Vikings Message Board.Com

Pondering Her Percy wrote: Patterson was a big time reach. However, I don't consider Treadwell that. He was a projected first rounder all along

Okay, I'll definitely give you that but I never wanted to pick a wr that high again. Randy Moss is not walking through that door. I think that this pick can be considered a reach when the pick doesn't match talent. Whether or not Treadwell is going to be good, great, or elite he is not any of those tags "now". To me if you pick a wr in the 1st round, he should definitely see the field more than he has. Way more.

Mothman wrote: He's had some big swings and some big misses. He's had some hits too but I feel he makes enough mistakes to undermine his own efforts to build a great team.

I want him to succeed too but for me (and I suspect for you), the bottom line is the team just hasn't experienced enough overall success since his arrival.

I was thinking about this yesterday. I've been in similar discussions about past Vikings coaches (particularly Green and Childress) who had experienced some genuine success but who I believed just didn't have "the right stuff" to take the team all the way. It's never a popular position.

I think one of the main reasons we Vikings fans often find ourselves in debates about whether a coach should stay or go (or in this case, whether the GM should stay or go) is because the team never settles the matter. They've been mired in mediocrity far too long and consequently, it's easy to see the glass half full or half empty and debate about it. During this young century, when the Vikes rise, they don't seem to stay up for long. They certainly haven't done what teams like the Patriots, Steelers or more recently, the Seahawks have done and clearly established themselves as a top team over an extended period of time. If they would clearly establish themselves as a genuine contender and actually stay in that position for a while I imagine we'd finally get to have some very different conversations. It's hard to imagine that happening under Spielman, all the more so since he's bungled the offensive line and used so many top draft picks in an effort to find a starting QB. The latter is more reminiscent of a franchise like Cleveland than of a team on it's way toward winning a Super Bowl any time soon.

This team Jim arguably is in worse shape than when he took over.

CbusVikesFan wrote:\
This team Jim arguably is in worse shape than when he took over.

See comments like these just make me really scratch my head. We have a defense that is near elite with very little leaving next year. We have 2 quarterbacks that have the ability to get it done and win. We have solid WRs. We have an all pro RB that IMO needs to be let go so we can draft one this year. Offensive line, especially OT is a big issue. However, what positions outside of that are we really overly worried about right now???

But now all of the sudden we're in worse shape (arguably)??? There's nothing to even argue about. There was holes all over this entire team when Spielman took over. Our main holes right now are OL and I guess you could say RB if AP goes. However they aren't that hard to find. Especially in this years class.

Bottom line is, this team is nowhere near in worse shape than when he took over. Not even close.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: See comments like these just make me really scratch my head. We have a defense that is near elite with very little leaving next year. We have 2 quarterbacks that have the ability to get it done and win. We have solid WRs. We have an all pro RB that IMO needs to be let go so we can draft one this year. Offensive line, especially OT is a big issue. However, what positions outside of that are we really overly worried about right now???

But now all of the sudden we're in worse shape (arguably)??? There's nothing to even argue about. There was holes all over this entire team when Spielman took over. Our main holes right now are OL and I guess you could say RB if AP goes. However they aren't that hard to find. Especially in this years class.

Bottom line is, this team is nowhere near in worse shape than when he took over. Not even close.

I stand by what I said. It's an opinion. Just like yours. Only yours is right though, right?

CbusVikesFan wrote: I stand by what I said. It's an opinion. Just like yours. Only yours is right though, right?

Uhhh? Of course everyone thinks their opinion is right. Otherwise why else would you say it.

I mean I did just list facts about how we don't have many guys leaving and can focus more on the offensive side of the ball. All you said was we are in worse shape than when Spielman first got here and that's it. So how am I or anyone for that matter suppose to agree with that when you provide no backing behind it??

We had nowhere near as good of a defense back then AND had an offense that was carried by AP and AP only. So please enlighten me how we are in worse shape? Just doesn't make much sense to me. But if you think your opinion is right, I would love to hear why.

Fire him.

Ricks not going anywhere this year. Injuries is just the problem.

halfgiz wrote:Ricks not going anywhere this year. Injuries is just the problem.

Yupp.

We are going to need one hell of an offseason though - let me tell you what.

HardcoreVikesFan wrote: Yupp.

We are going to need one hell of an offseason though - let me tell you what.

Yes, and even that might be an understatement.

even if a top notch GM with super bowl victories under his belt were available, I fear that Z Wilf has become complacent in regards to hands on managing. He got his stadium deal, the fans will pack the place, and he probably likes Spielman.

in regards to a recent post here, injuries are NOT the problem on the OL. A total lack of quality is the problem. If we had NO injuries on OL this year, our corp would be Kalil (chronic failure), Fusco ( nothing more then a back up player any other team), Sully ( herniated discs in back so never will be the same or make it thru a season), Clemmings (utter epic failed draft pick), and Loadholt (coming off achilles tear-completely uncertain future)....THAT was Spielmans brilliant plan for our super bowl aspirations.

And remember, Spielman is responsible for making the best use of the best RB in the league during the very last years we will have him. AP will soon end his career without having a SB appearance.....all due to Spielmans inability to build a good team around him.

chicagopurple wrote:even if a top notch GM with super bowl victories under his belt were available, I fear that Z Wilf has become complacent in regards to hands on managing. He got his stadium deal, the fans will pack the place, and he probably likes Spielman.

in regards to a recent post here, injuries are NOT the problem on the OL. A total lack of quality is the problem. If we had NO injuries on OL this year, our corp would be Kalil (chronic failure), Fusco ( nothing more then a back up player any other team), Sully ( herniated discs in back so never will be the same or make it thru a season), Clemmings (utter epic failed draft pick), and Loadholt (coming off achilles tear-completely uncertain future)....THAT was Spielmans brilliant plan for our super bowl aspirations.

The fifth starter would actually still be Boone, not Clemmings. However, as you know, I agree that it wasn't a good plan.

And remember, Spielman is responsible for making the best use of the best RB in the league during the very last years we will have him. AP will soon end his career without having a SB appearance.....all due to Spielmans inability to build a good team around him.

At this point, I fear the opportunity a truly elite player like Peterson represented for the Vikings has now been completely squandered.

Mothman wrote:
At this point, I fear the opportunity a truly elite player like Peterson represented for the Vikings has now been completely squandered.

Amen.......sad face

chicagopurple wrote:even if a top notch GM with super bowl victories under his belt were available, I fear that Z Wilf has become complacent in regards to hands on managing. He got his stadium deal, the fans will pack the place, and he probably likes Spielman.

in regards to a recent post here, injuries are NOT the problem on the OL. A total lack of quality is the problem. If we had NO injuries on OL this year, our corp would be Kalil (chronic failure), Fusco ( nothing more then a back up player any other team), Sully ( herniated discs in back so never will be the same or make it thru a season), Clemmings (utter epic failed draft pick), and Loadholt (coming off achilles tear-completely uncertain future)....THAT was Spielmans brilliant plan for our super bowl aspirations.

And remember, Spielman is responsible for making the best use of the best RB in the league during the very last years we will have him. AP will soon end his career without having a SB appearance.....all due to Spielmans inability to build a good team around him.

Ive addressed you in this before and I don't believe you ever got back to me but I'm not sure where you come up with this starting lineup of yours. That wasn't our starters at all.

LT was Kalil. Very up and down but serviceable and much better than anyone else we have over there. Still not saying much though I agree.

LG is Boone who you failed to mention and has been fairly solid.

C you keep saying is Sully and it's not. Sully was cut and plays for Washington now. We went with Berger and have Easton as his backup. Both who have been very good this year. Berger is currently the #6 center according to PFF. Not sure where the Sully thing keeps coming from.

RG is Fusco. They took a shot on him to come back at RG and play well and he hasn't. I still think we should start Easton at C and move Berger to RG when he gets back but I doubt that happens.

RT was NOT Clemmings. We had Loadholt and Andre Smith going into camp. Clemmings was a third string RT so CLEARLY Spielman wasn't "relying" on Clemmings.

Going into camp we had:

Smith, Loadholt, and Sirles at RT
Harris, Fusco and Kerin at RG
Berger, Easton and Sullivan at C
Boone, Beavers at LG
Kalil, Clemmings (later on brought Long in)

On paper, that isn't THAT bad at all. A lot of depth on one side but not much on the other. Either way the sack numbers SHOT up after our OTs went down. The turnovers SHOT up when the OTs went down. If you want to say injuries didn't play a big part in all of this, I must say you're dead wrong. We didn't allow a single sack against Tennessee or the Giants. Allowed only a couple between Carolina and Houston. This past week was the first time we didn't allow a sack since week 4. We were doing it early in the year and now couldn't for the longest time. I would say that has a lot to do with injuries.

I'm not saying we had some all-world OL prior to injuries but it wasn't all that bad. Run blocking for some reason was awful but pass blocking wasn't half bad. Injuries definitely played a big part in the OL collapse. There is no denying that

PHP, FWIW, I agree with your position on the topic, but I also think you are wasting your time. I've argued all this before and we're kind of at a point where the board has two camps on the topic who just don't agree with each other on this issue. (And that is OK.)

One detail you omitted: RG was supposed to be a battle between Harris and Fusco. Harris never made it to training camp due to a non-football issue we've never gotten any information on. IMO, this also represents a case where one of our better OL isn't on the field and is basically the equivalent of IR.

The original "plan" was:

Kalil
Boone
Sullivan
Harris/Fusco
Loadholt

Then the crap started piling up and two guys they thought were coming back in March didn't come back and one guy they resigned who performed well in 2015 went a some kind of "walk-a-bout." After than the Injury bug hit at tackle and here we are today. Worth noting: If they had decided to replace Sullivan, Fusco, and Loadholt last January that would have represented trying to replace 4 of 5 OL players in a single offseason. This, btw, is why Kalil got paid.

Without rehashing it: There is one camp that is of the opinion that Spielman has made too many mistakes and IS the problem and/or has demonstrated a series of bad choices and isn't good enough to win a championship. The other thinks Spielman has done a good to great overall job and/or that canning him is a bad idea.

It is also my opinion that the board has effectively stagnated on this topic. We need something else to talk about...

In response to the last two posts:

1) @ PHP: I think our OL was OK in pass pro against the Jaguars, so I'm left to wonder if this is a talent related thing or a coaching issue. You and I have different views on Asiata (though I don't love him, I just think you assign way too much of the deficient run o to him), but I think when AD gets back we'll see similar production. Our OL gets ZERO push. Loadholt was known for his run blocking, which is why AD loved him and lobbied for him to get paid, and his absence hurts us a lot.

2) @squatch: while I think you may be right, there are others, like me, who are kind of in between. I don't think it's time to fire Rick, but he has made some mistakes and I don't see why we can't discuss and critique them here. He put together a questionable line with a philosophy rooted in quantity over quality. It was costly because of the number of guys we had to pay and it rendered a poor performance. Yes, injuries should mitigate the critiques of Spielman a bit. But the fact remains, he put together a second rate starting line and it bit him in the backside. We need to invest in OL--a fact that has been clear for years.