Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

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

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

now to the offseason...
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12 ... 88, 89, 90  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rpmwr19


Moderator
Joined: 23 Dec 2006
Posts: 25902
Location: Stillwater, MN
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2013 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Even before Dallas Clark they had Ken Dilger and Marcus Pollard.
_________________
RPMs Viking Roster/Cap Tracker
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 48299
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2013 6:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rpmwr19 wrote:
Even before Dallas Clark they had Ken Dilger and Marcus Pollard.


Yep, Colts always had multiple TEs that were productive. I think with the emergence of Felton in the run game, MN probably needs to stick with more 1 TE/1 FB type plays. While Felton is a very effective blocker, I dislike the 1 TE / 1 FB offense. I would always prefer a 2 TE offense, with one TE who is capable of lining up all over and lead blocking. I think Rhett Ellison can eventually be that player.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
VikeSince70


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 645
PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2013 8:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
rpmwr19 wrote:
Even before Dallas Clark they had Ken Dilger and Marcus Pollard.


Yep, Colts always had multiple TEs that were productive. I think with the emergence of Felton in the run game, MN probably needs to stick with more 1 TE/1 FB type plays. While Felton is a very effective blocker, I dislike the 1 TE / 1 FB offense. I would always prefer a 2 TE offense, with one TE who is capable of lining up all over and lead blocking. I think Rhett Ellison can eventually be that player.


I do not think Frazier agree's with your point of getting away from a FB set. He had that very conversation with AD, saying that AD was more productive with a FB leading the way. Peterson actually prefers to running with no lead blockers but Frazier convinced him otherwise this last year.

Eventually I do agree we need to get away from a run first offense however; I do not think it should be this comming year. I think we give Ponder another year to be a game manager and let the game slow down for him even more ( Rodgers had 3 years behind Farve ). This would also give us a 1-2 year plan to get the right pieces ( receivers ) in place. At that time we could go to a more balanced attack.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ArcticNorseman


Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2225
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm a little late in joining this thread . . . and what a party it is! Wink

I don't see the Vikes making huge turnover in personnel as we've seen in the recent past. IMO, the Vikes need to spend their cash keeping their corps players together -- it is a pretty good band, just need a couple new instruments . . . that said, starting in-house, I'd like them to:
1. Re-structure and extend Kevin Williams. The man can still play, but they do need to start planning for a truly talented replacement.
2. See how Antoine does . . . if he wants to play just next year, that would be great, because he can bring it. So, locking him up for the next 3 years could be invaluable.
3. Re-sign Phil Loadholt and Schwartz.
4. I'm not sold on Brinkley or Henderson at the LB positions . . . I admit I was hopeful Brinkley would show more, but even with his last 5 or 6 games, he really didn't do much and was slow to the sidelines all year.
5. Injuries in the upcoming year could be disasterous . . . and the Vikes have a couple positions that are 1 guy deep . . . like LT and QB. So, drafting a small-school LT in the mid-rounds would be fine. As for back-up QB . . . well, that's a drama I'm not discussing here Laughing
6. Obviously, WR is a huge need . . . I don't see the Vikes retaining Burton, Jenkins, Aromashodu, or anyone except Wright and Harvin (maybe Simpson). This means the huge turnover in this particular unit, but hopefully huge upgrades in talent and speed.

As for the draft, I think the Vikes first three picks need to be (in no particular order): WR, OG, MLB, and OLB (used to lean toward CB). With the Shrine game kicking off the college All-star games, should be able to get a good feel for who the studs and problem children are.

I prefer the Vikes spend 2 early and 1 late round (Rd 5/6) picks on the WR position -- that leaves about 7 other picks for other needs.

As for the discussion regarding Run-dominant offense . . . well, it's worked for the Steelers, Bears, Giants, Cowboys and 49ers so why not the Vikes? Heck, even the Pats in 2002 - 2006 were run-first. All things considered, I believe Adrian should touch the ball 24 - 30 times per game, including runs and catches --- he's your best horse, ride 'em.

However, as has been stated, the Vikes need more balance on Offense so enter the TEs and WRs . . . I think Rudolph, Carlson and Ellison are a good bunch and as long as they're healthy, these guys will be awesome the next 3 yrs.

The WR position has been discussed . . . the OLine could use improvement at LG . . . even though I was pleasantly surprised by Johnson's performance as the year developed. Fusco, on the other hand, needs to climb the ladder a bit more. Good thing Schwartz was there -- that lil rotation might be a valuable thing to keep in place.

Last, but not least, the Coaching staff needs another year together. I liked what they did and how they handled the season. Anytime you win 4 or 5 more games than expected, you're doing something tremendously well behind the coaches' doors. No doubt, there were some ups and downs, but they deserve to stay in tact.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
disaacs


Joined: 13 Dec 2005
Posts: 23128
Location: Brownbackistan
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
Agreed. Run oriented teams like SF and Atlanta have transitioned away from it, realizing that you have to win with big plays in the passing game.

The Vikes must do the same thing if they ever hope to take the next step.


I disagree with both you and Steve. While the Vikings certainly need to have some type of passing game to make it a more balanced attack, they do not have to move to a fully pass-oriented team.

I consider this argument similar to the 4-3 or 3-4 defense argument that we have had over the past couple of seasons. How I compare it is that many teams have moved to a 3-4 defense, and people here have been clamoring that the Vikings do the same. I personally have argued that they should remain at the 4-3 because that gives them an advantage preparation-wise (and draft-wise). If more teams are running 3-4s, then that means they'll be one of the fewer running 4-3s, which means over time they'll have the advantage. It also gives them an advantage over the teams that are now converting back to the 4-3 (KC and Dallas)

The same goes with pass-oriented vs. run-oriented offenses. With more teams running pass-oriented offenses, over time the run-oriented offenses will have an advantage (especially in the playoffs), because teams will have generally game-planned for other pass-oriented offenses, and will find run-oriented offenses more difficult to game-plan for.

While I certainly can agree that the pass-oriented offenses will give them more success during the regular season and generally lead to more wins, in the playoffs, it's about rushing and defense. Houston and Green Bay can certainly fling the ball around (and what I would consider are pass-oriented offenses despite the presence of Arian Foster and GB's mishmash of RBs), but you notice, they are no longer around. And that's mainly due to their non-ability to run and their inability to stop anyone on defense. If the Vikings can just get their passing offense to the point where they can be at least slightly better than competent, they can have success with a run-oriented offense. They don't need to fling it around like Green Bay or Houston. They just need to have moderate success like a San Francisco.
_________________


Thx to Uncle Buck!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
biggsohnasty


Joined: 25 Dec 2008
Posts: 375
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 2:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think anybody is saying we need to become pass heavy. Having Peterson in the backfield will never allow us to be fully "pass heavy" because of not only his impact running, but his complete incompetence in the passing game.

But, being run heavy is not good either. The Texans were run heavy, saw how that worked out. Nobody else is run heavy. The 49ers, Seahawks, Redskins are run oriented, but all 3 have a smoke n mirrors style running attack that isnt as easy to gameplan for as "put player A into gap A, player B into gap B"

We saw how good Peterson can be countless times this year, but its foolish to think that as good as it was, defenses to stop it. The simplicity of a power running game makes it really good, but it also makes it very fragile and stoppable as shown in our playoff loss. And I for one do not believe Ponder would have made a huge difference...with the weapons we have.

This team does not need to become pass oriented, but we cant go into next year just assuming AD is gonna be able to do this again. How many wins would we have had if he had only run for 1300 to 1500 yards? And at some point, he is going to start breaking down if we continue to give him 350 carries a season.

Teams that contend can play in every kind of way. The Pats, 9ers, Falcons, Broncos, and Packers to an extent have shown that they can win shootouts, nail biters, defensive slugfests. The Vikings so far have not shown that extra gear. If we dont get the ball first/score first/ or get down by 10 points, its all but over because we just dont have that explosive threat.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
thestonedkoala


Joined: 28 Jan 2005
Posts: 4051
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 2:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We need to get a better QB coach. Not sold on Ponder going into the next season.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
biggsohnasty


Joined: 25 Dec 2008
Posts: 375
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thestonedkoala wrote:
We need to get a better QB coach. Not sold on Ponder going into the next season.


Who can the QB coach throw the ball to? Nobody is "sold" on Ponder going into next season, but if we going to switch QBs, we need to get a significant upgrade, not a lateral move. There arent any true significant upgrades and at some point we need to figure out IF Ponder can be that guy.

Won't know if he can until we put legitimate WRs around him.

Go into next season with clear upgrades for Ponder to throw the ball to, and if he can't be the guy, you know and when you do get a new QB, they are not in a garbage situation like Ponder was right away
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rpmwr19


Moderator
Joined: 23 Dec 2006
Posts: 25902
Location: Stillwater, MN
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If we add one of Bowe/Wallace/Jennings and keep Harvin then WR goes down on my list.

In the first I go best value between MLB/DT/CB and in the 2nd take one of the two remaining positions unless there is crazy value on the board for another position.

I see no point in taking a receiver in the first round if we add a top tier FA and keep Harvin as there are only so many throws to go around in our offense. Peterson should be getting at least 18 carries a game.
_________________
RPMs Viking Roster/Cap Tracker
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PurpleNation22


Joined: 07 Jan 2013
Posts: 430
Location: Iowa
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rpmwr19 wrote:
If we add one of Bowe/Wallace/Jennings and keep Harvin then WR goes down on my list.

In the first I go best value between MLB/DT/CB and in the 2nd take one of the two remaining positions unless there is crazy value on the board for another position.

I see no point in taking a receiver in the first round if we add a top tier FA and keep Harvin as there are only so many throws to go around in our offense. Peterson should be getting at least 18 carries a game.


The more I think about it, the more I think we will just be signing Percy and looking to build our WR corps through the draft. Spielman is going to want to continue to build through the draft so I think that we will see some smaller signings at LB, CB, or OG because those positions typically come cheaper than a WR.

I am guessing that only one of these needs will be addressed before the draft and we'll go into the draft with 3 big needs with one of them being at WR.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CriminalMind


Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 5084
Location: Toronto, CA
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 5:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Been saying it since time: try and sign a FA WR, try to work something out with Percy (regardless when a deal actually gets done). Focus the draft on the defense (and try to make that a top 5 overall unit) + OG (to help Ponder/AP).

To build a team to win in the playoffs with this current team make-up we need:

Running attack ranked top 5 (feasible)
Passing attack ranked 14-18th (big jump, but its possible)
Run Defense ranked top 10 (feasible)
Pass Defense ranked top 10 (relatively feasible)
Special Teams Combined Overall top 10 (feasible)
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
VikeSince70


Joined: 02 Sep 2007
Posts: 645
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

CriminalMind wrote:
Been saying it since time: try and sign a FA WR, try to work something out with Percy (regardless when a deal actually gets done). Focus the draft on the defense (and try to make that a top 5 overall unit) + OG (to help Ponder/AP).

To build a team to win in the playoffs with this current team make-up we need:

Running attack ranked top 5 (feasible)
Passing attack ranked 14-18th (big jump, but its possible)
Run Defense ranked top 10 (feasible)
Pass Defense ranked top 10 (relatively feasible)
Special Teams Combined Overall top 10 (feasible)


I agree with your analogy CriminalMind. I think for the next couple of years while AD is in his prime it is about building around AD, afterall it is why we drafted such a stud right? When AD starts to slow down is when we should have all the pieces to start the shift to a pass first team. So what you said about a 14-18 pass attack is a great point. I would add that the passing game should be about downfield explosion not the 5-10 yard passes the WCO gives. The Vikes need explosive plays in the passsing game to back the safeties out of the box and the linebackers are not keying on the running plays.

When AD starts to slow down (just like Walter Payton did) then we show off our new shiny toy called a pass first team. We still will have AD back there it just means he will get less touches. I just do not see that happening for at least 2 more years.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
thestonedkoala


Joined: 28 Jan 2005
Posts: 4051
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

biggsohnasty wrote:
thestonedkoala wrote:
We need to get a better QB coach. Not sold on Ponder going into the next season.


Who can the QB coach throw the ball to? Nobody is "sold" on Ponder going into next season, but if we going to switch QBs, we need to get a significant upgrade, not a lateral move. There arent any true significant upgrades and at some point we need to figure out IF Ponder can be that guy.

Won't know if he can until we put legitimate WRs around him.

Go into next season with clear upgrades for Ponder to throw the ball to, and if he can't be the guy, you know and when you do get a new QB, they are not in a garbage situation like Ponder was right away


Can we stop making excuses about who he has to throw too? Our receivers might look worse than they are because of Ponder.

Let's take some stats here of teams that don't have receivers:

QB 1: 282 completions 484 attempts 58.3 completion 3294 yards 12 TDs 13 INTs

QB 2: 297 completions 517 Attempts 57.4 completion 3,385 yards 14 TDs 17 int

QB 3: 345 completions, 564 attempts, 61.1 completion rate, 4,018 yards, 22 tds, 14 int

QB 4: 306 completions 505 yards, 60.6 completion rate, 3,400 yards 24 TDs, 16 int

QB 5: 300 completions, 483 attempts, 62.1 completion rate, 2,935 yards, with 18 tds and 12 interceptions

All four QBs have WORSE wide receivers than Minnesota. And yet Ponder can't crack 3000 yards?

Personally, I would go the way of Seattle. Look at a mid-round guy and have an open camp. Whoever wins in the off-season should get the job. Ponder should be fearing for his job at this point.

But we need to get a QB coach as well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vike daddy


Most Valuable Poster (2nd Ballot)

Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 74872
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

thestonedkoala wrote:
Can we stop making excuses about who he has to throw too?

i guess you ought to tell Troy Aikman that too, since he's said the same thing about the Vikings' receiver corp and what little chance any QB would have to do well with them.

but hey, what does Aikman know about being a QB in the NFL...?
_________________


Webmaster wrote:
Can we knock off all the nonsense and stick to football?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
thestonedkoala


Joined: 28 Jan 2005
Posts: 4051
PostPosted: Mon Jan 14, 2013 6:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vike daddy wrote:
thestonedkoala wrote:
Can we stop making excuses about who he has to throw too?

i guess you ought to tell Troy Aikman that too, since he's said the same thing about the Vikings' receiver corp and what little chance any QB would have to do well with them.

but hey, what does Aikman know about being a QB in the NFL...?


And Jimmy Johnson, who coached Aikman called Ponder the worst QB in the NFL. Let's ignore that

http://www.zimbio.com/Christian+Ponder/articles/zqq8bRI6JaC/Fox+Analyst+Jimmy+Johnson+calls+Christian

Listen, a bunch of QBs have bad receivers to work with. But they still manage to do something.

BTW; those QBs I listed:

Dolphins, Browns, Bills and Raiders. If you don't think they have bad receivers. Well...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12 ... 88, 89, 90  Next
Page 11 of 90

 
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