Talk Vikes and Other MN Sports Talk Vikes and Other MN Sports

Forums  Register  Login  My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums 

Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ  Ticket List  Log Out

RE: General Vikes Talk

 
Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> Vikes Talk >> RE: General Vikes Talk Page: <<   < prev  196 197 [198] 199 200   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/3/2022 10:04:21 AM   
Bill Johanesen


Posts: 28543
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

The other way out is having a roster with a decent number of good and proven backups waiting to start.

Who are our good and proven backups?
RB- Mattison.
QB - A disaster, and that's under Kwesi's watch.
WR - A hopeful based on a game or two.
IOL - Laughable.
OT - Basically nobody.

DL - Like IOL, trying to scrape together starters.
DT - Who knows.
LB - A bunch of bodies, hopefully a couple will work out.
CB - Please.
S - Scraping by on Bynum starting, the rest are a prayer.

We'll see with the new coaches and 3-4, but right now Mattison is IMO the only pretty good backup.

OG/C Reed is a great sign. Davis and Schlottman are better than what we had for depth. Udoh back at swing T.

I would rather have Denver back cbs Nate Harrison may surprise.

They have started to to work on depth. Kene looked good late last year but like most teams depth is a problem so health is a key.

Still early in the offseason


Given the situation at G, any "great sign" there should be the starter. So the point remains for the OL backups.

And you miss the overall premise clearly stated in the first line of the post, that being a roster with good and proven backups, i.e. potential starters, is a way to help lessen the pain of a rebuild. Sort of like how extra high draft picks ups the chances. And a clear cap ledger. All foreign concepts to you.

< Message edited by Bill Johanesen -- 4/3/2022 10:22:23 AM >
Post #: 4926
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/3/2022 10:08:44 AM   
Bill Jandro

 

Posts: 17924
Joined: 8/13/2007
Status: offline
About the only consistent thing the Wilf's ushered in is a 500 record

_____________________________

Oline...early and often this draft
Post #: 4927
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/3/2022 10:25:22 AM   
Bill Johanesen


Posts: 28543
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

About the only consistent thing the Wilf's ushered in is a 500 record


.520 to be more precise.
Post #: 4928
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/3/2022 11:00:53 AM   
Bill Jandro

 

Posts: 17924
Joined: 8/13/2007
Status: offline
On paper Reed appears to have the better resume to win the RG competition. Davis and Schlottman both appear to be Dozier type signings.

Wyatt is simply an unknown quantity at this point. I did read a while back that he was taking offseason conditioning more serious this year so I guess we''ll find out.

_____________________________

Oline...early and often this draft
Post #: 4929
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/3/2022 11:36:02 AM   
bohumm

 

Posts: 5705
Joined: 10/28/2007
From: Altadena, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

Mission statement: The Minnesota Vikings will make tough and smart decisions that gain additional draft picks, shed cap (not kick it down the road), and lead to acquiring a top tier QB.

Outside of that, extended mediocrity is the most likely outcome... regardless of a Wilf periodically surfacing and toothlessly barking about being 'competitive' every year.

So far in year one: fail, fail, fail.

KAM-KOC were hired for their vision of the franchise and roster ...

They have committed to riding the Spielman-Zimmer nurtured and bred horse for at least two more years ... with some tweaks ... a new riding crop, maybe tighter leggings ...

That decision bears more on their success than some nutty Wilf proclaiming our roster to be the greatest ever assembled, including the Avengers.

But do you know why they decided to this horse? According to many reports---and taking the stable owners at their word---the stable owners mandated they at least compete to show, if not actually show, because then maybe they could catch lightening and place or win.

Mark Wilf said they want to get into "the dance" because then anything could happen. My impression is that Kwesi is trying to find the best way to achieve that while creating cap space and building a better roster. Do they think they could make the playoffs with no changes to the roster? I would imagine so, since that roster almost made the playoffs. Is that a good standard? Moot, because it's the owners' standard. He has created the possibility of much greater cap flexibility in 2024 while accumulating talent.

I'm willing to see how it plays out. Again, the most meaningful line from Kwesi's last presser was, "Everyone has a boss." His current bosses want to establish a floor at mediocre, which often means establishing a ceiling just above mediocre. They have been mediocre as owners, winning about 50% of their games. They've spent money, but the record shows them to be mediocre.
Post #: 4930
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/3/2022 1:51:50 PM   
Tom Sykes

 

Posts: 5871
Joined: 7/27/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bohumm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

Mission statement: The Minnesota Vikings will make tough and smart decisions that gain additional draft picks, shed cap (not kick it down the road), and lead to acquiring a top tier QB.

Outside of that, extended mediocrity is the most likely outcome... regardless of a Wilf periodically surfacing and toothlessly barking about being 'competitive' every year.

So far in year one: fail, fail, fail.

KAM-KOC were hired for their vision of the franchise and roster ...

They have committed to riding the Spielman-Zimmer nurtured and bred horse for at least two more years ... with some tweaks ... a new riding crop, maybe tighter leggings ...

That decision bears more on their success than some nutty Wilf proclaiming our roster to be the greatest ever assembled, including the Avengers.

(1.) But do you know why they decided to this horse? According to many reports---and taking the stable owners at their word---(2.) the stable owners mandated they at least compete to show, if not actually show, because then maybe they could catch lightening and place or win.

Mark Wilf said they want to get into "the dance" because then anything could happen. (3.) My impression is that Kwesi is trying to find the best way to achieve that while creating cap space and building a better roster. Do they think they could make the playoffs with no changes to the roster? I would imagine so, since that roster almost made the playoffs. Is that a good standard? Moot, because it's the owners' standard. (4.) He has created the possibility of much greater cap flexibility in 2024 while accumulating talent.

I'm willing to see how it plays out. Again, the most meaningful line from Kwesi's last presser was, "Everyone has a boss." His current bosses want to establish a floor at mediocre, which often means establishing a ceiling just above mediocre. They have been mediocre as owners, winning about 50% of their games. They've spent money, but the record shows them to be mediocre.

1. Not exactly, neither do you. I'll accept your interpretation. It's probably better than mine.

2. So the owners 'mandate' that teams compete. What multi-billion dollar enterprise is going to market itself as not competing? That's actually not a mandate, its more of a slogan, teams make wholesale changes and go intentionally backward almost every year, so they can rebuild and catapult themselves back to competitiveness.

3. I agree that Kwesi is trying to improve the cap and roster but for no other reason than it has to happen. He doesn't need any prescription from his boss to do that. Obviously the playoffs are a competitive standard but for me, it is low hanging fruit. It could have been a more aggressive approach, trading SOME assets, etc, for draft capital and more immediate cap relief but he and O'Connell have decided to move forward with a more conservative approach. They obviously didn't interview with a complete rebuild pitch. I'm not saying Mark's super-competitive remark isn't a factor, it certainly allowed Kwesi and O'Connell to adjust their resumes accordingly.

4. As far as creating greater cap flexibility in 2024 ... its quite the opposite, we have added more in salary and dead cap to 2024 by restructuring Cousins, Thielen, Harry, Hunter and signing Smith. We already had a ton of flexibility in 2024 ... now, those players big hits are lower each year but they do go back farther. I don't actually mind this. Whether you trade / eject massive assets up front or take the slower, more methodical approach for three years ... its all a gamble – it will all come down to how good the regime is at recognizing talent and how good the coaches are at developing / harnessing it.
Post #: 4931
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/3/2022 2:03:51 PM   
Bill Johanesen


Posts: 28543
Status: offline
He has created the possibility of much greater cap flexibility in 2024 while accumulating talent.

I still don't understand how he has accomplished anything pertaining to greater cap flexibility in 2024 when $12.5 million is sitting there in a voidable year for Cousins, and Smith's contract was stretched where $7.5 million is a dead cap figure likely to be exercised. That's $20 million in dead cap right there. How did he instead create greater cap flexibility?
Post #: 4932
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/3/2022 2:12:45 PM   
Bill Johanesen


Posts: 28543
Status: offline
Maybe they can be like the Eagles and draft a Hurts-type in the second round, and trade Cousins before 2023 (depending on the no-trade clause). They got a 1st for Wentz. Philly is sitting there with three first round picks.
Post #: 4933
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/3/2022 3:53:34 PM   
ratoppenheimer


Posts: 9550
Joined: 12/9/2007
From: cascais, portugal...still in exile
Status: offline
.
.
phil mackey, from purple daily, reviewed all of the quarterbacks for all of the teams the vikings are playing this season...which teams, have a quarterback advantage over us this season....

in the opinion of mackey, and his two co-hosts, judd zulgad, and declan goff, there are only five games the vikings play where we give up quarterback superiority - packers twice, Arizona, buffalo, and dallas...three of those games are at home...the remaining twelve games we have the better quarterback....

there was some debate regarding dak prescott and jameis winston, but they all agreed on those five....

of course, the defense has a lot to do with winning football games....

las vegas has our over/under for wins at 8.5...seems low to me...something else to consider is we play nine home games this season....

_____________________________

the journey...is paradise.
Post #: 4934
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/3/2022 4:01:40 PM   
ratoppenheimer


Posts: 9550
Joined: 12/9/2007
From: cascais, portugal...still in exile
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

On paper Reed appears to have the better resume to win the RG competition. Davis and Schlottman both appear to be Dozier type signings.

Wyatt is simply an unknown quantity at this point. I did read a while back that he was taking offseason conditioning more serious this year so I guess we''ll find out.



if it's not reed, there is nobody competing against Bradbury...schlottmann is listed as his backup, and he could be a long shot to make the team....

perhaps if bradbury is starting, and he gets injured, reed slides over to center and one of the davis boys takes over at right guard....

I'm hoping that reed beats Bradbury at the center spot, and wyatt wins out at right guard....

_____________________________

the journey...is paradise.
Post #: 4935
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/3/2022 7:15:49 PM   
marty


Posts: 13038
Joined: 12/28/2007
Status: offline
I look at the Vikings and Packers schedules, and I could see the Vikings winning 12 games and taking the division.

_____________________________

SKOL to the BOWL !!!
Post #: 4936
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/4/2022 9:31:19 AM   
fmaltes

 

Posts: 1013
Joined: 9/8/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bohumm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

Mission statement: The Minnesota Vikings will make tough and smart decisions that gain additional draft picks, shed cap (not kick it down the road), and lead to acquiring a top tier QB.

Outside of that, extended mediocrity is the most likely outcome... regardless of a Wilf periodically surfacing and toothlessly barking about being 'competitive' every year.

So far in year one: fail, fail, fail.

KAM-KOC were hired for their vision of the franchise and roster ...

They have committed to riding the Spielman-Zimmer nurtured and bred horse for at least two more years ... with some tweaks ... a new riding crop, maybe tighter leggings ...

That decision bears more on their success than some nutty Wilf proclaiming our roster to be the greatest ever assembled, including the Avengers.

But do you know why they decided to this horse? According to many reports---and taking the stable owners at their word---the stable owners mandated they at least compete to show, if not actually show, because then maybe they could catch lightening and place or win.

Mark Wilf said they want to get into "the dance" because then anything could happen. My impression is that Kwesi is trying to find the best way to achieve that while creating cap space and building a better roster. Do they think they could make the playoffs with no changes to the roster? I would imagine so, since that roster almost made the playoffs. Is that a good standard? Moot, because it's the owners' standard. He has created the possibility of much greater cap flexibility in 2024 while accumulating talent.

I'm willing to see how it plays out. Again, the most meaningful line from Kwesi's last presser was, "Everyone has a boss." His current bosses want to establish a floor at mediocre, which often means establishing a ceiling just above mediocre. They have been mediocre as owners, winning about 50% of their games. They've spent money, but the record shows them to be mediocre.


1) I don't think that the Wilfs are ok with being mediocore. That is why they went in a very different direction in who they hired as coach/GM. Also, they have not demonstrated to being cheap. Their biggest failing was keeping Rick Spielman in charge for so long.

2) Even if the strategy is a complete rebuild, now is not the time to trade Cousins, Hunter, Hendricks etc.. All three of these players are likely to have more trade value in a year.

3) It takes about 6 to 9 months to really know your personnel. The new GM is a smart guy and will want to make his own evaluations of playersf while they are under the tutelage of his coach.

4) If you think the team is bad now, and needs a major rebuild, getting cap space this year or the next is really not very helpful.

5) Under the rules of the current cap, it really can be handled. Tampa Bay,Los Angeles, New Orleans and Denver all have won super bowls with "bad" cap situations.
Post #: 4937
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/4/2022 11:33:41 AM   
Tom Sykes

 

Posts: 5871
Joined: 7/27/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: fmaltes

quote:

ORIGINAL: bohumm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

Mission statement: The Minnesota Vikings will make tough and smart decisions that gain additional draft picks, shed cap (not kick it down the road), and lead to acquiring a top tier QB.

Outside of that, extended mediocrity is the most likely outcome... regardless of a Wilf periodically surfacing and toothlessly barking about being 'competitive' every year.

So far in year one: fail, fail, fail.

KAM-KOC were hired for their vision of the franchise and roster ...

They have committed to riding the Spielman-Zimmer nurtured and bred horse for at least two more years ... with some tweaks ... a new riding crop, maybe tighter leggings ...

That decision bears more on their success than some nutty Wilf proclaiming our roster to be the greatest ever assembled, including the Avengers.

But do you know why they decided to this horse? According to many reports---and taking the stable owners at their word---the stable owners mandated they at least compete to show, if not actually show, because then maybe they could catch lightening and place or win.

Mark Wilf said they want to get into "the dance" because then anything could happen. My impression is that Kwesi is trying to find the best way to achieve that while creating cap space and building a better roster. Do they think they could make the playoffs with no changes to the roster? I would imagine so, since that roster almost made the playoffs. Is that a good standard? Moot, because it's the owners' standard. He has created the possibility of much greater cap flexibility in 2024 while accumulating talent.

I'm willing to see how it plays out. Again, the most meaningful line from Kwesi's last presser was, "Everyone has a boss." His current bosses want to establish a floor at mediocre, which often means establishing a ceiling just above mediocre. They have been mediocre as owners, winning about 50% of their games. They've spent money, but the record shows them to be mediocre.


1) I don't think that the Wilfs are ok with being mediocore. That is why they went in a very different direction in who they hired as coach/GM. Also, they have not demonstrated to being cheap. Their biggest failing was keeping Rick Spielman in charge for so long.

2) Even if the strategy is a complete rebuild, now is not the time to trade Cousins, Hunter, Hendricks etc.. All three of these players are likely to have more trade value in a year.

3) It takes about 6 to 9 months to really know your personnel. The new GM is a smart guy and will want to make his own evaluations of playersf while they are under the tutelage of his coach.

4) If you think the team is bad now, and needs a major rebuild, getting cap space this year or the next is really not very helpful.

5) Under the rules of the current cap, it really can be handled. Tampa Bay,Los Angeles, New Orleans and Denver all have won super bowls with "bad" cap situations.

1) Nobody aspires to mediocrity, many get there. Worse, many get there for a long time. I really like ownership's decision-making process for the new regime ... but if they aren't the answer, are we going to have to endure another prolonged bout with mediocrity? [the Wilfs are the constant]

2) What's more important – maximizing trade value or team-building success?

3) 6-9 months? A lot if not most of the roster and draft evaluation necessary for 'the plan' – has probably already happened by now. Some critical decisions have already been made three years out. Yes its a work in process but, certainly for this season, the heavy lifting has been done because games start in 5 months ... AND hopefully the 6-9 month evaluation period that you are talking about – moving forward – will have a bigger portion in-game / less in-practice than the previous regime. AND there is the issue of exceeding/falling short of evaluations, etc. People automatically plump up Phillips as an upgrade to Pierce because he played well at the end of last season [not before] – that was after being in a system and not starting for four seasons unless as a fill-in. Both Pierce and Tomlinson came in with a lot more established production than Phillips ... so hold your pro bowl votes, we can only hope that Phillips acclimates better than those two.

4) It wasn't an 'if / or' proposition, it was a 'dilute talent to create cap space for presumably better talent' vs 'hang on to as much talent as possible while improving cap space forward'.

5) True statement. We talk about cap space in black and white terms but there seems to be IMO more and more wriggling around it, as we go along. Plus 'kicking the can down the road' used to be a filthy cuss word ... now its just standard MO.

< Message edited by Tom Sykes -- 4/4/2022 11:37:37 AM >
Post #: 4938
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/4/2022 12:12:56 PM   
David F.


Posts: 10864
Joined: 12/31/2007
Status: offline
If they don’t replace Bradbury then I’ll start the “Fire Kwesi” and/or “Fire O’Connell” chant at the very first home game. This is the simplest decision anyone could encounter. If they can’t even do that we’re screwed.

_____________________________

I wouldn't give ANY qb $30-50+ mil unless that QB had won me a Super Bowl. Did you win a Super Bowl on your rookie deal? Yes? Great! Here's your hugenormous contract. F it let's just run victory laps and love life. No? Good luck. Next!
Post #: 4939
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/4/2022 3:50:28 PM   
Bill Johanesen


Posts: 28543
Status: offline
Read an article saying the cap may increase at a more rapid rate than it has over time (ignore COVID). Wondering if this makes sense: assume the current projected dead cap (merely a projection for simplicity plus we have to see what happens to the players/contracts) for 2024 is 21 million, equating to 10% of total cap. Normal cap increases mean when 2024 rolls around and the cap is at say 250 million, the 21 million dead cap equates to 8.4% of the total cap. Now this article is saying (making up the numbers) forget 250, the cap may be 275... so we'd be at 7.6% of the total cap], a difference of 0.8%. Or another way to see it... based on today, dead cap will be 76 cents on the dollar vs 84 cents.

Sort of like a theory out there that the U.S. could inflate it's way out of massive debt. Simply just saying!

But the other variables don't change with an even faster accelerating cap: contracts by default go up, and all 32 teams have the same 'extra' cap. Per the above, add 30% to today's contracts (275/210).

Take Tyreke Hill's contract that is based on today's cap and project out.... Jefferson's money is going to be obscene. In effect, a mid-upper tier QB salary in today's cap dollar world.

< Message edited by Bill Johanesen -- 4/4/2022 4:22:45 PM >
Post #: 4940
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/4/2022 4:09:10 PM   
Bill Johanesen


Posts: 28543
Status: offline
Tampa Bay, Los Angeles, New Orleans and Denver all have won super bowls with "bad" cap situations.

Part of the reason their cap situations may (link?) have been bad is their QBs were eating a lot of cap (but Stafford only $20 million).

Moreover 3 of the 4 teams you list had QBs that are arguably THE top three all-time greats. The most apparent conclusion is that if you have GOAT QB, he can help "handle" a bad cap situation. Disingenuous examples, and there is NOTHING to suggest we will be in a similar situation post-Cousins.

< Message edited by Bill Johanesen -- 4/4/2022 4:10:29 PM >
Post #: 4941
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/4/2022 6:25:00 PM   
Steve Lentz


Posts: 36196
Joined: 7/19/2007
From: Omaha
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

If they don’t replace Bradbury then I’ll start the “Fire Kwesi” and/or “Fire O’Connell” chant at the very first home game. This is the simplest decision anyone could encounter. If they can’t even do that we’re screwed.

Bingo!

_____________________________

" I believe empathy is the most essential quality of civilization"
Post #: 4942
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/4/2022 6:26:41 PM   
Bill Johanesen


Posts: 28543
Status: offline
Philly showing how to reload/rebuild. Traded #16 and #19 to NO for #18, a late third, NO 2023 1st & 2024 2nd. Some other late round stuff involved. NO is a middling team.

They have 4 first rounders the next two years, 2 each year.

We are in a competitive rebuild.
Post #: 4943
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/4/2022 7:04:26 PM   
Tom Sykes

 

Posts: 5871
Joined: 7/27/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

If they don’t replace Bradbury then I’ll start the “Fire Kwesi” and/or “Fire O’Connell” chant at the very first home game. This is the simplest decision anyone could encounter. If they can’t even do that we’re screwed.

'One could argue that the Vikings should also have a competition at center, considering Garrett Bradbury was outright benched at one point last season after a stint on the COVID list. They presumably will, to some extent, but head coach Kevin O'Connell seems to be high on Bradbury's potential in a new offensive scheme.'

"With Garrett, there was a lot to love about Garrett coming out (of the draft) a few years ago," O'Connell said at the NFL owners meetings last week. "I watched a ton of his tape coming out. Schematically, what we do may be a little bit different overall from what has been done here, that I think could maybe put some tools in his toolbox to have some success consistently, snap in and snap out. And then we're going to have a nice competition at that right guard spot."

https://www.si.com/nfl/vikings/news/chris-reed-jesse-davis-wyatt-ranking-vikings-right-guard-competition#gid=ci029de309e0002674&pid=6-kyle-hinton

honestly WTF. How much of his tape have you watched since he came out of college?

To imply the C position is Bradbury's before the first off-season get-together ... is ... appalling.
Post #: 4944
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/4/2022 7:20:47 PM   
Tom Sykes

 

Posts: 5871
Joined: 7/27/2007
Status: offline
So Zimmer's solution to Bradbury was to try and add size next to him. Udoh, Cole, no-show Wyatt

I thought this was just Zimmer being his typical unhinged self.

O'Connell' solution is to throw a quantity of 2-3 tier FAs next to him. Reed (2 yr deal), J. Davis (1 yr deal), Davis (rookie deal), Udoh (rookie deal), Schlottman (1 yr deal).

I take it all back, I'm now begging to get on the Lindenbomb at #12 tiny wagon.

< Message edited by Tom Sykes -- 4/4/2022 7:31:59 PM >
Post #: 4945
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/4/2022 8:30:34 PM   
Bill Jandro

 

Posts: 17924
Joined: 8/13/2007
Status: offline
The only move the new regime has made that I like was signing Z

Everything else has pretty much been meet the new boss same as the old boss.

The one major thing I was hoping regime change would bring is just a little more attention to this sad ass oline. But it appears they have simply doubled down on stupid. Cousins needs a clean pocket to be successful and the new regime's answer is to sign 3rd stringers and give the worst C in the NFL a vote of confidence. not a good business model.

I have zero expectations this season and would not be surprised if we finish below Det.

_____________________________

Oline...early and often this draft
Post #: 4946
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/4/2022 9:36:42 PM   
bohumm

 

Posts: 5705
Joined: 10/28/2007
From: Altadena, CA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

So Zimmer's solution to Bradbury was to try and add size next to him. Udoh, Cole, no-show Wyatt

I thought this was just Zimmer being his typical unhinged self.

O'Connell' solution is to throw a quantity of 2-3 tier FAs next to him. Reed (2 yr deal), J. Davis (1 yr deal), Davis (rookie deal), Udoh (rookie deal), Schlottman (1 yr deal).

I take it all back, I'm now begging to get on the Lindenbomb at #12 tiny wagon.

Linderbaum's draft profile is essentially a copy/paste of Bradbury's
Post #: 4947
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/4/2022 9:38:28 PM   
David F.


Posts: 10864
Joined: 12/31/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

So Zimmer's solution to Bradbury was to try and add size next to him. Udoh, Cole, no-show Wyatt

I thought this was just Zimmer being his typical unhinged self.

O'Connell' solution is to throw a quantity of 2-3 tier FAs next to him. Reed (2 yr deal), J. Davis (1 yr deal), Davis (rookie deal), Udoh (rookie deal), Schlottman (1 yr deal).

I take it all back, I'm now begging to get on the Lindenbomb at #12 tiny wagon.


Dream scenario would be to trade with Pittsburgh for #20 and a 1st and 3rd in 2023.

_____________________________

I wouldn't give ANY qb $30-50+ mil unless that QB had won me a Super Bowl. Did you win a Super Bowl on your rookie deal? Yes? Great! Here's your hugenormous contract. F it let's just run victory laps and love life. No? Good luck. Next!
Post #: 4948
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/4/2022 9:39:07 PM   
David F.


Posts: 10864
Joined: 12/31/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bohumm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

So Zimmer's solution to Bradbury was to try and add size next to him. Udoh, Cole, no-show Wyatt

I thought this was just Zimmer being his typical unhinged self.

O'Connell' solution is to throw a quantity of 2-3 tier FAs next to him. Reed (2 yr deal), J. Davis (1 yr deal), Davis (rookie deal), Udoh (rookie deal), Schlottman (1 yr deal).

I take it all back, I'm now begging to get on the Lindenbomb at #12 tiny wagon.

Linderbaum's draft profile is essentially a copy/paste of Bradbury's


Ugh.

_____________________________

I wouldn't give ANY qb $30-50+ mil unless that QB had won me a Super Bowl. Did you win a Super Bowl on your rookie deal? Yes? Great! Here's your hugenormous contract. F it let's just run victory laps and love life. No? Good luck. Next!
Post #: 4949
RE: General Vikes Talk - 4/4/2022 11:11:16 PM   
Todd M

 

Posts: 40564
Joined: 7/14/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

The only move the new regime has made that I like was signing Z

Everything else has pretty much been meet the new boss same as the old boss.

The one major thing I was hoping regime change would bring is just a little more attention to this sad ass oline. But it appears they have simply doubled down on stupid. Cousins needs a clean pocket to be successful and the new regime's answer is to sign 3rd stringers and give the worst C in the NFL a vote of confidence. not a good business model.

I have zero expectations this season and would not be surprised if we finish below Det.


Shocking.

I think you're 0/15 since moving to this site on liking the direction of the team in April before the draft.

Plus however longer posting at the strib.

This is who you are.
Post #: 4950
Page:   <<   < prev  196 197 [198] 199 200   next >   >>
All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> Vikes Talk >> RE: General Vikes Talk Page: <<   < prev  196 197 [198] 199 200   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode