Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by Mothman »

http://blog.startribune.com/sports/acce ... nsive-line
After quarterback Teddy Bridgewater was sacked eight times in Sunday’s 17-3 loss to the Lions, Vikings head coach Mike Zimmer said today the team is considering changes on the offensive line.

“We are evaluating all that and I’m not opposed to it,” Zimmer said at his Monday news conference.

Zimmer, who didn’t want to speak specifically about any one lineman, said that a variety of factors led to the Lions spending so much time in the backfield, including Bridgewater being indecisive at times. According to Pro Football Focus, the rookie QB was pressured on 24 of his 47 dropbacks.
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by Mothman »

There's a longer article on the same subject at the PP site:

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_267 ... ions-table
Options include veteran center Joe Berger, who has played both guard positions, and swing tackle Mike Harris, claimed off waivers from San Diego on Aug. 31.

Rookie guard David Yankey has been inactive all six weeks, while rookie tackle Austin Wentworth has only been active for three.

None has the experience or cachet of starting left guard Charlie Johnson, right tackle Phil Loadholt, center John Sullivan or left tackle Matt Kalil, whose ongoing struggles at the most pivotal position have become chronic.

Pass protection is at a premium with rookie Teddy Bridgewater learning how to quarterback on the fly. The Vikings have allowed more sacks (14) than they have scored points (13) in the past two weeks.

Only the Jacksonville Jaguars (27) have allowed more sacks than Minnesota (21).
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4959
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
x 395

Re: Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by fiestavike »

Its tricky to come up with the best combo of linemen and its frightening to consider we might be starting them already!

The big question is what to do with Kalil. Would he be better at RT? If not, I don't see a place for him on the field. He's not a great run blocker, and now he's also a below average pass blocker. Maybe the simplest thing to do would just be to bench him in place of Harris?

If he would do better at RT, we could slide Loadholt in at RG and try Harris at LT?

Either of these scenarios assume that Harris would be an upgrade over Kalil. I'm not sure that's the case.
"You like that!"
-- Cap'n Spazz Cousins
losperros
Commissioner
Posts: 10041
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Location: Burbank, California

Re: Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by losperros »

I'm not sure how many real changes can be made at this point. Who do the Vikings have that's better than their OL starters? The changes will have to happen during the off-season.

Either that or the guys that are already there have to play better. The Vikings OL may not be the best in the NFL. But seriously, they certainly have played better than last Sunday.
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by Mothman »

I'm inclined to keep Kalil where he is, give him some help and see if he can ride this out. There are stretches where he plays quite well but then breakdowns occur and they look disastrous. Loadholt's the same way on the other side.

The coaches need to look at how the backup players are performing in practice and if it looks like someone deserves a shot to start over one of the underachieving OL starters, put 'em in and see what happens.

Meanwhile, I think the Vikes need to change several dynamics that are leading to ugly losses and Norv is going to have to find some way to use more fast-developing plays. That will help Bridgewater get the ball out quicker and take some pressure off the struggling o-line. They Vikes also need to find their running game. That relies on the OL too but sometimes, the best way to right a struggling OL is to challenge them to get physical and push a defense around for 4 quarters. Give it to MckInnon, Felton, Asiata... heck give Line a chance if it will work! This team already has 3 games where they've run the ball for less than 70 yards. That's just putting more pressure on the passing game and the poor pass protection.

They also have to play better defense early in games. The Vikes are allowing an average of 8.5 points in the first quarter this year. Only the Bucs defense has been worse (with an average of 12!). The Vikes are better in the second quarter (6.3 average) but still among the worst in first half points allowed, with a 14.8 average. They keep giving up early leads and I think that compounds their problems because opposing teams aren't worried about a home run threat (not much need to be overly concerned by Patterson at this point—he hasn't been much of a factor for the past 5 weeks) or the running game. They can just go after the QB.

I don't have any easy answers but I do think the answers lie in playing better defense early, establishing and sustaining a running game and utilizing game plans that get the ball out of Teddy's hands more quickly. The OL still needs to step up and do their part but maybe taking a little pressure off them in the passing game and putting it on them in the running game will help.

Of course, that might not be the best game plan against the top-ranked Bills run defense. :(
User avatar
chicagopurple
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1498
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 am
x 88

Re: Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by chicagopurple »

Berger has got to be reallllly old by now, it seems he has been around forever......once again...we are grasping at straws. Do we really have no one on the dev squad?!....sigh.....
User avatar
Texas Vike
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4672
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:52 am
x 405

Re: Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by Texas Vike »

Mothman wrote:There's a longer article on the same subject at the PP site:

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_267 ... ions-table
Charlie Johnson has "cachet"? Maybe if he's competing against high school players! :lol:

I think Zimmer's openness to replacing players, even if it's temporary, can be a good thing if handled appropriately. These guys need to get their act together and they seem to need a serious incentive to do it. I have to wonder, too, if the shift in blocking schemes is part of the problem. It seems that Zim's transition from Cover-2 to a tighter/ more aggressive pass defending technique has given good results, but this blocking scheme shift has not gone smoothly.
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by Mothman »

Texas Vike wrote:Charlie Johnson has "cachet"? Maybe if he's competing against high school players! :lol:
Are you kidding me? Charlie Johnson is swimming in cachet, my friend!
I think Zimmer's openness to replacing players, even if it's temporary, can be a good thing if handled appropriately. These guys need to get their act together and they seem to need a serious incentive to do it. I have to wonder, too, if the shift in blocking schemes is part of the problem. It seems that Zim's transition from Cover-2 to a tighter/ more aggressive pass defending technique has given good results, but this blocking scheme shift has not gone smoothly.
I've mentioned the same things and I'm guessing some miscommunication or misunderstanding of assignments has played at least a partial role in the line's shoddy performance.
BGM
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5948
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 11:39 am

Re: Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by BGM »

Mothman wrote: Are you kidding me? Charlie Johnson is swimming in cachet, my friend!
That made me snort and guffaw at the same time. :-)
I think Zimmer's openness to replacing players, even if it's temporary, can be a good thing if handled appropriately. These guys need to get their act together and they seem to need a serious incentive to do it. I have to wonder, too, if the shift in blocking schemes is part of the problem. It seems that Zim's transition from Cover-2 to a tighter/ more aggressive pass defending technique has given good results, but this blocking scheme shift has not gone smoothly.
I've mentioned the same things and I'm guessing some miscommunication or misunderstanding of assignments has played at least a partial role in the line's shoddy performance.[/quote][/quote]

After he clarified what he said, I feel much better about how he is handling the locker room. To be honest, the idea that there was a lack of discipline during the week flat out shocked me. I like that he is holding practice squad players to a standard, as well. Maybe that is common or just assumed, but I still like it.
"You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airline. It helps if you have some kind of a football team, or some nuclear weapons, but at the very least you need a beer." - Frank Zappa
Pseudo Everything
Transition Player
Posts: 399
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 12:17 pm

Re: Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by Pseudo Everything »

I thought the preseason validated why David Yankey slid to the 5th round. Replacing Johnson with Yankey might not be the upgrade that fans think it will be; in fact it might even be a downgrade. Charlie Johnson isn't very good anymore and needs to be replaced but I also don't think he is as bad as he's made out to be on internet message boards. I like Yankey as a prospect but its probably going to take some time for him to develop. If we keep losing we'll reach a point in the season where we should start playing a guy like Yankey in order to give him experience and get him ready for next year. Will Zimmer do that?

Vladimir Ducasse was on the bubble for making the roster; now he's our starting RG. I was surprised that we didn't use Berger or Yankey (instead of Ducasse) to fill in for Fusco. Guess they like Ducasse's size and experience. His play so far is about on par with his rep. Medicore castoff who couldn't cut it with the Jets. I don't see him being replaced.

Matt Kalil isn't going anywhere. We have no one on the roster who is even close to being an upgrade. If we did plan on sitting him we better be confident in his replacement because I could easily see Kalil's already shaky confidence being completely shattered and/or his attitude going down the toilet if he was benched.

Phil Loadholt got the big money and now he's playing like he's worth about half his contract. Chicago made a run at him in free agency. They drove his salary up but were they serious about signing him or did they punk Spielman? Mike Harris was an undrafted free agent who got some playing time with the Chargers due to a rash of injuries. As soon as guys ahead of him got healthy he rode the pine and couldn't make the final cut in SD this year. Harris is an option (I guess) and I suppose Wentworth is as well. Does anyone think either of these guys would be an upgrade?

Leaves us with John Sullivan. I don't understand why Sullivan gets a pass when it comes to critiquing the OL play. He's overrated in my book. Would Zimmer replace Sullivan with Berger? I doubt it. I think Sullivan is more or less untouchable.

Bottom line ... because of our questionable depth at OL, I don't think replacing one or two starters will give us a better chance at protecting Bridgewater or improving our run game. I could easily see our OL getting worse, not better, by elevating one or more of our subs.
BGM
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5948
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 11:39 am

Re: Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by BGM »

Pseudo Everything wrote:
Leaves us with John Sullivan. I don't understand why Sullivan gets a pass when it comes to critiquing the OL play. He's overrated in my book. Would Zimmer replace Sullivan with Berger? I doubt it. I think Sullivan is more or less untouchable.
I agree that he has dodged much criticism. This season is making plain what others have said all along, this OL really is not as good as advertised. That is one of the downsides of having an All-World RB. You assume these guys are better than they are.
"You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airline. It helps if you have some kind of a football team, or some nuclear weapons, but at the very least you need a beer." - Frank Zappa
mondry
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8455
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:53 pm

Re: Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by mondry »

The best bet of replacing someone and actually getting an upgrade is LG charlie johnson with Yankey or Berger. Johnson is bad enough where there isn't going to be much downside to putting Yankee in there and letting him and kalil build some chemistry for the future.

I don't see any other viable changes, RG maybe but I feel if they thought someone would give them a better performance at RG they would have just went with them instead of Ducasse.

All in all doesn't bode well for our O-line this season.
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by dead_poet »

chicagopurple wrote:Berger has got to be reallllly old by now, it seems he has been around forever......once again...we are grasping at straws. Do we really have no one on the dev squad?!....sigh.....
Berger is 32.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by dead_poet »

It will be very interesting to see how Kalil finishes out the season. That will go a long way into determining our early draft selections.

That said, the free agent offensive line market isn't exactly bursting with talent.

Doug Free (will be 31 in January)
Bryan Bulaga
James Carpenter
Orlando Franklin
Michael Roos (32 years old and just sustained a knee injury)
King Dunlap

Bottom line is Spielman has to realize that keeping Teddy alive is Priority #1. The offseason and draft had better reflect this.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
Pseudo Everything
Transition Player
Posts: 399
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2014 12:17 pm

Re: Vikings considering changes on the offensive line

Post by Pseudo Everything »

BGM wrote: I agree that he has dodged much criticism. This season is making plain what others have said all along, this OL really is not as good as advertised. That is one of the downsides of having an All-World RB. You assume these guys are better than they are.
Makes me wonder what Peterson could have done with an elite OL in front of him (like the talent the 49ers have on their OL). He probably would have not only broke Eric Dickerson's record; might have shattered it.

If AD plays again for the Vikings, job one is for him to whip the OL into shape.
Post Reply