Vikings Message Board.Com

CharVike wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2025 11:13 amI thought Darnold was overpaid at 10 million. What made him worth more than double Mayfield's prove it deal?

As you posted we were better than our record because we lost Cousins and had nothing behind him. That should make a light go on for our FO, coaching staff and fans.

Detroit is better than us. Our D couldn't stop Gibbs and that ended the whole thing. Looked like we had a slow and tired defense.

If I was running the team Darnold would stay unless a massive trade deal could be made. The tag will be 41 mill. JJM is an unknown right now. Even his health. Darnold like Cousins took a beating but both played through the beatings but were banged up. Can JJM do that? I have no idea. But the NFL isn't college. They all can hit and run at that level.

Cliff wrote: ↑Tue Feb 18, 2025 11:12 am

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Feb 17, 2025 9:56 pm
Pretty much every deal he signed last year had void years attached.

As always with these situations, that money is gone and should be ignored as a factor in deciding to re-sign a player or not (if they need more cap to spend on other free agents, they can just do the exact same thing and add void years to lower the cost).

That's not exactly correct. If a player's contract is extended they have the ability to spread those void years out over the next contract rather than paying all at once. The salary cap also tends to expand every year and so "kicking the can down the road" a little can potentially allow you to pay out when you have more money to pay with.

Cliff wrote: ↑Tue Feb 18, 2025 4:17 pm

VikingLord wrote: ↑Tue Feb 18, 2025 3:30 pm

So the real question for me is, why is a team predicted to win 6 games at the start of last season inking one-year free agents to deals with void years, especially if that team isn't hard up against the cap?

Spreading cap spending out over multiple dead years can make sense I suppose if a team is hard up against the cap and mostly wants to retain as much core talent as possible because that team's core has had success. It doesn't make much sense for a team that is effectively rebuilding, especially when there are a lot of non-core players who are collecting those void year payments at the same time.

This isn't as bad as what the Wild did with Parise and Suter but it isn't good, either, especially considering how much turnover there is going to be on the defensive side of the ball.

Its not necessarily bad or good. Darnold costs 5 million for 2 years instead of 10 for one year. Kind of makes the burden of his signing over a period of time instead of all at once. Meanwhile some other players signed this year will have void years and offset his 5 million and on and on.

Jalen Hurts has void years from 2029 to 2032 at something like 92 million. Obviously they plan on resigning him and spreading it out lol

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 11:45 am One other thing to point out with cap inflation, longer contracts generally mean better value for the team (assuming the player works out that is).

So to VikingLord's question about why Kwesi signed a bunch of these short contracts on a team that was never going to compete for a Super Bowl, this method of signing players to 1 or 2 years is kind of dumb for a team trying to rebuild its roster.

Cliff wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2025 3:00 pm

CharVike wrote: ↑Thu Feb 20, 2025 11:13 amI thought Darnold was overpaid at 10 million. What made him worth more than double Mayfield's prove it deal?

In hindsight the coaches thought he was worth it and they were right.

As you posted we were better than our record because we lost Cousins and had nothing behind him. That should make a light go on for our FO, coaching staff and fans.

There aren't very many teams who are still a great team if their QB starter goes down. Even then, the #2 QB was injured too and eventually even the #3. The Vikings tried to remedy that last year by having JJM, Darnold, and Mullens. Then JJM doesn't even make it to the season.

Detroit is better than us. Our D couldn't stop Gibbs and that ended the whole thing. Looked like we had a slow and tired defense.

And I'm sure that's partially why they're fine letting several of the starters from last season walk. The secondary especially needs to get younger.

If I was running the team Darnold would stay unless a massive trade deal could be made. The tag will be 41 mill. JJM is an unknown right now. Even his health. Darnold like Cousins took a beating but both played through the beatings but were banged up. Can JJM do that? I have no idea. But the NFL isn't college. They all can hit and run at that level.

There can't be a trade unless they sign him. KOC has already said he won't tag him. I don't think he would tag any player which is a strategy I like. Players hate being tagged and one thing the team has going for it is being a player friendly environment. When signing players in FA often teams offer similar amounts of money and when it comes to "which team would you rather play for" the Vikings are high on the list.

Anyway, I think there are too many holes to pay a QB 40m+ when you've already paid for a QB in draft picks. They'll let FA set the price for Darnold and if it's low enough they'll resign him. Otherwise I think they'll move forward with the JJM plan. Perhaps Daniel Jones and JJM will end up battling for starter in camp.

I'm guessing after 2023 and given that JJM has already been injured they'll have a decent plan at backup QB. Whether it be Jones or someone else. There are some decent FA QBs out there that would make good backups even aside from Jones.

Cliff wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2025 5:35 pm I think a team able to win 14 games with Sam Darnold at QB should be thinking about what pieces they're missing to make a superbowl run.

Cliff wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 3:08 pm

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 11:45 am One other thing to point out with cap inflation, longer contracts generally mean better value for the team (assuming the player works out that is).

So to VikingLord's question about why Kwesi signed a bunch of these short contracts on a team that was never going to compete for a Super Bowl, this method of signing players to 1 or 2 years is kind of dumb for a team trying to rebuild its roster.

It doesn't make sense to sign players you don't necessarily want to keep to long contracts just for the sake of it. To me it seems like the players that they feel could potentially be "upgraded" got shorter contracts and players they want to hold onto got longer contracts. Makes sense to me.

VikingLord wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2025 6:39 pm This is really good stuff in this thread, but it begs the question for me of what exactly is KAM's plan here? It's like he's focused on the next season based on the moves he's making both in the draft and free agency and completely ignoring or at least heavily discounting the longer term impact of those decisions and failures to maximize positive outcomes. People say he's good in free agency, but I agree with Stump that if he were really all that good he'd have taken those discount free agent vets he inked to one year deals before last season and instead signed them to contracts that accounted for the possibility they had really good years, if for no other reason than he could possibly trade some of them to restock his upcoming draft board. But all he's got is a 14 win team that bowed out in the first round yet again and a team roster that resembles swiss cheese heading into this offseason. The team he built wasn't really competitive for anything meaningful and even if he could keep it together its arguable he would want to do that.

And let's not forget that KAM did try to re-sign Cousins too. He was saved from that by the Falcons, but does anyone thing last year's team comes anywhere near 14 wins had Cousins remained the starting QB?

What is the plan? Where is the logic that explains his moves to this point? Starting with his inexplicable trade down in the 1st round of his first draft I've often wondered whether KAM really has a plan or he's just making moves and hoping they work out. That first year I thought he was under some sort of directive from the Wilfs that might have tied his hands and that could at least partially explain some of the moves he made. Now, though, I don't think he is, and yet the inexplicable moves (like trading most of this year's draft to move up in the 1st round to select a role player DE) continue.

If past performance is indicative of future performance, I expect more inexplicable moves both in FA and the upcoming draft. The fact the team has enjoyed winning seasons under KAM might be the most inexplicable part of this all. Maybe KOC is just that good of a head coach, or maybe the Vikings have been more lucky than not during his tenure, but I don't see that continuing for much longer. I hope I'm not right about that.

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2025 2:29 pm

Cliff wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 3:08 pm

It doesn't make sense to sign players you don't necessarily want to keep to long contracts just for the sake of it. To me it seems like the players that they feel could potentially be "upgraded" got shorter contracts and players they want to hold onto got longer contracts. Makes sense to me.

Not sure how it makes sense in a league where teams can just cut players with little repercussions depending on the guarantees remaining. If Kwesi had been a little more aggressive on adding years to some of these deals, and say signed Darnold, Jones and Griffin to 2 year deals, Darnold would be an actual trade asset, Jones would be forced to restructure or be cut, giving the Vikings actual leverage, and we would have a single competent vet CB returning instead of the 0 we currently have. The biggest head scratcher was the deal he gave AVG, who will be a free agent after this year.

It takes two to tango and those guys would have had to agree to longer deals, but I think all those players would have based on where they were at in their careers.

Just poor free agent team building for the future by a GM who is arguably the worst in the NFL at drafting.

Cliff wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 3:08 pm

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2025 11:45 am One other thing to point out with cap inflation, longer contracts generally mean better value for the team (assuming the player works out that is).

So to VikingLord's question about why Kwesi signed a bunch of these short contracts on a team that was never going to compete for a Super Bowl, this method of signing players to 1 or 2 years is kind of dumb for a team trying to rebuild its roster.

It doesn't make sense to sign players you don't necessarily want to keep to long contracts just for the sake of it. To me it seems like the players that they feel could potentially be "upgraded" got shorter contracts and players they want to hold onto got longer contracts. Makes sense to me.

CharVike wrote: ↑Wed Feb 26, 2025 9:08 am Carter added to coaching staff
After losing Shaun Sarrett to the Jacksonville Jaguars, the Vikings have hired Keith Carter as an offensive line coach.

In his past, Carter has spent time as the offensive line coach of Tennessee Titans and the New York Jets. In his new role, Carter will report directly to Chris Kuper, who has been the Vikings’ offensive line coach since O’Connell took over.

“I wanted to take the opportunity to get a former No. 1 and a guy that’s been involved in some of the best rushing attacks,” O’Connell said. “He really wanted to come to Minnesota and he’s going to be able to help us a lot and infuse some things into our run game.”

Though some have criticized Carter for his approach, the Vikings did their due diligence and felt comfortable hiring him.

“You’ll find some things about him in regards to being tough on his players,” O’Connell said. “I think in the No. 2 role, he’s going to be really good for us, and he’s in a great spot in his career to really help us.”