances of Ponder and Cassel and just like the QB position, I see the line as an area that needs to be upgraded and improved if the Vikings are going to compete with the best in the league.

As for Loadholt, he may not have allowed a sack over the final 13 games but he certainly continued to allow speed rushers to get around him and disrupt plays. However, I should clarify that when I made that comment about the RT position sometimes being a turnstile, I was including Webb as Loadholt.

Hank Fraley - C - Vikings

Vikings hired former Rams, Eagles, and Browns OL Hank Fraley as assistant offensive line coach.

Fraley spent a decade in the NFL (2001-2010), primarily playing center. He was last heard of when the Rams made Fraley one of their final cuts in 2011 camp. In Minnesota, Fraley will be tasked with coaching up young OLs Matt Kalil, John Sullivan, Brandon Fusco, and Phil Loadholt.

Hope we find those guard sooner rather than later. Or we'll be looking for a center and tackle by the time we do...

Vikings add head strength and conditioning coach Evan Marcus and assistant strength and conditioning coach Jeff Hurd to complete staff.

dead_poet wrote:Vikings add head strength and conditioning coach Evan Marcus and assistant strength and conditioning coach Jeff Hurd to complete staff.

Do they still have Sugarman or whatever his name is?

PurpleMustReign wrote: Do they still have Sugarman or whatever his name is?

Yeah, I think so. They'd be stupid to axe him.

Jacoby Jones pooch kick for a TD was made me realize how awesome Mike Priefer is and how innovative he really is.

NextQuestion wrote:Jacoby Jones pooch kick for a TD was made me realize how awesome Mike Priefer is and how innovative he really is.

How many times have we seen pooch kicks executed properly against Patterson?

Honestly, I know a lot of people want to blame the coach for that, but I think the kick was executed poorly by Walsh. That ball has to be pooched directly to one of the players blocking for Jones, instead it was pooched to a spot where Jones could run up and get it.

saint33 wrote:Oh and before someone (not going to name any names) points out in a snarky fashion that we used draft picks on our kicker and punter, which means they should be expected to be great, I'll just point out a few statistics.

In the past 5 years 20 specialists (kickers or punters) have been drafted. In the past 10 years 44 specialists have been drafted. In that same time frame, 20 specialist have been drafted in the 5th round or higher, including four in the 3rd round and even one in the 2nd round. So it would be nice if people stopped acting like drafting a kicker or punter is a waste of a pick and is some sort of rare decision that should only be made on sure fire elite specialists.

Yes, but if you want to credit Walsh's success to Priefer, he should get an equal amount of credit for the failure of Locke.