Vikings still in an uptrend

[mike2mike]

Technically speaking, the Vikings are still in an uptrend since the 2011 low of 3-13. A failure to hold 8-7-1 moving forward would violate that uptrend.
Lows:
3-13 2011 season
5-10-1 2013 season
7-9 2014 season
8-8 2016 season
8-7-1 2018 season

Highs:
10-6 2012 season
11-5 2015 season
13-3 2017 season

Any suggestion that Vikes are on the decline is speculation. While they do have less cap flexibility and have locked their fate into the success of Cousins (barring a Brock Osweiller style trade of draft pick AND Cousins to get the guarenteed contract off the books) they still have ways to improve the team, the OL particularly and there are ways to free up a lot of cap room if we are willing to cut or trade some veterans (Sendejo $5.5M, Rudolph $7.65M, Griffin ~$11M) or the middle ground is try to get them to take a paycut.

[VikingLord]

I'm not going to argue about the trend line for the team. They may very well be in an "uptrend".

But that isn't the point I don't think.

I've been watching this team for a long time, and I've seen the team go through uptrends and downtrends and things in between those two if there are such things. At this point, trends don't matter. I want them to at least get to, and preferably win, a Superbowl. I'd take that even if they had to mortgage their next 20 years. If it meant they'd finally win just one Superbowl, I'd gladly take it at this point.

I think for me, if they want to win with Cousins as the QB, they're going to need a dominant offensive line. They're going to need an offensive line that can consistently pass protect and keep Cousins comfortable in the pocket. Cousins has the arm and experience, but the guy simply isn't a good scrambler and doesn't do a great job protecting the ball. So he's going to need a line he can trust and as things stand, the Vikings have one of the worst groups to provide him that level of confidence.

They also need to be able to run block so the run threat is credible. The Vikings have the running backs, but without an offensive line that can bully defenses on the ground, it's going to be easier for defensive coordinators to force Cousins into situations where he won't thrive barring some almost miraculous progression in his game.

It isn't just about the offensive line, of course. The defense continues to have lapses at critical times and plays with an almost maddening inconsistency, and the special teams also had way too many struggles throughout the year, but given the investment in the QB, Spielman cannot afford to go into another season without the offensive line that QB needs to maximize his abilities. And given that the only guy on that line I'm comfortable with heading into next year is O'Neill, Spielman has his work cut out for him.

[PurpleKoolaid]

How can anyone think of last season as an uptrend? We fell from 13 wins. A good GM and we would have equaled that, and maybe be set for a decade of playoff games. This team is in a lot worse shape then some of you realize, and it has to be fixed from the top down.

[The negotiator]

I'm not going to argue about the trend line for the team. They may very well be in an "uptrend".

But that isn't the point I don't think.

I've been watching this team for a long time, and I've seen the team go through uptrends and downtrends and things in between those two if there are such things. At this point, trends don't matter. I want them to at least get to, and preferably win, a Superbowl. I'd take that even if they had to mortgage their next 20 years. If it meant they'd finally win just one Superbowl, I'd gladly take it at this point.

I think for me, if they want to win with Cousins as the QB, they're going to need a dominant offensive line. They're going to need an offensive line that can consistently pass protect and keep Cousins comfortable in the pocket. Cousins has the arm and experience, but the guy simply isn't a good scrambler and doesn't do a great job protecting the ball. So he's going to need a line he can trust and as things stand, the Vikings have one of the worst groups to provide him that level of confidence.

They also need to be able to run block so the run threat is credible. The Vikings have the running backs, but without an offensive line that can bully defenses on the ground, it's going to be easier for defensive coordinators to force Cousins into situations where he won't thrive barring some almost miraculous progression in his game.

It isn't just about the offensive line, of course. The defense continues to have lapses at critical times and plays with an almost maddening inconsistency, and the special teams also had way too many struggles throughout the year, but given the investment in the QB, Spielman cannot afford to go into another season without the offensive line that QB needs to maximize his abilities. And given that the only guy on that line I'm comfortable with heading into next year is O'Neill, Spielman has his work cut out for him.

Great post

[mike2mike]

How can anyone think of last season as an uptrend? We fell from 13 wins. A good GM and we would have equaled that, and maybe be set for a decade of playoff games. This team is in a lot worse shape then some of you realize, and it has to be fixed from the top down.

I didn’t say last season was an uptrend or an improvement, I said Vikings are still in an uptrend. Think longer term. Look at the rosters following comparative points in the cycle such as prior peaks like 2013 following the 2012 10-6. Look at the roster in 2016 following 2015 11-5 season. The uptrend remains in tact. It was a higher low. It was still a low, but a higher low. The team was improved from the prior low in terms of record and on paper. Compare high points to prior high points. Higher highs and higher lows is the definition of an uptrend. The idea being season to season lots of things happen, the NFL is competitive and has a built in mechanism to take teams above 8-8 and cause them to decline and those below 8-8 should tend to improve with all other things equal. If not improving from 13-3 is “not a good GM” then you know who is a bad GM? Everyone on planet earth. There is no GM on the planet who would consistently improve following such a record.


From 3-13 the lows have improved over time and the highs of 10-6 have as well. By any technical measure that is an uptrend as long as the prior 8-8 record holds and we eventually take out the 13-3 before then.


Zero GMs ever in the past, now or in the future will be perpetually 13-3 or better. Any expectations to improve every year is outlandish and unrealistic. All sorts of variables happen. Scheduling gets tougher, players regress, Offensive coordinators get signed as head coaches, offensive line coaches die, centers like Easton go out for the year, Elflein starts the year hurt and when he comes back he isn’t full strength. Players are unlikely to replicate their previous seasons and to be 13-3 it tends to be the high end of performance all around. I wasn’t at all surprised by this season, I was expecting 9-7. It’s not my fault if people’s expectations were unrealistic. After the OL coach died I was feeling it could have been like when Korey Stringer died. I wasnt sure the Vikings had the OL to support Cousins particularly in a new system with new supporting players. All a GM can try to do is add talent in the long run at a faster rate than you lose it and manage the cap. A team by default ages 52 years each year if you keep everyone. Players decline at a young age in the NFL. The better players want more. The average result is always that teams go closer to 8-8 than the previous year. Fans have weird expectations sometimes.

[9man]

I think this is a very interesting topic, although not an accurate way to measure success. If you look at trends of each Vikings head coach during their career in Minnesota you will find an interesting outcome. There are 3 coaches that have had a downtrend in wins per season, albeit very slight: Grant, Burns, and Green.

If you split Grant's tenure in half you see an uptrend the first half and then a downtrend the second half. Average wins per season, 8.9.

Burns tenure is a little up and down but overall a downtrend. Average wins per season, 8.7.

Greens career was really flat the first 6 seasons. Then a spike in '98, a back to the "mean" in '99 and '00 and a large drop in '01. Average wins per season, 9.7.

Van Brocklin, Tice, Childress, Frazier, and Zimmer all have uptrends.

To be honest Childress' trend stands out the most, a constant trend up until '10, but averaged 8.4 wins per season.

Zimmers trend is up and down (currently down) but overall an uptrend. Average wins per season, 9.4.

What does this tell us? Nothing really. But, looking at the trend of when the Wilf's release coaches, Zimmer was maybe 1 loss away from being let go.