Vikings OL and GM discussion

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

Post Reply
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4959
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
x 395

Re: Vikings OL

Post by fiestavike »

Jordysghost wrote: Yea, and all of those things point to the Vikings being a good, talented team, but you are in the beginning of this teams life cycle, now it definitly not the time for this overly aggressive 'win now' approach, very rarely does that kind of thing work and even when it does it leaves serious cap repercussions down the road.

II think you are getting to antsy and impatient, don't mortgage the future of a young team for instant gratification, your QB is only in his third year! You want to achieve your maximum potential right?

I personally think the Vikings can take that next step naturally and without any over the top win now nonsense.
Ironically, Jordy was much more bullish on the Vikings last year than most on this board.
"You like that!"
-- Cap'n Spazz Cousins
Jordysghost
Packers Suck
Posts: 2992
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:40 pm

Re: Vikings OL

Post by Jordysghost »

fiestavike wrote: Ironically, Jordy was much more bullish on the Vikings last year than most on this board.
Quite, I did say you would challenge for the division.
"Follow my lead today, whos goona be the big dog with me?" - Aaron Rodgers, February 6th, 2011
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4959
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
x 395

Re: Vikings OL

Post by fiestavike »

Jordysghost wrote:
Quite, I did say you would challenge for the division.
I'm very interested to see how they address areas of weakness in the offseason. Another great draft class a couple key free agents and this team's window could be wide open for half a decade.

The Vikings currently have 32 players with 2 years (or less) experience. 5 of those players started a majority of games last season (Barr, Kendricks, Teddy, Diggs, Clemmings). another 6 were significant contributors over the last two years (Danielle, McKinnon, Pruitt, Shamar Stephen, Thielen, Waynes).

Extend it to 3 years and you can add starters like Shariff Floyd, Xavier Rhodes, and Zach Line, as well as contributors such as Charles Johnson and Cordarelle Patterson.

Its quite possible that half or more of all opening day starters will be players with less than 3 years experience in the 2016 season.
Barr, Kendricks, Teddy, Diggs, D. Hunter, T. Waynes, Shariff Floyd, Xavier Rhodes, Zach Line, and hopefully 1 or two more rookies [or one or two guys such as Johnson/Patterson, Clemmings step up].

There's no way to be sure what the trajectory of said players will be, but that cuts both way, as promising players like Edmond Robinson, Bykowski, Chrichton, Easton, Exum, Anthony Harris, Jabari Brice, Shepherd, Sirles, or Watts could develop and boost that number even higher.

This thread is all about the big key. There is a mix of solid young players at every position group except for offensive line where there isn't a single presumptive starter with 3 years or less experience, and no clear current/longterm standout starter at any position. Given the way the Vikings have handled this position in the past its easy to assume they will fail to adequately address it this offseason, but looking at the big picture, I expect at least 1 big free agent OL to be signed, and one 1st or 2nd round pick to be spent on an offensive lineman. The need is too obvious and cupboard too bare not to.
"You like that!"
-- Cap'n Spazz Cousins
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
x 117

Re: Vikings OL

Post by mansquatch »

It is more than the OL. There is another aspect to the window and that is Adrian Petersen. When he departs this team the entire way teams defend us will change. The Rushing Attack simply will not be the same. So there is rationale for a view that it might be worth making a few big, short term signings to push in his last few seasons in Purple.

I agree with longer term approach, but that typically requires both playmaking and stability at QB. This team is showing stability in that the coaches are committed to TB, but the playmaking isn't there yet.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Vikings OL

Post by dead_poet »

mondry wrote:The reason no one answered is because it doesn't really matter what other teams do. What matters is does our team need to replace 2 or more starters? Yes. Do we have the contract flexibility and resources in the draft / FA to do it? Yes. It should be highly considered.
I think it matters when you're setting expectations. Teams simply don't replace 3+ starters on their lines over the course of a single offseason so expecting the Vikings to do that is already setting yourself up for disappointment/frustration. They have two former starters coming back that could be/have been considered top-10 players at their respective positions. That alone opens up more positional flexibility and theoretical offensive line improvement without needing to go into free agency or starting another rookie.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be highly considered (and it sounds as though Zimmer is considering anything that would improve the offense in general) -- and I agree we should target at least one quality free agent -- but I'm not inclined to give up on multiple players that have been very good in the past (despite the current unit not playing well/at a high level due to injury, replacements and growing pains) when they've never played together as a unit to properly assess their performance.

I'm very nervous thinking that replacing someone with an UDFA, seventh-round player or rookie will improve the line. Want to replace Loadholt for Schwartz? Great. Replace Fusco for Osemele? Awesome! I'm just incredibly skeptical that the organization does that. That would mean cutting two guys (that you drafted, developed, know your system, have received second contracts, are veterans NOT out of their prime with demonstrated abilities to be above-average or even "top" players) for top free agent offensive linemen commanding top free agent dollars, a philosophy that we have rarely (ever?) seen from Rick to date.
“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 OL

Post by dead_poet »

Vikings coach Mike Zimmer said Teddy Bridgewater was hit "way too many" times and that protection needs to be better for him.
Zimmer on the podium at the combine
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
User avatar
chicagopurple
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1498
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 am
x 88

Re: Vikings OL

Post by chicagopurple »

LOL....Fusco never had a a "prime" and doesnt appear he ever will.......unlike a good cut of steak, Bologna has no "prime" cut. :flamed:
User avatar
jackal
Strong Safety
Posts: 11583
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 2:05 am
Location: California
x 5

Re: Vikings OL

Post by jackal »

Top OG prospect Turner bench pressed
30 plus times at combine. He was already
considered one of the top interior OL.
no one expects the Spanish Inquisition!
mondry
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8455
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:53 pm

Re: Vikings OL

Post by mondry »

dead_poet wrote: I think it matters when you're setting expectations. Teams simply don't replace 3+ starters on their lines over the course of a single offseason so expecting the Vikings to do that is already setting yourself up for disappointment/frustration. They have two former starters coming back that could be/have been considered top-10 players at their respective positions. That alone opens up more positional flexibility and theoretical offensive line improvement without needing to go into free agency or starting another rookie.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be highly considered (and it sounds as though Zimmer is considering anything that would improve the offense in general) -- and I agree we should target at least one quality free agent -- but I'm not inclined to give up on multiple players that have been very good in the past (despite the current unit not playing well/at a high level due to injury, replacements and growing pains) when they've never played together as a unit to properly assess their performance.

I'm very nervous thinking that replacing someone with an UDFA, seventh-round player or rookie will improve the line. Want to replace Loadholt for Schwartz? Great. Replace Fusco for Osemele? Awesome! I'm just incredibly skeptical that the organization does that. That would mean cutting two guys (that you drafted, developed, know your system, have received second contracts, are veterans NOT out of their prime with demonstrated abilities to be above-average or even "top" players) for top free agent offensive linemen commanding top free agent dollars, a philosophy that we have rarely (ever?) seen from Rick to date.
All I can really say is that we have vastly different views of Kalil and Loadholt it seems. Kalil played like a top 10 LT once in his career and that was his rookie year, in other words a long long time ago and given his knee's that's not a guy I want them to invest a hefty long term contract on. I fear his recent play which imo was mediocre at best and then down right bad at times throughout the year is pretty much the norm for him now with a high chance of lingering injuries creeping in as the season wears on.

Loadholt has never been a top 10 RT imo, I simply can't call a one dimensional run blocker a top 10 player for his position in a pass happy league. He's way too inconsistent in pass blocking and that's really the killer trait both he and Kalil have.

I guess if they performed like a top 10 line (like they're being paid next year) in the past, I might feel differently but I just don't see the upside and on top of that their is significant injury concern for both players. This line has been bad for YEARS now even with those guys healthy.

The thing that seals it though is the new O-line coach, perfect time to go in a different direction and get him the guys he wants. If Sparano is sold on Kalil and Loadholt then that's a different story obviously.

Anyway I understand we were so bad that some people will be fine with just trying to walk before we try and run because it's better than the crawling we had to do this year but I'm hoping for a little more, it'd be nice to call the O-line a strength for once.
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
x 117

Re: Vikings OL

Post by mansquatch »

The sad thing is that our line wasn't unique is how bad it was. OL were terrible all over the NFL last year. Denver, had a line equally as dysfunctional as our and they won the freaking SB. Carolina was starting one of our cast offs at LT.

I'm not sure the OL as a strength exists in the NFL right now. Maybe Dallas or SF, but neither of those teams even made the playoffs.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi
User avatar
jackal
Strong Safety
Posts: 11583
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 2:05 am
Location: California
x 5

Re: Vikings OL

Post by jackal »

The sad thing is that our line wasn't unique is how bad it was. OL were terrible all over the NFL last year. Denver, had a line equally as dysfunctional as our and they won the freaking SB. Carolina was starting one of our cast offs at LT.

I'm not sure the OL as a strength exists in the NFL right now. Maybe Dallas or SF, but neither of those teams even made the playoffs.
I think Kansas City, Jets and Buffalo all had good lines .. Dallas suffered from no weapons after Romo went down
and had no real running game.. Dez Bryant missed a lot of games as well.
no one expects the Spanish Inquisition!
mondry
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8455
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:53 pm

Re: Vikings OL

Post by mondry »

mansquatch wrote:The sad thing is that our line wasn't unique is how bad it was. OL were terrible all over the NFL last year. Denver, had a line equally as dysfunctional as our and they won the freaking SB. Carolina was starting one of our cast offs at LT.

I'm not sure the OL as a strength exists in the NFL right now. Maybe Dallas or SF, but neither of those teams even made the playoffs.
The stars aligned pretty well for Denver to win the superbowl like that and as Jim and I talked about a lot, a good power running game that can exert their will on a pass rush like theirs is a good counter punch and you need a good O-line to do that. Who was our cast off on Carolina? Looked at the roster and I only recognize Yankey who never got his shot, simlar to Patterson, I guess he wasn't strong enough :roll: But either way Carolina had a top O-line all year and I believe Michael Oher is their LT but maybe I'm wrong about that.

It should be more than obvious why DAL and SF didn't make the playoffs, they are not good examples of why we shouldn't try to improve the O-line because they didn't make the playoffs with a good one.

With all that said though I do agree with you that when you face Denver the O-line is not going to be a strength but it's kind of not about that. It's about limiting the damage that Denver can do to you! If Carolina could have prevented the strip sack fumble return TD for example even if they didn't protect particularly well to move the ball preventing that defensive big play matters.
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
x 117

Re: Vikings OL

Post by mansquatch »

I think his last name was remmers. Cannot recall and don't have time to look him up. He started 5 games for them, due to injuries.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi
User avatar
halfgiz
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2289
Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 11:38 pm
x 111

Re: Vikings OL

Post by halfgiz »

Could this be what things look like to start the season? Or are we going to pick up another FA?
Assuming we sign Smith.
Thoughts??
Position:
LT
Starter: Kalil
Backup: Clemmings

LG
Boone
Fusco

C
Sully
Berger

RG
Harris
Fusco

RT
Smith
Loadholt
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Vikings OL

Post by dead_poet »

I'm thinking this is more likely (as it stands today but FA/draft will have a big impact):

LT: Kalil, Shepherd, Bykowski
LG: Boone, Kerin
C: Sullivan, Berger, Easton
RG: Fusco, Harris
RT: Loadholt, Smith (if signed), Clemmings
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
Post Reply