quote:

ORIGINAL: kurt bilben

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
Sean Borman@SeanBoarMan
Ben Goessling said on KFAN he expects Rick Dennison to be named offensive line coach for the #Vikings.

Huge pickup IMO...

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

This guy nailed it as far as the play of the OLine this past season and how coaching was a very big part of the problem. There was no accountability for the poor results for marching out the same crap week after week.

https://thevikingage.com/2019/01/26/fix-minnesota-vikings-offensive-line/4/

I agree. If something isn't working, try something else.

Reminds me of 2013 when it was obvious that Ponder wasn't playing well, and when asked for comment, Frazier would reply that he needed to review the tape. It was obvious something wasn't working, so make a change.

Sticking with the status quo suggests that the backup o-lineman are even worse, which seems difficult to believe. I'd like to believe that the team would bench relatively high draft picks or free agent signings that play like crap, but I'm not sure they would. It's as if the coaches are scared to make Spielman look bad.

Continuity is almost as important as anything else for an OL unit. The throw crap at the wall and see what sticks coaching approach should be limited to OTAs, training camp, and preseason.

That's conventional wisdom. Would you never bench an underperforming offensive lineman? The Vikings don't seem to.

Of course I would. Just not for a worse performing player. It's not like the Vikes haven't seen what they have at backup. This don't want to make Spielman look bad stuff is silly, why would Spielman look bad if we replaced Compton with Isiidora?

My point was that Zimmer and Co. kept putting the same crap out there EVERY WEEK with garbage results. Everyone knows an offensive line needs cohesion, but if the results you want continues to come up short, you try something else. Why not try Isidora or Jones? Hard to believe it could have been any worse. Why not promote Edison? Gossett gets plucked from the practice squad. Let's continue to march these "Veteran" scrubs out there EVERY week.

Zimmer is extremely guilty of this. He will continue to start his vets, no matter how bad they're playing. He'll, if Sendejo doesn't get hurt, Anthony Harris is still riding the pine.

Can't believe Zimmer let them play Brian O'neill, or Elflein last year.

Me neither, especially the way Elflein struggled.

Why not play Jones? As for O'Neil, it wouldn't have happened with him either, if Hill hadn't gotten hurt.

See a pattern?

Hmmmm. Won't replace a veteran with a young guy. Oh yeah, I see that! er wait. No, won't replace a young guy with a veteran. Yeah that's it!



About the only pattern I see is a bunch of posters in a competitive straw man competition.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

If you are hanging on for dear life, you dont fix a problem by simply throwing in worse players. That is begging for an even worse situation.

I myself am surprised they didnt try Isidora more but I dont watch him practice.

I believe the personnel people failed miserably by targeting veterans Andrews, Jones, Edison, and that Wiszcy guy as depth ... obviously none of them practiced to expectation.

Bottomline, there arent plug and play OL on the street during the season to plug gaps.

But the answer is not to simply stick someone worse for the sake of change. You try and get your better players healthier, better technique and continuity wise, and you adapt your playcalling to their strengths and avoid their weaknesses.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

This guy nailed it as far as the play of the OLine this past season and how coaching was a very big part of the problem. There was no accountability for the poor results for marching out the same crap week after week.

https://thevikingage.com/2019/01/26/fix-minnesota-vikings-offensive-line/4/

I agree. If something isn't working, try something else.

Reminds me of 2013 when it was obvious that Ponder wasn't playing well, and when asked for comment, Frazier would reply that he needed to review the tape. It was obvious something wasn't working, so make a change.

Sticking with the status quo suggests that the backup o-lineman are even worse, which seems difficult to believe. I'd like to believe that the team would bench relatively high draft picks or free agent signings that play like crap, but I'm not sure they would. It's as if the coaches are scared to make Spielman look bad.

Continuity is almost as important as anything else for an OL unit. The throw crap at the wall and see what sticks coaching approach should be limited to OTAs, training camp, and preseason.

That's conventional wisdom. Would you never bench an underperforming offensive lineman? The Vikings don't seem to.

Of course I would. Just not for a worse performing player. It's not like the Vikes haven't seen what they have at backup. This don't want to make Spielman look bad stuff is silly, why would Spielman look bad if we replaced Compton with Isiidora?

My point was that Zimmer and Co. kept putting the same crap out there EVERY WEEK with garbage results. Everyone knows an offensive line needs cohesion, but if the results you want continues to come up short, you try something else. Why not try Isidora or Jones? Hard to believe it could have been any worse. Why not promote Edison? Gossett gets plucked from the practice squad. Let's continue to march these "Veteran" scrubs out there EVERY week.

Zimmer is extremely guilty of this. He will continue to start his vets, no matter how bad they're playing. He'll, if Sendejo doesn't get hurt, Anthony Harris is still riding the pine.

Can't believe Zimmer let them play Brian O'neill, or Elflein last year.

Me neither, especially the way Elflein struggled.

Why not play Jones? As for O'Neil, it wouldn't have happened with him either, if Hill hadn't gotten hurt.

See a pattern?

Hmmmm. Won't replace a veteran with a young guy. Oh yeah, I see that! er wait. No, won't replace a young guy with a veteran. Yeah that's it!



About the only pattern I see is a bunch of posters in a competitive straw man competition.

Strawman? Hmmm....I guess that includes you, as well.

Never let the obvious facts get in the way of "Strawman" statements. A bottom rated league OLine, an 8-7-1 record, a QB that was pressured 259 times (Only Houston was worse), and the constant 2nd/3rd and short yardage failures...

Nahhh, you're right. They were correct to keep the status quo in there.

My Bad. Carry on.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

This guy nailed it as far as the play of the OLine this past season and how coaching was a very big part of the problem. There was no accountability for the poor results for marching out the same crap week after week.

https://thevikingage.com/2019/01/26/fix-minnesota-vikings-offensive-line/4/

I agree. If something isn't working, try something else.

Reminds me of 2013 when it was obvious that Ponder wasn't playing well, and when asked for comment, Frazier would reply that he needed to review the tape. It was obvious something wasn't working, so make a change.

Sticking with the status quo suggests that the backup o-lineman are even worse, which seems difficult to believe. I'd like to believe that the team would bench relatively high draft picks or free agent signings that play like crap, but I'm not sure they would. It's as if the coaches are scared to make Spielman look bad.

Continuity is almost as important as anything else for an OL unit. The throw crap at the wall and see what sticks coaching approach should be limited to OTAs, training camp, and preseason.

That's conventional wisdom. Would you never bench an underperforming offensive lineman? The Vikings don't seem to.

Of course I would. Just not for a worse performing player. It's not like the Vikes haven't seen what they have at backup. This don't want to make Spielman look bad stuff is silly, why would Spielman look bad if we replaced Compton with Isiidora?

My point was that Zimmer and Co. kept putting the same crap out there EVERY WEEK with garbage results. Everyone knows an offensive line needs cohesion, but if the results you want continues to come up short, you try something else. Why not try Isidora or Jones? Hard to believe it could have been any worse. Why not promote Edison? Gossett gets plucked from the practice squad. Let's continue to march these "Veteran" scrubs out there EVERY week.

Zimmer is extremely guilty of this. He will continue to start his vets, no matter how bad they're playing. He'll, if Sendejo doesn't get hurt, Anthony Harris is still riding the pine.

Can't believe Zimmer let them play Brian O'neill, or Elflein last year.

Me neither, especially the way Elflein struggled.

Why not play Jones? As for O'Neil, it wouldn't have happened with him either, if Hill hadn't gotten hurt.

See a pattern?

Hmmmm. Won't replace a veteran with a young guy. Oh yeah, I see that! er wait. No, won't replace a young guy with a veteran. Yeah that's it!



About the only pattern I see is a bunch of posters in a competitive straw man competition.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

This guy nailed it as far as the play of the OLine this past season and how coaching was a very big part of the problem. There was no accountability for the poor results for marching out the same crap week after week.

https://thevikingage.com/2019/01/26/fix-minnesota-vikings-offensive-line/4/

I agree. If something isn't working, try something else.

Reminds me of 2013 when it was obvious that Ponder wasn't playing well, and when asked for comment, Frazier would reply that he needed to review the tape. It was obvious something wasn't working, so make a change.

Sticking with the status quo suggests that the backup o-lineman are even worse, which seems difficult to believe. I'd like to believe that the team would bench relatively high draft picks or free agent signings that play like crap, but I'm not sure they would. It's as if the coaches are scared to make Spielman look bad.

Continuity is almost as important as anything else for an OL unit. The throw crap at the wall and see what sticks coaching approach should be limited to OTAs, training camp, and preseason.

That's conventional wisdom. Would you never bench an underperforming offensive lineman? The Vikings don't seem to.

Of course I would. Just not for a worse performing player. It's not like the Vikes haven't seen what they have at backup. This don't want to make Spielman look bad stuff is silly, why would Spielman look bad if we replaced Compton with Isiidora?

My point was that Zimmer and Co. kept putting the same crap out there EVERY WEEK with garbage results. Everyone knows an offensive line needs cohesion, but if the results you want continues to come up short, you try something else. Why not try Isidora or Jones? Hard to believe it could have been any worse. Why not promote Edison? Gossett gets plucked from the practice squad. Let's continue to march these "Veteran" scrubs out there EVERY week.

Zimmer is extremely guilty of this. He will continue to start his vets, no matter how bad they're playing. He'll, if Sendejo doesn't get hurt, Anthony Harris is still riding the pine.

Can't believe Zimmer let them play Brian O'neill, or Elflein last year.

Me neither, especially the way Elflein struggled.

Why not play Jones? As for O'Neil, it wouldn't have happened with him either, if Hill hadn't gotten hurt.

See a pattern?

Hmmmm. Won't replace a veteran with a young guy. Oh yeah, I see that! er wait. No, won't replace a young guy with a veteran. Yeah that's it!



About the only pattern I see is a bunch of posters in a competitive straw man competition.

Strawman? Hmmm....I guess that includes you, as well.

Never let the obvious facts get in the way of "Strawman" statements. A bottom rated league OLine, an 8-7-1 record, a QB that was pressured 259 times (Only Houston was worse), and the constant 2nd/3rd and short yardage failures...

Nahhh, you're right. They were correct to keep the status quo in there.

My Bad. Carry on.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

If you are hanging on for dear life, you dont fix a problem by simply throwing in worse players. That is begging for an even worse situation.

I myself am surprised they didnt try Isidora more but I dont watch him practice.

I believe the personnel people failed miserably by targeting veterans Andrews, Jones, Edison, and as depth ... obviously none of them practiced to expectation.

Bottomline, there arent plug and play OL on the street during the season to plug gaps.

But the answer is not to simply stick someone worse for the sake of change. You try and get your better players healthier, better technique and continuity wise, and you adapt your playcalling to their strengths and avoid their weaknesses.

I agree with you 100 percent Tom, but too often Zim has proven to stick with the same players, no matter how ineffective they are. Treadwell, Compton, Remmers, Hill and Sendejo are good examples.

Sendejo wasn't a bad player, but I think Harris proved to be much more effective. It took Sendejo to get injured to bring Harris in. Same with O'Neil. Hill gets hurt and O'Neil comes in and plays better. I thought Jones and Isidora could have played just as bad as Compton/Elf/Remmers, but they were never really given an opportunity.

And don't get me started on Treadwell. I had a lot of hope for him, but there could have been another player brought in and given a chance to produce.

Change is good when it's needed.

And I'll even give Remmers a slight pass. I still don't know why these coaches have a fascination to play guys out of their natural positions. Remmers was a much better RT than G.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Todd M

Exciting series for the NFC...Elliot literally lays down on his back after a 2 yard dump off to avoid contact...the whistle blows on a 'sack' practically before the defender met RWilson...RWilson with a deep throw with no chance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: jbusse

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

This guy nailed it as far as the play of the OLine this past season and how coaching was a very big part of the problem. There was no accountability for the poor results for marching out the same crap week after week.

https://thevikingage.com/2019/01/26/fix-minnesota-vikings-offensive-line/4/

I agree. If something isn't working, try something else.

Reminds me of 2013 when it was obvious that Ponder wasn't playing well, and when asked for comment, Frazier would reply that he needed to review the tape. It was obvious something wasn't working, so make a change.

Sticking with the status quo suggests that the backup o-lineman are even worse, which seems difficult to believe. I'd like to believe that the team would bench relatively high draft picks or free agent signings that play like crap, but I'm not sure they would. It's as if the coaches are scared to make Spielman look bad.

Continuity is almost as important as anything else for an OL unit. The throw crap at the wall and see what sticks coaching approach should be limited to OTAs, training camp, and preseason.

That's conventional wisdom. Would you never bench an underperforming offensive lineman? The Vikings don't seem to.

Of course I would. Just not for a worse performing player. It's not like the Vikes haven't seen what they have at backup. This don't want to make Spielman look bad stuff is silly, why would Spielman look bad if we replaced Compton with Isiidora?

My point was that Zimmer and Co. kept putting the same crap out there EVERY WEEK with garbage results. Everyone knows an offensive line needs cohesion, but if the results you want continues to come up short, you try something else. Why not try Isidora or Jones? Hard to believe it could have been any worse. Why not promote Edison? Gossett gets plucked from the practice squad. Let's continue to march these "Veteran" scrubs out there EVERY week.

Zimmer is extremely guilty of this. He will continue to start his vets, no matter how bad they're playing. He'll, if Sendejo doesn't get hurt, Anthony Harris is still riding the pine.

Can't believe Zimmer let them play Brian O'neill, or Elflein last year.

Me neither, especially the way Elflein struggled.

Why not play Jones? As for O'Neil, it wouldn't have happened with him either, if Hill hadn't gotten hurt.

See a pattern?

Hmmmm. Won't replace a veteran with a young guy. Oh yeah, I see that! er wait. No, won't replace a young guy with a veteran. Yeah that's it!



About the only pattern I see is a bunch of posters in a competitive straw man competition.

Strawman? Hmmm....I guess that includes you, as well.

Never let the obvious facts get in the way of "Strawman" statements. A bottom rated league OLine, an 8-7-1 record, a QB that was pressured 259 times (Only Houston was worse), and the constant 2nd/3rd and short yardage failures...

Nahhh, you're right. They were correct to keep the status quo in there.

My Bad. Carry on.

A little weak on the strawman concept, eh?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

If you are hanging on for dear life, you dont fix a problem by simply throwing in worse players. That is begging for an even worse situation.

I myself am surprised they didnt try Isidora more but I dont watch him practice.

I believe the personnel people failed miserably by targeting veterans Andrews, Jones, Edison, and as depth ... obviously none of them practiced to expectation.

Bottomline, there arent plug and play OL on the street during the season to plug gaps.

But the answer is not to simply stick someone worse for the sake of change. You try and get your better players healthier, better technique and continuity wise, and you adapt your playcalling to their strengths and avoid their weaknesses.

I agree with you 100 percent Tom, but too often Zim has proven to stick with the same players, no matter how ineffective they are. Treadwell, Compton, Remmers, Hill and Sendejo are good examples.

Sendejo wasn't a bad player, but I think Harris proved to be much more effective. It took Sendejo to get injured to bring Harris in. Same with O'Neil. Hill gets hurt and O'Neil comes in and plays better. I thought Jones and Isidora could have played just as bad as Compton/Elf/Remmers, but they were never really given an opportunity.

And don't get me started on Treadwell. I had a lot of hope for him, but there could have been another player brought in and given a chance to produce.

Change is good when it's needed.

And I'll even give Remmers a slight pass. I still don't know why these coaches have a fascination to play guys out of their natural positions. Remmers was a much better RT than G.

That Wiszcy guy got picked up by Chicago and started for them while Long was out. Jones played decently in NY last year. Both of which destroys the it's the personnel argument. It was both, coaching and front office. Neither get a pass from me.

If you believe the posters over at Windy City Gridiron, there was no drop off from Long to Witzmann and several were advocating moving on from Long to save some cap space.

Zimmer was praising the oline after the first Chicago game. I hope Kubiak can save Zimmer from himself. The less Zim is involved in the offense, the better.

I am excited about Dennison as the new oline coach.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

If you are hanging on for dear life, you dont fix a problem by simply throwing in worse players. That is begging for an even worse situation.

I myself am surprised they didnt try Isidora more but I dont watch him practice.

I believe the personnel people failed miserably by targeting veterans Andrews, Jones, Edison, and as depth ... obviously none of them practiced to expectation.

Bottomline, there arent plug and play OL on the street during the season to plug gaps.

But the answer is not to simply stick someone worse for the sake of change. You try and get your better players healthier, better technique and continuity wise, and you adapt your playcalling to their strengths and avoid their weaknesses.

I agree with you 100 percent Tom, but too often Zim has proven to stick with the same players, no matter how ineffective they are. Treadwell, Compton, Remmers, Hill and Sendejo are good examples.

Sendejo wasn't a bad player, but I think Harris proved to be much more effective. It took Sendejo to get injured to bring Harris in. Same with O'Neil. Hill gets hurt and O'Neil comes in and plays better. I thought Jones and Isidora could have played just as bad as Compton/Elf/Remmers, but they were never really given an opportunity.

And don't get me started on Treadwell. I had a lot of hope for him, but there could have been another player brought in and given a chance to produce.

Change is good when it's needed.

And I'll even give Remmers a slight pass. I still don't know why these coaches have a fascination to play guys out of their natural positions. Remmers was a much better RT than G.

That Wiszcy guy got picked up by Chicago and started for them while Long was out. Jones played decently in NY last year. Both of which destroys the it's the personnel argument. It was both, coaching and front office. Neither get a pass from me.

If you believe the posters over at Windy City Gridiron, there was no drop off from Long to Witzmann and several were advocating moving on from Long to save some cap space.

Zimmer was praising the oline after the first Chicago game. I hope Kubiak can save Zimmer from himself. The less Zim is involved in the offense, the better.

I am excited about Dennison as the new oline coach.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

If you are hanging on for dear life, you dont fix a problem by simply throwing in worse players. That is begging for an even worse situation.

I myself am surprised they didnt try Isidora more but I dont watch him practice.

I believe the personnel people failed miserably by targeting veterans Andrews, Jones, Edison, and as depth ... obviously none of them practiced to expectation.

Bottomline, there arent plug and play OL on the street during the season to plug gaps.

But the answer is not to simply stick someone worse for the sake of change. You try and get your better players healthier, better technique and continuity wise, and you adapt your playcalling to their strengths and avoid their weaknesses.

I agree with you 100 percent Tom, but too often Zim has proven to stick with the same players, no matter how ineffective they are. Treadwell, Compton, Remmers, Hill and Sendejo are good examples.

Sendejo wasn't a bad player, but I think Harris proved to be much more effective. It took Sendejo to get injured to bring Harris in. Same with O'Neil. Hill gets hurt and O'Neil comes in and plays better. I thought Jones and Isidora could have played just as bad as Compton/Elf/Remmers, but they were never really given an opportunity.

And don't get me started on Treadwell. I had a lot of hope for him, but there could have been another player brought in and given a chance to produce.

Change is good when it's needed.

And I'll even give Remmers a slight pass. I still don't know why these coaches have a fascination to play guys out of their natural positions. Remmers was a much better RT than G.

That Wiszcy guy got picked up by Chicago and started for them while Long was out. Jones played decently in NY last year. Both of which destroys the it's the personnel argument. It was both, coaching and front office. Neither get a pass from me.

If you believe the posters over at Windy City Gridiron, there was no drop off from Long to Witzmann and several were advocating moving on from Long to save some cap space.

Zimmer was praising the oline after the first Chicago game. I hope Kubiak can save Zimmer from himself. The less Zim is involved in the offense, the better.

I am excited about Dennison as the new oline coach.

Well if you concede that it was both personnel and coaching, it doesn't exactly 'destroy' the personnel argument.

Unless by 'Front Office' you mean the executive staff (Spielman, etc.) pluck names out of a hat to populate the roster (without any pro personnel scouting or research).

And no, I don't put much stock in the Windy City Gridiron.

But just to clarify ... as a whole, I agree that coaching was a big part of the OL performance this past year. Which I attribute to a muddied OC situation and Sporano.

We also did not score any help through free agency, even though we brought in 4 veterans with some starting experience. IMO that is not getting it done on a personnel level.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Todd M

The pro bowl dodge ball games probably offered more than this game likely will.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SoMnFan

ESPN's projected win totals for all 32 NFL teams.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Minnesota Vikings (8-7-1)

Projected over/under: 9 wins (over -125, under +105)

It seems like the Vikings cycle between wildly successful and despair-inducing seasons from year to year under Mike Zimmer, but in the bigger picture, they've won an average of 9.5 games in their five years under the former Cowboys and Bengals assistant.



Minnesota doesn't have much cap room after the Kirk Cousins deal and could lose Sheldon Richardson, Anthony Barr, Dan Bailey and Latavius Murray this offseason, but if you ask Vikings fans, Richardson might be the only one in the bunch they'll miss.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
Sean Borman@SeanBoarMan
Ben Goessling said on KFAN he expects Rick Dennison to be named offensive line coach for the #Vikings.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

quote:

ORIGINAL: Viking Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

If you are hanging on for dear life, you dont fix a problem by simply throwing in worse players. That is begging for an even worse situation.

I myself am surprised they didnt try Isidora more but I dont watch him practice.

I believe the personnel people failed miserably by targeting veterans Andrews, Jones, Edison, and as depth ... obviously none of them practiced to expectation.

Bottomline, there arent plug and play OL on the street during the season to plug gaps.

But the answer is not to simply stick someone worse for the sake of change. You try and get your better players healthier, better technique and continuity wise, and you adapt your playcalling to their strengths and avoid their weaknesses.

I agree with you 100 percent Tom, but too often Zim has proven to stick with the same players, no matter how ineffective they are. Treadwell, Compton, Remmers, Hill and Sendejo are good examples.

Sendejo wasn't a bad player, but I think Harris proved to be much more effective. It took Sendejo to get injured to bring Harris in. Same with O'Neil. Hill gets hurt and O'Neil comes in and plays better. I thought Jones and Isidora could have played just as bad as Compton/Elf/Remmers, but they were never really given an opportunity.

And don't get me started on Treadwell. I had a lot of hope for him, but there could have been another player brought in and given a chance to produce.

Change is good when it's needed.

And I'll even give Remmers a slight pass. I still don't know why these coaches have a fascination to play guys out of their natural positions. Remmers was a much better RT than G.

That Wiszcy guy got picked up by Chicago and started for them while Long was out. Jones played decently in NY last year. Both of which destroys the it's the personnel argument. It was both, coaching and front office. Neither get a pass from me.

If you believe the posters over at Windy City Gridiron, there was no drop off from Long to Witzmann and several were advocating moving on from Long to save some cap space.

Zimmer was praising the oline after the first Chicago game. I hope Kubiak can save Zimmer from himself. The less Zim is involved in the offense, the better.

I am excited about Dennison as the new oline coach.

Well if you concede that it was both personnel and coaching, it doesn't exactly 'destroy' the personnel argument.

Unless by 'Front Office' you mean the executive staff (Spielman, etc.) pluck names out of a hat to populate the roster (without any pro personnel scouting or research).

And no, I don't put much stock in the Windy City Gridiron.

But just to clarify ... as a whole, I agree that coaching was a big part of the OL performance this past year. Which I attribute to a muddied OC situation and Sporano.

We also did not score any help through free agency, even though we brought in 4 veterans with some starting experience. IMO that is not getting it done on a personnel level.

That original premise was that there were better options than what we played all season. You argued that those that didn't play were inferior options.

The rest is just noise.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kurt bilben

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
Sean Borman@SeanBoarMan
Ben Goessling said on KFAN he expects Rick Dennison to be named offensive line coach for the #Vikings.

Huge pickup IMO...