Vikings Message Board.Com

Posted: **Fri Sep 23, 2016 5:42 pm**

Dames wrote: Jim is a huge Bradford fan:

Posted: **Sat Sep 24, 2016 5:08 pm**

Pondering Her Percy wrote:-Both our OTs Kalil and Smith are in contract years. We have a 34 year old center. And Fusco is horrid. I would have to imagine we bring back Smith on another 1 year deal and let Kalil walk. My question is, without a first round pick, it could be tough finding a starting LT. What should be our approach here?

-Peterson due $18 million next year and coming off another knee injury. Next years RB class is loaded however but we might HAVE to go OT with that pick in the second and I can't see Fournette, Cook or Chubb falling to the 3rd.

-If Bradford continues to play well, what do we do here?? We can always let Bradford play until Teddy is fully 100% but this could very well turn into a QB controversy.

-.......I love our defense

.....All in all, I have to imagine we spent our first few picks on offense am I right? My offseason mocks will be quite interesting

Just as it was the last two years, I think its all about the offensive line. If Kalil comes back as a presumptive starter after years of subpar play and an IR designation I will join those calling for Rick's job. That means the Vikings either find an in-house solution to the position this year (unlikely) or overspend/overdraft to get one next year (likely). Whether Smith comes back or is replaced by another journeyman doesn't change the make-up of the line that significantly.

Peterson is gone unless he'll play for peanuts. I think he'll retire because I don't think his pride will let him play for what the market will say he's worth. It'd be nice to get another great RB, but I hope they basically spend most of their draft picks on offensive line unless they can find a way to dramatically upgrade in FA.

Posted: **Sat Sep 24, 2016 7:22 pm**

Pondering Her Percy wrote:-Both our OTs Kalil and Smith are in contract years. We have a 34 year old center. And Fusco is horrid. I would have to imagine we bring back Smith on another 1 year deal and let Kalil walk. My question is, without a first round pick, it could be tough finding a starting LT. What should be our approach here?

-Peterson due $18 million next year and coming off another knee injury. Next years RB class is loaded however but we might HAVE to go OT with that pick in the second and I can't see Fournette, Cook or Chubb falling to the 3rd.

-If Bradford continues to play well, what do we do here?? We can always let Bradford play until Teddy is fully 100% but this could very well turn into a QB controversy.

-.......I love our defense

.....All in all, I have to imagine we spent our first few picks on offense am I right? My offseason mocks will be quite interesting

Next offseason the high draft and free agency must be focused on the O-line.

From my perspective AP has played his last game in purple, or at least should have. I like McKinnon and Asiata and they can pick up a serviceable back in free agency

Bradford is the Vikings QB of the next 5 years if he plays anywhere near his potential/Green Bay game levels. Teddy was still a question mark prior to the injury and he'll be an even bigger question mark after. The spot is Bradford's to lose at this point, that sucks for Teddy, but that's the reality of the NFL.

Next off season is about the O-line and nothing but the O-line!

Posted: **Sat Sep 24, 2016 8:05 pm**

This may be wishful thinking, but I think AD would be back, and I think Spielman and Zimmer would take him back, for the right price.

Posted: **Sun Sep 25, 2016 9:19 am**

PurpleMustReign wrote:This may be wishful thinking, but I think AD would be back, and I think Spielman and Zimmer would take him back, for the right price.

I wish that wasn't true, but it probably is. Now we get to test how important or overrated AP is to actually winning games.

Posted: **Sun Sep 25, 2016 9:43 am**

PurpleMustReign wrote:This may be wishful thinking, but I think AD would be back, and I think Spielman and Zimmer would take him back, for the right price.

Not only do I think they would, I think they will, if his health isn't an issue. I expect his contract to be renegotiated and I expect him to be a Viking again next year.

Posted: **Sun Sep 25, 2016 10:59 am**

I like Peterson but I think we will be better without him moving forward..

It will bring more balance to our offense.. I get tired of 3 and outs with a few runs for losses...

Posted: **Sun Sep 25, 2016 3:14 pm**

Mothman wrote:
Not only do I think they would, I think they will, if his health isn't an issue. I expect his contract to be renegotiated and I expect him to be a Viking again next year.

I hope so, I want him to go out like Fitz. It's awful when you see guys like Montana in Chief's jerseys, or Rice in Raiders jerseys, or Farve in....

Posted: **Sun Sep 25, 2016 3:21 pm**

S197 wrote: I hope so, I want him to go out like Fitz. It's awful when you see guys like Montana in Chief's jerseys, or Rice in Raiders jerseys, or Farve in....

Carter with Miami....so gross.

Posted: **Sun Sep 25, 2016 3:30 pm**

TJ Clemmings played a pretty damn good game. Who knows, maybe he'll be the answer at LT. In the 2nd half they shifted leverage and he still did a solid job. Granted they doubled his guy on any passes that weren't quick hitters, but he did alright. Reason for a little optimism there?

Posted: **Sun Sep 25, 2016 4:04 pm**

Just as a random not related the Oline play.

one of the sacks was simply A mind boggling choice of having Mckinnon try to block an rushing Olinmen and got wiped. A pass protection issue but I am confident in saying that, one of the sacks today had nothing to do with the big guys.

Posted: **Sun Sep 25, 2016 4:07 pm**

IrishViking wrote:Just as a random not related the Oline play.

one of the sacks was simply A mind boggling choice of having Mckinnon try to block an rushing Olinmen and got wiped. A pass protection issue but I am confident in saying that, one of the sacks today had nothing to do with the big guys.

That one definitely had something to do with the big guys. They quickly released that lineman right up the middle into McKinnon's face. That's not supposed to happen.

Posted: **Sun Sep 25, 2016 4:10 pm**

IrishViking wrote:Just as a random not related the Oline play.

one of the sacks was simply A mind boggling choice of having Mckinnon try to block an rushing Olinmen and got wiped. A pass protection issue but I am confident in saying that, one of the sacks today had nothing to do with the big guys.

A RB blocking a LB isn't exactly mind bogging. McKinnon needs to do better.

Posted: **Sun Sep 25, 2016 4:12 pm**

That was straight up miscommunication. Berger blocked no one and I'm pretty sure it was s D-lineman not a LB. They rushed 3, there's no way McKinnon is responsible for anyone when you rush 3.

Posted: **Sun Sep 25, 2016 4:14 pm**

S197 wrote:That was straight up miscommunication. Berger blocked no one and I'm pretty sure it was s D-lineman not a LB. They rushed 3, there's no way McKinnon is responsible for anyone when you rush 3.

I'll have to rewatch, I'm thinking of the play with Thomas Davis coming up the middle.

Vikings Message Board.Com

Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year

Re: Biggest questions heading into next year