A message board dedicated to the discussion of Minnesota Viking Football.
https://vikingsmessageboard.com/
Excellent stuff. The question is, do people have the patience and discipline to look at every GFY and analyze the plays for themselves before forming their opinions about Kalil's actual performance instead of just joining in on the "Kalil sucks" groupthink pile-on?Skolcanada wrote:http://www.reddit.com/r/minnesotaviking ... back_week/
Not mine. Just thought it was good in depth analysis.
My issue with Kalil is that he has struggled that past two seasons, and has not had the positive effect he had as a rookie. He is NOT a bum, but he is also not an elite LT, which is what I expected him to become. I think he can be, but I have doubts about the coaching (which have been longstanding with me) and doubts about whether he can overcome whatever psychological blocks have been thrown up in his way. If he does, then the sky's the limit. We'll see.chicagopurple wrote:the other big question would be that if you really do think he sucks....where is our better option at that position?? I don't see it. It IS an important question because now its all about Teddy and we dont want our star of the future becoming a skittish QB with post-traumatic stress syndrome........
What other word would you describe Kalil's play the past 2 years? Sucks may be a way to describe it, him being a bum may be another. Good isnt one of them. Average might be, but that's kin of hard to stomach with a 4th overall pick.Leafman wrote: Excellent stuff. The question is, do people have the patience and discipline to look at every GFY and analyze the plays for themselves before forming their opinions about Kalil's actual performance instead of just joining in on the "Kalil sucks" groupthink pile-on?
LEAFMAN THE PURPLE FAN
Here's your answer, Leafman.PurpleKoolaid wrote: What other word would you describe Kalil's play the past 2 years? Sucks may be a way to describe it, him being a bum may be another. Good is one of them. Average might be, but that's kin of hard to stomach with a 4th overall pick.
I find that patently unfair. Kalil has played less than stellar and seems to have regressed since his rookie season. I don't think there is anyone here who could disagree with that. Word choice notwithstanding Kalil has definitely underperformed the last two seasons. It isn't groupthink, it isn't unfair, it is a serious critique of an NFL player who was chosen 4th overall in the NFL draft, and it does not seem out of line to say that his play has sucked a bit these past two seasons. At the very least, it has definitely not met expectations. Unless you believe what he has done on the field is All Pro caliber. I don't.DKSweets wrote:Here's your answer, Leafman.
What's unfair is saying that the player sucks or that he's a bum. If you look at those plays, he has more good plays than bad plays, and a lot of average plays. He might not be the once-in-a-decade player we had hoped for, but when you look at the players drafted around him, (RG3, Trent Richardson, Justin Blackmon, Morris Claiborne, Mark Barron, Stephen Gilmore) only two players are performing better: Luck and Kuechly. But I'm sure EVERYBODY knew Kuechly was going to be this good, right?BGM wrote: I find that patently unfair. Kalil has played less than stellar and seems to have regressed since his rookie season. I don't think there is anyone here who could disagree with that. Word choice notwithstanding Kalil has definitely underperformed the last two seasons. It isn't groupthink, it isn't unfair, it is a serious critique of an NFL player who was chosen 4th overall in the NFL draft, and it does not seem out of line to say that his play has sucked a bit these past two seasons. At the very least, it has definitely not met expectations. Unless you believe what he has done on the field is All Pro caliber. I don't.
If you want to discuss whether he is struggling with the schemes, the assignments, his technique, his psychology - those lead to possibly fruitful discussions. But I tire of the marginalization of those with whom we do not agree.
Good call. I am going to try to be more mindful in my criticism of players that I don't use that kind of terminology.Mothman wrote:Words like "sucks" and "bum" paint a more extreme picture and consequently, end up being divisive, as does a phrase like '"Kalil sucks" groupthink pile-on". If we keep going down that road, we'll end up right where the board was with Ponder a year ago. I don't think anybody wants that.
Brian has a point about marginalizing individuals with different opinions and DKSweets has a point about marginalizing a player whose performance is frustratingly inconsistent but certainly not awful. If we try to avoid lumping each other into groups, keep our focus on football and try to acknowledge that extreme descriptions of a player's performance are rarely the best fit, we'll probably all end up having more productive discussions and we'll enjoy this place more.
That's my take anyway.