You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum.
This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in Forum Index Home

General Manager Candidates?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message

Joined: 11 Sep 2010
Posts: 773
Location: England
PostPosted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 8:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eric dunn wrote:
Out of those QBs. Romo, Rodgers, Brady, Brees, Kaep, and Wilson are the only players we had a chance to get without trading up.

Nobody thought Romo or Brady were gonna be good, hints the draft status. When we passed on Arod and Brees, I THINK we had a QB in place. (Culpepper) So that leaves 2 QBs in Kaep and Wilson, one seen as a project and the other seen as a potential backup/future starter.

Just trying to justify passing on Rodgers for two players that are out of the NFL already. Crying or Very sad

How do we know what those that picked Wilson/Kaep thought they'd be? The fact is they were drafted and in relatively quick time have established themselves.

The wider point though is that franchise QBs are available outside the top picks - and the Vikings are looking like getting a prime pick this year.

Also, not trading up is not a complete excuse for not getting a guy imo.

In hindsight the Ponder pick might have not only wasted that pick and the last 2 years it also stopped Spielman from trading up ONE SPOT to get Griffin III. The cost would have been less than the Redskins gave up and had he been in Minnesota he might not have got injured.

Pairing Griffin and AD might have been worth over paying for.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
El Raymundo

Joined: 02 Mar 2005
Posts: 5475
Location: Northern Virginia
PostPosted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 9:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think anyone is saying we made the playoffs last year solely because AP went into god mode. (I like that expression.) But AP playing in god mode was the driving force in our playoff run, and that playoff run would not have been possible with a lesser back. For example, we would not have made the playoffs last year with The Whizzinator in the backfield.

"Live as brave men; and if Fortune is adverse, front its blows with brave hearts." -- Cicero
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 14089
Location: Where the true depth of one's soul doesn't resonate with the world
PostPosted: Fri Oct 25, 2013 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You don't trade the bulk of our draft for a raw WR based out of need. Playing poker with Daniel Negreanu, er, I mean Bill Belichick isn't the best idea.

Explosive or not, if they feel he doesn't run quality routes, or knows the playbook, he won't see the field over Simpson.

We had far greater needs.

Joe_is_the_best ^^

BWG VIKE wrote:
Teddy needs a Snickers, he looks like Ponder when he is hungry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 4194
PostPosted: Fri Oct 25, 2013 1:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

golf333333 wrote:
Krauser wrote:
Right, that's why good defensive coaches (Belichick, Rex Ryan, etc) put together good to excellent squads every year even when playing converted WRs at CB. And the Vikings have 2 1st rounders, a 2nd rounder and a 3rd rounder in the secondary and can't stop a last minute drive to save their lives.

Rex Ryan was the odds on favorite at the beginning of the year to be the first coach fired, and his teams have been absolutely terrible recently. That is a horrible argument.

Rex Ryan is a buffoon and a foot fetishist but he's a good football coach, especially for defenses. In 5 years, mostly with Mark Sanchez at QB, his only losing season is 6-10 and his overall record is 38-33.

Ryan's Jets defenses by DVOA:
2009: 1st
2010: 6th
2011: 2nd
2012: 9th
2013: 4th (so far)

Vikings defenses over that span were run by Frazier as DC and then by Frazier's chosen replacement Alan Williams. Their best rankings were 11th in 2010, 15th in 2009, otherwise haven't been in the top 20.

golf333333 wrote:
[Your Vikings argument is even have that much talent but they still can't tackle, can't cover...that's stuff you learn in high school, not stuff NFL coaches teach you. That's on drafting the wrong guys.

You want to argue that Rex Ryan couldn't have coached the Vikings team defense into the top 10 even once in 5 years? With the Williams Wall and Allen and Greenway in their primes and Antoine Winfield at a sprightly age? Were those guys "the wrong guys" to finish, just once, in the top 10 in the league?

golf333333 wrote:
Krauser wrote:
Jeff Saturday made it on rep from fan voting as a long-time vet who used to play with Peyton Manning. Kalil made it as a rookie, named by the coaches based on his play. They're completely opposite situations. Kalil hasn't been great this year, he was bad against the Lions and the Giants (playing hurt last week). But he still hasn't given up a sack this year.

If you think Kalil has been even remotely above average this year, all your other arguments mean nothing. He is just like McKinnie, talented, but lazy. Fact is, they tried to bulk up Kalil so he could handle NFL football. He didn't have the frame for it. He has lost quickness, and has no drive. That is painfully obvious.

I didn't say Kalil was above average this year, read it again and try not to move your lips this time. I did say he deserved to make the Pro Bowl last year, that he didn't make it on career rep and fan voting like Jeff Saturday did, and so the Pro Bowl nomination was an actual achievement in his case. He has talent. I agree he's not playing well this year.

golf333333 wrote:
Krauser wrote:
They have a good offensive line that's not playing well together as a unit, making mistakes picking up blitzes and stunts. It's not a lack of talent, but a problem with on-field performance.

They have a defense that gets no pressure in part because they play a vanilla scheme where coaching adds nothing above the ability of their pass rushers to beat the man in front of them.

They have a bottom 5 secondary despite legitimate talent, drafted highly, that has played well as recently as this time last year, and that are nowhere near too old. They turned over a 36 year old slot corner who's currently still unemployed, replacing him with a rookie CB that was often mocked to go in the top 15 picks, who's been one of the best rookie CBs in the league this year. Where's the evidence that they're playing as well as they're capable of? What do you think happens to that unit's performance if we trade them all to the Patriots?

This part is my favorite. They can't pick up blitzes and stunts? I bet you have coached a ton of high level football in your life. These guys just flat out aren't good. I've seen our QBs get killed far too many times on 4 man rushes to blame scheme.

Stunts often come from a 4 man rush. As an experienced high level football coach, you already knew that. They do require some coordination and cohesion from the OL as a unit (not just individual talent), and that's been lacking this year.

golf333333 wrote:
Note to armchair QBs everywhere: Schemes don't make a defense. Players make a defense. You, and every other delusional fan, call for all these exotic blitzes and what not. If you had your way, the team would blitz every play. Lining up and beating your man is how you win football games.

I'm not calling for exotic blitzes. But rushing 4 can be more effective when you're not sure which 4 guys are coming. Most modern defenses vary their looks, try to create mismatches or overload one gap. The Vikings line up 4 across on almost every play and bring all 4 guys almost every time. They're predictable.

Being able to pressure the QB while rushing 4 consistently is the hallmark of the Tampa 2, but we're not getting that done this year. The talent on the DL has dropped off from years past, because KWill and Allen are aging and Floyd's not ready yet, but it's still better than most teams. But most teams scheme more to bring pressure in other ways beyond one-on-one match ups, so they maximize the value of their talent. That's coaching, that's the creativity and aggressiveness that the Vikings are lacking as their DL ages, that's my point.

golf333333 wrote:
And to my favorite part, "Bottom 5 secondary despite talent". What in the world has shown you that this secondary has talent? Seriously question.

They aren't bottom 5 in talent, or at least they weren't before Smith went on IR.

They are having serious problems in coordinating downfield coverage responsibilities. Here are some examples:

LaFell's long TD was either Rhodes following the other receiver inside or Robinson not staying with him deep. Bennett's game winner in Chicago was Smith not rotating over the top of the route and trusting the LB to cover the underneath zone. Steve Smith's TD on the crossing route happened because the Vikings left Josh Robinson in man coverage facing a bunch formation.

Mismatched or badly executed coverages against different route combinations is partly the fault of coaching and scheme, not talent alone. Better prepared players would make fewer mistakes, and get better results, with the same talent.

golf333333 wrote:
These arguments about "oh a guy was drafted high so he's talented and is being misued by the coaching staff" is the biggest joke I've ever heard. Take note, every team in the NFL has the same opportunites in the draft. Barring trades, everyone gets a pick in every round. This isn't college football where one team gets whoever they want and others are left with the scraps. Everyone has 1st and 2nd round picks all over on both sides of the field, ours are just worse than others. And that's on coaching.

The bolded part is my argument, not yours. Did you forget which side of the argument you're on? You're like Daffy Duck having "pronoun trouble". Maybe you got confused from hypercarbia because you were breath-holding while typing and stomping your feet.

My argument is that we have some NFL-level talent that isn't producing as expected, or even as it did last year, because the coaching isn't doing enough (development, scheme, playcalling) to make the most of it.
Your argument is that the team's record of 1-5 reflects its ceiling based on limited talent, which is Spielman's fault, and that no Hall of Fame coach would have them playing any better.

(you can print out that paragraph above and keep it in your pocket for future reference, but remember that when I write "My" I mean me, Krauser, not you)

golf333333 wrote:
Congratulations on the worst post I have ever seen on this topic.

Congratulations, you're a clown.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 6545
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
PostPosted: Fri Oct 25, 2013 2:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's another thing.

Spielman wasn't exactly a resounding success as VP Player Personnel and GM in Miami either. I stumbled across this article today:


The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong. — Ecclesiastes 9:11

But that’s the way to bet. — Jimmy The Greek
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 23 Dec 2006
Posts: 35765
Location: Stillwater, MN
PostPosted: Fri Oct 25, 2013 2:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This thread is being locked as it's original topic has been distorted and is causing unneeded comments about posters and not their posts.

Maybe after a cool down period we can re-open it.


2017 Aggregate Draft Board
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Page 9 of 9

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group