Vikings Message Board.Com

Screw it. Lets draft another FS and CB to replace Harrison Smith and Xavier Rhodes while we at it.

shannontw wrote:Screw it. Lets draft another FS and CB to replace Harrison Smith and Xavier Rhodes while we at it.

We need some Linemen to replace Everson Grffen and... are we allowed to draft a Head Coach?

PurpleMustReign wrote: We need some Linemen to replace Everson Grffen and... are we allowed to draft a Head Coach?

Lets trade our 1st round pick for Jim Harbargh.

drafting a QB in the first round at this point would be a declaration of total incompetence. We have a big draft pick already in Teddy. In order to even judge Teddy we need a good/great OL that lets him shine. Right now he has mediocrity on the OL. Drafting should focus on OL and probably beefing up our DL as well.
Like many great teams, our back up/future-future QB ought to be a lower round draft choice that we let develop on the bench for a number of years.

The whole point of the Vikes lacking a QB pipeline, as Moth puts it, is likely to be a massive failure of coaching rathe then drafting. I do not believe that the Vikes had managed to take a college QB and groom him into a Pro with the sole exception of Culpepper, who might have been great if he didnt get destroyed. Otherwise, as much as I disliked watching TJax and Ponder in Purple, I believe they could have been much more with better coaching. Teams like the Pats and Green Bay are NOT just simply lucky at drafting. They teach their QBs and that is how they have a Pipeline.

Exactly what I'm saying, I'm glad I'm not the only one on this board that see's it this way.

It's ridiculous to even think about drafting a QB in round 1. I wouldn't mind it in later rounds for depth but not a chance in round 1. Teams that draft a QB in the first are teams that either have awful play there or have an aging veteran like Favre that they will get rid of in a year or two. We have neither of those. You don't draft a QB in the first after you literally just drafted one the previous year in the first. Especially when the damn kid is playing good. My goodness

Purple bruise wrote: That being said, I once again state that I hope that the Vikings already have their guy but it would be extremely difficult to pass up a talent like the unnamed QB if he fell into their laps.

It would not be difficult at all.....you trade down with someone. Just like other teams do when the BPA is someone that doesn't fill a need. Sorry but you don't pass up a top WR, OL, LB, or CB to draft a guy that literally does nothing but cause a controversy and basically puts one of our first round QBs on the bench holding a clipboard. Its just not even a realistic thought.

Pondering Her Percy wrote:We have a good PROGRESSING QB already!!! Why add something to the mix that we don't need.

I thought I stated it very clearly: In theory, the only compelling reason to do it is if the team believes the player they're selecting has a greater upside than the QB they already have under contract. However, now that I think about it, I'd also add that it also makes sense if they believe the player is just too good to pass up.

And let's remember, we're talking about Mariota if anyone and he is NOT Andrew Luck, Manning or Rodgers so we can throw that out the door now before that creates another explosion on here.

I covered that too, when I wrote: I understand that when you get down to the specific players involved, it becomes much more debatable.

We have holes to fill on this team. I'm sorry but QB is NOT a hole. Are you going to go replace Anthony Barr in the draft this year if there is a guy available?? No I would hope not. When teams find themselves in situations like that, what do they do?? They TRADE DOWN!! They would usually receive that teams first round pick and more which provides more DEPTH (which many on here say we don't have) on this team.

Drafting a QB in the first this year IS a waste of a pick because bottom line is, only 1 starts.

Until he gets hurt or fails to sufficiently progress and needs to be replaced. The Vikes have started 3 different QBs in each of the past two seasons. Depth is important and the Vikes depth at QB is less than impressive. They've got an unreliable journeyman as a backup and unless they plan to just go with Bridgewater and Cassel next year, they'll need to add a third QB and it should be a young QB with upside. If an elite prospect falls into their lap, it makes sense to seriously consider drafting him. In retrospect, how much better off might they be now if they had drafted Aaron Rodgers in 2005 instead of Erasmus James? They had Culpepper so it wasn't a need but it sure would have looked like a good move after Culpepper blew out his knee.

There's a difference between recommending that the Vikings draft Mariota (or some other QB) in the first round and simply saying all options should be on the table. I'm saying the latter.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: It would not be difficult at all.....you trade down with someone. Just like other teams do when the BPA is someone that doesn't fill a need. Sorry but you don't pass up a top WR, OL, LB, or CB to draft a guy that literally does nothing but cause a controversy and basically puts one of our first round QBs on the bench holding a clipboard. Its just not even a realistic thought.

Sure it is... you're just locked into the same "one is enough" strategy that has helped kill the Vikes at the QB position for far too long. They put all their eggs in the TJ basket with no Plan B and what did it get them? They did the same thing with Ponder? Heck, they were basically doing it with Culpepper too. I understand that it would be an unconventional move to draft a QB in R1 this year but there are genuine potential benefits to such a move. Again, I'm not recommending it as their primary strategy but I think all options should be on the table. This team has been trying to find it's next franchise QB since Fran Tarkenton retired in the 1970s. I think a little unconventional thinking might be in order because that's a problem that needs to be solved. I don't care if everyone wants to believe they've already solved it by drafting Teddy or that his progress over the last two weeks somehow indicates he's the answer. He still has a lot to prove so if the Vikes are sitting there on draft day and they feel a potentially great QB is on the board, I say take him. Let him learn behind Teddy.

Steve Young spent 4 years behind Joe Montana in SF. Was that dumb on SF's part? They ended up following a Hall of Fame QB with another Hall of Fame QB and just kept right on winning. Green Bay has probably managed the same trick, although Rodgers hasn't cemented a spot in the Hall just yet. Meanwhile, the Vikes just keep stepping in the same hole.

Solve the problem. All options on the table.

makes sense: draft a qb when we need a linebacker, another decent safety, several offensive lineman, and a receiver. we have the best rookie qb out there as of now but lets draft another one in the first or second round.

Steve Young was a free agent acquisition for the 49ers. He looked terrible when he first played for the Bucs! The 49ers did not have to use a draft pick, and found an unproven gem in Steve Young.

ThePiper wrote:Steve Young was a free agent acquisition for the 49ers. He looked terrible when he first played for the Bucs! The 49ers did not have to use a draft pick, and found an unproven gem in Steve Young.

They used two draft picks (a second and a 4th) to trade for Young but the price wasn't the point. The point was to illustrate the obvious value of having a truly talented young QB behind the starter.

Mothman wrote:
I thought I stated it very clearly: In theory, the only compelling reason to do it is if the team believes the player they're selecting has a greater upside than the QB they already have under contract. However, now that I think about it, I'd also add that it also makes sense if they believe the player is just too good to pass up.

But bottom line is, they invested their first round pick in Bridgewater. He is just getting his feet wet and showing great progress. When you invest in a QB like Bridgewater, you give him time. Not 12 games like he'll get this year. You don't just throw in the towel on him like that. Just about every franchise that invests in a 1-2 round QB, gives them time. I don't care what kind of upside Mariota has because it shouldn't matter when you have a guy like Bridgewater on your team. Bridgewater has a lot of upside and is showing it. If we had an aging QB or a young guy that fell flat on his face like Ponder, then yeah, you take Mariota. But not when you have just drafted a good rookie QB. It does nothing for this team but provide "depth". However, there are much easier/less costly ways to provide depth. A first round pick isn't a depth pick, it's a week 1-mid season starter.

Mothman wrote:Until he gets hurt or fails to sufficiently progress and needs to be replaced. The Vikes have started 3 different QBs in each of the past two seasons. Depth is important and the Vikes depth at QB is less than impressive. They've got an unreliable journeyman as a backup and unless they plan to just go with Bridgewater and Cassel next year, they'll need to add a third QB and it should be a young QB with upside. If an elite prospect falls into their lap, it makes sense to seriously consider drafting him. In retrospect, how much better off might they be now if they had drafted Aaron Rodgers in 2005 instead of Erasmus James? They had Culpepper so it wasn't a need but it sure would have looked like a good move after Culpepper blew out his knee.

There's a difference between recommending that the Vikings draft Mariota (or some other QB) in the first round and simply saying all options should be on the table. I'm saying the latter.

Ok yes I agree they need to add a 3rd QB thats young and has upside but you DONT do that in the first round. You do it in rounds ~4-7. There is nothing wrong with having Cassel as a backup. To be honest, he is probably one of the better backups in the league. Lets remember, backup QBs are backups for a reason. I'm sorry but there isn't a stud backup anywhere in the league. You just need to find a guy that can manage the game if your starter goes down and that fits Cassel. As for a 3rd QB, find a guy with upside later in the draft. There will be plenty of opportunities to draft one later on but not with our first pick. You don't draft an "elite" college QB one year after you drafted an "elite" college QB with just as much upside. It doesn't make any sense at all.

If there is an elite SLB do you draft him to replace Barr?? No. Maybe you would draft him and try to mold him or Barr into a MLB or WLB but you don't replace the promising talent you already have. Also, with LB and most other positions, there are more than 1 starter. With QB, its one starter and thats it. So in turn, drafting one with our first pick is a waste because that is not the way to find depth. And if we're drafting him to start, then picking Bridgewater was a waste.

MOST IMPORTANTLY.......Mariota doesn't come close to fitting Norv's system regardless. His offense is not built for a running QB and thats what Mariota is.

You guys are missing Jim's point: the Vikings need to draft another quarterback to groom for backup capabilities. Jim isn't advocating drafting a guy high to be brought in as our starter. Jeez Louise. It makes all the sense in the world to invest a 4th round pick or lower in another quarterback. It is the type of forward thinking good NFL teams do and something we should do as well.

As far as Marcus Mariota being drafted - it is just nonsense. Even if he were to fall to us on draft day, you don't draft him - you trade with a team who wants him. When we will people learn that spread QBs aren't NFL ready QBs? Mariota will need at least a year or so before any team can start him. He is one hell of a college player, but as far as the NFL? I am betting against him - just given the history.

I think Marcus Mariotta will be a better QB than Teddy Bridgewater, although I do have high hopes for Teddy and was both thrilled that we drafted him and pleased with his progression. That being said, it's laughable to suggest that we would take a QB to compete with/replace Teddy. I can only assume anyone that was saying it was trolling. We have what looks like a good qb. We're obviously not taking Mariotta just because he's a better prospect.