49ers Post Game

[CharVike]

Bad game to judge the guys.

If you want to reserve judgment for a divisional round playoff game and make excuses for the team, be my guest, but to me, this level is what teams do all the offseason work, the preseason, and the long regular season and endure all that travel and injuries to get to. If you're not going to judge them at this stage, why bother judging them at all, much less based on a thumping of a bottom dweller Giants team that had serious and easily exploitable issues throughout its defense?

I mean, come on. These guys are professionals. This is what they do. They do what they do not for fun or for pure entertainment but to try to get to and win Superbowls. To come out in such a key game and lay such a complete egg *begs* for judgment and critical analysis IMHO, if for no other reason than I assume that next year we all (and by "we", I mean the players, coaches, GM and owners in addition to the fans) all hope for a better end result. So what is it going to take to make that next step? Or should everyone just be content with the result and clap for the teams that somehow manage to take it?

Been a fan too long now to just accept excuses. The Vikings were thoroughly outclassed by the 49ers, which means changes have to be made this offseason so next season there is a chance it's the Vikings who get the first round bye in the playoffs and hand out drubbings and its the fans of other teams that are searching for answers and making excuses. Personally, I'm tired of it always being us.

For the players the only goal is to win a Super Bowl. Come on that's a pipe dream. How about the money in their pocket? They don't do it for that. Money is why they do it. If an NFL job paid 9 bucks an hour nobody would do it or want it. The Super Bowl wouldn't men a thing if they lived on the street. Baseball went through the same thing which is why I no longer watch it. When they struck the world series the fan outcry was what about the World Series. The players said they don't care about that BS. We want more money. Is that so hard to see? It's about the coin. It's entertainment for the avg joe blow. It's no more than that. Our biggest problem is the defense isn't good enough. Zim has yet to create a D that's good enough. 2017 D was the best in the NFL which was BS. We shut out the Pack. Why? No QB. If we shut them out twice this year we would be golden. Our D can't hold up to Rodgers. That's the difference. We won't find a QB in Rodgers class this off season. I don't care if we picked that Burrow kid who will go No 1. He's not in his class. The guy was projected to be a 2 or 3 round pick before the season and I thought great he's ours. He still has that same skill set. His "team" won but it;'s still the same skill set. He didn't start running faster, or throwing a bomb deeper. The team threw him in the spot light and he delivered. But his skill set is not close to Rodgers. We need to build a dominate D. Something very close to the 49ers or old Raven team ect..... Our D isn't close to that right now. That's our biggest problem. Most feel it's Cousins. Look at some of the bum starters in the NFL. Look at our division. Tribisky blows. The guy for the Lions blows because he can't win. I could go on by why.

[Dames]

Speaking of Cook, he's up for an extension this offseason if Spielman wants to avoid him becoming a free agent after next season. What should be done with that?

On the one hand, Cook is a dynamic, game-changing player when he's healthy. The problem has been he hasn't stayed healthy for a full season yet.

And then you have Mattison up behind him. Mattison isn't the game-changer that Cook is, but he's not bad, either. One wonders if an improved offensive line with a combo of Mattison/Boone could still get it done for acceptable cost.

I don't know what Cook would fetch on the open market. In theory, it could be quite a haul, but his injury history probably puts a cap on what he could realistically expect. It's probable that the Vikings can work something out with him this offseason that is a win for both sides in terms of extending his contract and making it more cap friendly. But Cook might want to test the free agent waters, especially if he feels like the team isn't moving in a positive direction.

So much depends on how Spielman works the cap early in the offseason. Vikes are like $10 million over as of today. They have to cut that down.

Ask me that in week 10, and you get a completely different answer, but as great of a talent as Cook is, you really can't ignore the history. He's very likely going to get paid, and probably paid more than he is worth (unless 100% healthy all year) He was phenomenal for the better part of the year, and I think the offense is much better with him... but he really fell off around the time of his injury. I want him on the Vikings, but to be honest there are probably better ways to use the money that have more positive influence on the team. Matti is probably not as talented, but I think he would be good enough. It's hard to say, because Matti never once had the lead role this year did he? He was injured at the same time as Cook IIRC, so we don't really know how we would look in a lead role. Maybe I'm not remembering a game.

[StumpHunter]

He didn't look right in the 2nd half of the Saints game either. I have my suspicions that he still wasn't all the way healthy. Maybe he was just tired, but it seems like more than that. He didn't look comfortable at all, and he wasn't making people miss (or breaking tackles).

Speaking of Cook, he's up for an extension this offseason if Spielman wants to avoid him becoming a free agent after next season. What should be done with that?

On the one hand, Cook is a dynamic, game-changing player when he's healthy. The problem has been he hasn't stayed healthy for a full season yet.

And then you have Mattison up behind him. Mattison isn't the game-changer that Cook is, but he's not bad, either. One wonders if an improved offensive line with a combo of Mattison/Boone could still get it done for acceptable cost.

I don't know what Cook would fetch on the open market. In theory, it could be quite a haul, but his injury history probably puts a cap on what he could realistically expect. It's probable that the Vikings can work something out with him this offseason that is a win for both sides in terms of extending his contract and making it more cap friendly. But Cook might want to test the free agent waters, especially if he feels like the team isn't moving in a positive direction.

So much depends on how Spielman works the cap early in the offseason. Vikes are like $10 million over as of today. They have to cut that down.

It will be interesting to see what the Saints do with Kamara, as that probably will play a big part in what the Vikings do with Cook. Cook had the better year this year, but Kamara has been better over his career. I think both are looking for similar deals this off season, and one will set the bar for the other.

[VikingLord]

For the players the only goal is to win a Super Bowl. Come on that's a pipe dream. How about the money in their pocket? They don't do it for that. Money is why they do it. If an NFL job paid 9 bucks an hour nobody would do it or want it. The Super Bowl wouldn't men a thing if they lived on the street. Baseball went through the same thing which is why I no longer watch it. When they struck the world series the fan outcry was what about the World Series. The players said they don't care about that BS. We want more money. Is that so hard to see? It's about the coin. It's entertainment for the avg joe blow. It's no more than that. Our biggest problem is the defense isn't good enough. Zim has yet to create a D that's good enough. 2017 D was the best in the NFL which was BS. We shut out the Pack. Why? No QB. If we shut them out twice this year we would be golden. Our D can't hold up to Rodgers. That's the difference. We won't find a QB in Rodgers class this off season. I don't care if we picked that Burrow kid who will go No 1. He's not in his class. The guy was projected to be a 2 or 3 round pick before the season and I thought great he's ours. He still has that same skill set. His "team" won but it;'s still the same skill set. He didn't start running faster, or throwing a bomb deeper. The team threw him in the spot light and he delivered. But his skill set is not close to Rodgers. We need to build a dominate D. Something very close to the 49ers or old Raven team ect..... Our D isn't close to that right now. That's our biggest problem. Most feel it's Cousins. Look at some of the bum starters in the NFL. Look at our division. Tribisky blows. The guy for the Lions blows because he can't win. I could go on by why.

It's hard to follow your response because you cover a lot of ground, but there are a few things to say.

Money is why a lot of people do something, but its rarely the only reason they do it. Personal achievement within a profession or a sport is also important. Legacy is important. Maybe not equally to everyone, but I would guess few players are in it solely for the monetary rewards, especially playing a sport where severe and long-lasting injury is possible if not likely even.

You conflate the actions of the player's unions with the individual players as well when you mention the player strike that cost the World Series. When considering things like that, you have to acknowledge that the overall interests of larger groups come into play in such things and it's not just the players who caused that. The owners also dug in their heels. One could look at it like the two groups (owners and players) sacrificed a world series in pursuit of a better long term deal that would ensure many future world series. This happens in other venues too, most notably Olympic boycotts and such. It doesn't alter the individual or team motivations or goals, however.

My basic point in responding to your first claim is that if the team overall is excused for this reason or that, then nothing substantial is likely to change heading into next season, and for those of us who are tired of the status quo with this team, for those of us who would prefer it is the Vikings who are hosting playoff games and who are favored to win and not teams like the Packers and 49ers, for those of us who think fundamental changes are necessary to position the team to be legitimate Superbowl contenders in the future, excuses can't cut it anymore. Not for the team overall, nor for individual players and coaches who consistently underperform, especially in key situations.

The Wilfs ultimately bear responsibility for deciding on what level of change will happen. They have to decide if they're getting what they're paying for and if the results are what they should reasonably expect given that investment.

[VikingLord]

It will be interesting to see what the Saints do with Kamara, as that probably will play a big part in what the Vikings do with Cook. Cook had the better year this year, but Kamara has been better over his career. I think both are looking for similar deals this off season, and one will set the bar for the other.

That assumes the Saints move on Kamara before the Vikings move on Cook, but if they do I agree that will help set the market.

I do wonder about the value of the star running back, mostly because even star backs struggle without solid blocking in front of them. It almost seems better to continue to invest in the OL and go with a less-talented overall back or even running back by committee than to invest heavily in a single RB on a team that still has some glaring weaknesses along the OL.

[J. Kapp 11]

It will be interesting to see what the Saints do with Kamara, as that probably will play a big part in what the Vikings do with Cook. Cook had the better year this year, but Kamara has been better over his career. I think both are looking for similar deals this off season, and one will set the bar for the other.

That assumes the Saints move on Kamara before the Vikings move on Cook, but if they do I agree that will help set the market.

I do wonder about the value of the star running back, mostly because even star backs struggle without solid blocking in front of them. It almost seems better to continue to invest in the OL and go with a less-talented overall back or even running back by committee than to invest heavily in a single RB on a team that still has some glaring weaknesses along the OL.

Absolutely. Look at San Fran. Three running backs, none of them household names, yet they're the No. 2 rushing team in the NFL. They cleaned our clock, thanks to a) the O-line dominating, and b) finding the running back who had the hot hand that day.

Don't get me wrong. I LOVE Dalvin Cook. But with his durability issues, it may not make sense to invest in him long-term.

[MikethePurple]

That assumes the Saints move on Kamara before the Vikings move on Cook, but if they do I agree that will help set the market.

I do wonder about the value of the star running back, mostly because even star backs struggle without solid blocking in front of them. It almost seems better to continue to invest in the OL and go with a less-talented overall back or even running back by committee than to invest heavily in a single RB on a team that still has some glaring weaknesses along the OL.

Absolutely. Look at San Fran. Three running backs, none of them household names, yet they're the No. 2 rushing team in the NFL. They cleaned our clock, thanks to a) the O-line dominating, and b) finding the running back who had the hot hand that day.

Don't get me wrong. I LOVE Dalvin Cook. But with his durability issues, it may not make sense to invest in him long-term.

Also, Mattison played pretty well when given opportunities this season. I wonder how much of it was a result of spelling Cook and maybe defenses were tired? He obviously has talent but I wonder whether he would be as effective as the focal point versus a complement to Cook. He doesn't have the top shelf speed or shiftiness of Cook but has been very good when he has had his chances. I would agree that breaking the bank for Cook would be ill advised based on the RB position and his inability to stay healthy for long stretches so far in his career.

[StumpHunter]

Absolutely. Look at San Fran. Three running backs, none of them household names, yet they're the No. 2 rushing team in the NFL. They cleaned our clock, thanks to a) the O-line dominating, and b) finding the running back who had the hot hand that day.

Don't get me wrong. I LOVE Dalvin Cook. But with his durability issues, it may not make sense to invest in him long-term.

Also, Mattison played pretty well when given opportunities this season. I wonder how much of it was a result of spelling Cook and maybe defenses were tired? He obviously has talent but I wonder whether he would be as effective as the focal point versus a complement to Cook. He doesn't have the top shelf speed or shiftiness of Cook but has been very good when he has had his chances. I would agree that breaking the bank for Cook would be ill advised based on the RB position and his inability to stay healthy for long stretches so far in his career.

I believe Toby Gearhart had a 8 YPA in relief of AP one season.

[YikesVikes]

I think we fail to realize how far we are from a chip. We aren't close. We have a good team but we are long in the tooth and our players outside of a few are not game-changers. Defensively, we have spent all this capital and draft picks for an above average defense.

We have 1 game-changer on the DL, 1 game changer at LB and 2 in the secondary.
Very hard to compete against a 49ers who have 3 on the DL, 2 at the LB and 1 in the secondary.
This defense needs to be broken down and stripped.

Keep Hunter, Keep Kendricks, Keep Smith and Harris.
Everyone else can go and need to be replaced over a 1 or 2 year period.

On offense, the Oline should be the priority. Reiff needs to go with his 13 million.
Rudy should have never been resigned. His cap figure is absurd. SIgn Trent Williams. Draft a guard and pray for improvement of Samia to push Kline for playing.

Cousins should be shown the door after his contract. We should hope that one of the big 2 Qbs fall to us. I am hoping that TUA is still out there at 20 and we trade up and select him. It seems the teams that take chances are the ones that are successful. This roster building with 6 7th rounders is not working.

So you would trade up for an injured guy? Then you want to build on hope. What is success to you? We made the playoffs and won a game. Is that not success. If winning a Super Bowl is a success then we have never had success even with a HOF QB. The best chance to get an elite QB is to tank a season. Of course you can get a guy later but it becomes much more difficult. Don't hope for something that's the worse way to look at it. Grap is considered a great QB. I seen him against us today and I didn't see great. I seen a guy that threw some bad passes. IMO he's no Rodgers but is good enough if he has a team around him. It's another Cousins. To you it's hope and pry. How about a plan. Can't that work?

This roster is a tier two roster. We are not equipt to beat the big boys of the league. We can beat any team but EVERYTHING has to be right for that to happen? Why are we settling for just being good? I wouldnt mind selecting Tua because he has shown the ability to be clutch and a gamer. No i dont think his injury will be a long term one and I believe we will be back to dominating. The problem is management and our coaching staff believes that good is fine. We arent interested in greatness. Its the reason we hold on to previously good players and pay a premium for them. The Pats move on from guys when they are no longer usefull. We are loyal to a fault and as a result we are paying premium prices to guys that should be making much less.

[VikeFanInEagleLand]

Sage Rosenfels broke down 8 plays on offense that were missed opportunities. I see good pass protection and open WRs. I’m not going to pretend the OL was good but I’m also not going to pretend Cousins wasn’t very much part of the problem Sunday.

Diggs is open, Cousins doesn’t see him:

https://twitter.com/sagerosenfels18/sta ... 53250?s=21

Deep cross open:

https://twitter.com/sagerosenfels18/sta ... 58725?s=21

Miss on an easy out route:

https://twitter.com/sagerosenfels18/sta ... 94086?s=21

Another deep cross open WR but he checks down:

https://twitter.com/sagerosenfels18/sta ... 73441?s=21

Under route:

https://twitter.com/sagerosenfels18/sta ... 51137?s=21

Early in the year, there was a thread going where there was a Keenum versus Cousins debate going on. Over 300 posts. There were many passionate posts about all of Keenum's deficiencies. I think these tweets go a long way in describing what I was attempting to say about Cousins. I am completely convinced that Keenum would have made these throws that Cousins didn't even attempt. I am not saying that we would have won the game with Keenum. I'm just saying what I said and that's all.

[fiestavike]

Sage Rosenfels broke down 8 plays on offense that were missed opportunities. I see good pass protection and open WRs. I’m not going to pretend the OL was good but I’m also not going to pretend Cousins wasn’t very much part of the problem Sunday.

Diggs is open, Cousins doesn’t see him:

https://twitter.com/sagerosenfels18/sta ... 53250?s=21

Deep cross open:

https://twitter.com/sagerosenfels18/sta ... 58725?s=21

Miss on an easy out route:

https://twitter.com/sagerosenfels18/sta ... 94086?s=21

Another deep cross open WR but he checks down:

https://twitter.com/sagerosenfels18/sta ... 73441?s=21

Under route:

https://twitter.com/sagerosenfels18/sta ... 51137?s=21

Early in the year, there was a thread going where there was a Keenum versus Cousins debate going on. Over 300 posts. There were many passionate posts about all of Keenum's deficiencies. I think these tweets go a long way in describing what I was attempting to say about Cousins. I am completely convinced that Keenum would have made these throws that Cousins didn't even attempt. I am not saying that we would have won the game with Keenum. I'm just saying what I said and that's all.

Keenum does have deficiencies, and the type that are obvious to casual fans...Kirk also has deficiencies, the type that aren't obvious to casual fans. If my goal is to get the best regular season record, I'm going with Kirk. If the goal is to win a superbowl, I'd tend toward Keenum.

I'm not saying Keenum has a high likelihood of winning a Superbowl...He's just a journeyman and a guy who isn't likely to even get you to the playoffs on a given year...but he has the character and demeanor needed for big moments and Kirk doesn't.

[Dames]

Keenum does have deficiencies, and the type that are obvious to casual fans...Kirk also has deficiencies, the type that aren't obvious to casual fans. If my goal is to get the best regular season record, I'm going with Kirk. If the goal is to win a superbowl, I'd tend toward Keenum.

I'm not saying Keenum has a high likelihood of winning a Superbowl...He's just a journeyman and a guy who isn't likely to even get you to the playoffs on a given year...but he has the character and demeanor needed for big moments and Kirk doesn't.

I have my reservations about Cousins too, but what were you saying after the NO game then? Because that was the playoffs and Kirk clearly was instrumental in that win. I think it's way too convenient to say that he doesn't have what it takes after a game like SF (even though I catch myself thinking that way too sometimes). He was really awful in the SF game, and not only due to his Oline, and when things go wrong for him early, it's almost a miracle to see him pull out if it it seems. But, you can't simply disregard the NO game either. There's more to it, I think.

[fiestavike]

Keenum does have deficiencies, and the type that are obvious to casual fans...Kirk also has deficiencies, the type that aren't obvious to casual fans. If my goal is to get the best regular season record, I'm going with Kirk. If the goal is to win a superbowl, I'd tend toward Keenum.

I'm not saying Keenum has a high likelihood of winning a Superbowl...He's just a journeyman and a guy who isn't likely to even get you to the playoffs on a given year...but he has the character and demeanor needed for big moments and Kirk doesn't.

I have my reservations about Cousins too, but what were you saying after the NO game then? Because that was the playoffs and Kirk clearly was instrumental in that win. I think it's way too convenient to say that he doesn't have what it takes after a game like SF (even though I catch myself thinking that way too sometimes). He was really awful in the SF game, and not only due to his Oline, and when things go wrong for him early, it's almost a miracle to see him pull out if it it seems. But, you can't simply disregard the NO game either. There's more to it, I think.

I'm not reducing it to something stupid, like 'he can't win the big game' blah blah blah. That's a strawman, or a pathetic ESPN argument. I've consistently talked about how Cousins handles pressure, both in game and psychological, since it became clear to me that he struggles to do that. This is not some one off thing, nor is it some kind of position derived from 'small game we win...big game we lose' kind of correlation.

Cousins is wound tight. It undoubtedly drives his preparation (which is evidently very intentional and impressive), it also influences his ability to act and react decisively.

[Dames]

I'm not reducing it to something stupid, like 'he can't win the big game' blah blah blah. That's a strawman, or a pathetic ESPN argument. I've consistently talked about how Cousins handles pressure, both in game and psychological, since it became clear to me that he struggles to do that. This is not some one off thing, nor is it some kind of position derived from 'small game we win...big game we lose' kind of correlation.

Cousins is wound tight. It undoubtedly drives his preparation (which is evidently very intentional and impressive), it also influences his ability to act and react decisively.

No, sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you were doing that. I'm honestly just trying to get a grasp on what is going on with Cousins. It's clearly not an issue he suffers from every game, and I'd go so far to say it's not something he suffers from most of the time. We won a lot of games this year, and in those games he was often very good, and yet in 4-5 games this year he was damn near useless, and you could see it happening almost from the start of the game. It's a really strange thing.

It might just be that he is wound too tight, and when things go wrong, he can't get himself out of the funk.

I can see why people want to move on from him, because we are afraid it will pop up again at just the wrong time. I am somewhere in the middle on him. I'm far from convinced he is the answer, but I think we can win it with him, but I'm also scared of which guy will show up on game day.

[CharVike]

So you would trade up for an injured guy? Then you want to build on hope. What is success to you? We made the playoffs and won a game. Is that not success. If winning a Super Bowl is a success then we have never had success even with a HOF QB. The best chance to get an elite QB is to tank a season. Of course you can get a guy later but it becomes much more difficult. Don't hope for something that's the worse way to look at it. Grap is considered a great QB. I seen him against us today and I didn't see great. I seen a guy that threw some bad passes. IMO he's no Rodgers but is good enough if he has a team around him. It's another Cousins. To you it's hope and pry. How about a plan. Can't that work?

This roster is a tier two roster. We are not equipt to beat the big boys of the league. We can beat any team but EVERYTHING has to be right for that to happen? Why are we settling for just being good? I wouldnt mind selecting Tua because he has shown the ability to be clutch and a gamer. No i dont think his injury will be a long term one and I believe we will be back to dominating. The problem is management and our coaching staff believes that good is fine. We arent interested in greatness. Its the reason we hold on to previously good players and pay a premium for them. The Pats move on from guys when they are no longer usefull. We are loyal to a fault and as a result we are paying premium prices to guys that should be making much less.

Please don't use the Pats. Yes they always seem to win the Super Bowl. They have played in the biggest joke division forever. I'm not looking it up but I think their division record is great. I can't remember if they ever faced a HOF QB in their division. We faced a team with back to back HOF QBs. Did the Pats. If I made the schedule for them they wouldn't make the Super Bowl. Every player would be so beat up they couldn't beat any team. I'm not a fan of Tua. I don't watch much college ball at all but I tuned in to check this guy out because he was considered the best college QB. He didn't impress me at all. IMO he will be a backup nothing more before his injury. I like QBs that have a big time arm like Farve. Every throw is in the book. He made a play in a game that turned our season around. I forget every detail and don't feel like looking it up but it was a pass to some bum WR that was a laser into the end zone splitting guys for a game winning TD. I think it was against the 49ers. The guy wasn't wide open either. It was a strike and got us on a roll. The players were like we are never out of a game with this guy. This wasn't from the goal line either. Tau can't make that throw. Wouldn't attempt it. I don't want that for my QB. With him we lose that game and the season is over. I know there are many examples like Joe Montana who had Rice ect.... He couldn't make that throw. Our season would have been done right there with him.