RE: General Vikes Talk

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: David Levine

Printable Version

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> Vikes Talk >> RE: General Vikes Talk

Page: << < prev 235 236 237 238 [239]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: General Vikes Talk - 2/28/2025 12:25:59 PM

Jeff Jesser

Posts: 19634
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: Southern Cal
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

And KC plans to Tag Trey Smith.

They did. I would love to get him but now? No thanks.

Post #: 5951

RE: General Vikes Talk - 2/28/2025 12:42:21 PM

Mark Anderson

Posts: 12313
Joined: 9/1/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

It is the time of rumors, but sometimes when there's smoke.....

https://x.com/TheDraftBuzzNFL/status/1895238591028285885

The team that makes the most sense to me still is the Colts.

If we franchise Darnold with the desire to trade him, he has to agree to all that and the specific team. Why would he want to screw his new team out of a draft pick?

Unless the Vikings are positive there would be a bidding war for Darnold from multiple teams, I don't think you can risk getting stuck with him for 40M. The contract offers might not be that good and Darnold might decide this is the best place for him.

It sounds like you mean if the Vikings offer the franchise tag to Darnold (with the intent to trade), he would first have to agree to all the terms before signing the tag.

The last part about Darnold might decide this is the best place for him... that is only in play if the Vikings want him.

Overall, it looks like everything has to be on the table and all parameters agreed to with Minnesota, Darnold, and the trading partner. I don't know the protocol/unwritten rules between GMs but on the surface it seems like there is still a risk the other team balks at the 11th hour.

And I don't even think that is legal, right?? Legal tampering is a week after franchise deadline.

Could we bend the rules and get something done? Maybe. But a team that wanted Darnold and didn't get the chance might want an investigation.

Post #: 5952

RE: General Vikes Talk - 2/28/2025 12:45:44 PM

David Levine

Posts: 78459
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

It is the time of rumors, but sometimes when there's smoke.....

https://x.com/TheDraftBuzzNFL/status/1895238591028285885

The team that makes the most sense to me still is the Colts.

If we franchise Darnold with the desire to trade him, he has to agree to all that and the specific team. Why would he want to screw his new team out of a draft pick?

Unless the Vikings are positive there would be a bidding war for Darnold from multiple teams, I don't think you can risk getting stuck with him for 40M. The contract offers might not be that good and Darnold might decide this is the best place for him.

It sounds like you mean if the Vikings offer the franchise tag to Darnold (with the intent to trade), he would first have to agree to all the terms before signing the tag.

The last part about Darnold might decide this is the best place for him... that is only in play if the Vikings want him.

Overall, it looks like everything has to be on the table and all parameters agreed to with Minnesota, Darnold, and the trading partner. I don't know the protocol/unwritten rules between GMs but on the surface it seems like there is still a risk the other team balks at the 11th hour.

And I don't even think that is legal, right?? Legal tampering is a week after franchise deadline.

Could we bend the rules and get something done? Maybe. But a team that wanted Darnold and didn't get the chance might want an investigation.

Is it tampering if Darnold is not under contract?

It sounds like there was a lot of talk with teams at the combine.

Post #: 5953

RE: General Vikes Talk - 2/28/2025 2:08:39 PM

Mark Anderson

Posts: 12313
Joined: 9/1/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

It is the time of rumors, but sometimes when there's smoke.....

https://x.com/TheDraftBuzzNFL/status/1895238591028285885

The team that makes the most sense to me still is the Colts.

If we franchise Darnold with the desire to trade him, he has to agree to all that and the specific team. Why would he want to screw his new team out of a draft pick?

Unless the Vikings are positive there would be a bidding war for Darnold from multiple teams, I don't think you can risk getting stuck with him for 40M. The contract offers might not be that good and Darnold might decide this is the best place for him.

It sounds like you mean if the Vikings offer the franchise tag to Darnold (with the intent to trade), he would first have to agree to all the terms before signing the tag.

The last part about Darnold might decide this is the best place for him... that is only in play if the Vikings want him.

Overall, it looks like everything has to be on the table and all parameters agreed to with Minnesota, Darnold, and the trading partner. I don't know the protocol/unwritten rules between GMs but on the surface it seems like there is still a risk the other team balks at the 11th hour.

And I don't even think that is legal, right?? Legal tampering is a week after franchise deadline.

Could we bend the rules and get something done? Maybe. But a team that wanted Darnold and didn't get the chance might want an investigation.

Is it tampering if Darnold is not under contract?

It sounds like there was a lot of talk with teams at the combine.

Stafford staying in LA. Darnold has a lot of value with the poor crop of college QBs.

Can we capitalize on this?

Post #: 5954

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/3/2025 10:44:22 AM

Phil Riewer

Posts: 28691
Joined: 8/24/2007
From: MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pager

It is the time of rumors, but sometimes when there's smoke.....

https://x.com/TheDraftBuzzNFL/status/1895238591028285885

The team that makes the most sense to me still is the Colts.

If we franchise Darnold with the desire to trade him, he has to agree to all that and the specific team. Why would he want to screw his new team out of a draft pick?

Unless the Vikings are positive there would be a bidding war for Darnold from multiple teams, I don't think you can risk getting stuck with him for 40M. The contract offers might not be that good and Darnold might decide this is the best place for him.

It sounds like you mean if the Vikings offer the franchise tag to Darnold (with the intent to trade), he would first have to agree to all the terms before signing the tag.

The last part about Darnold might decide this is the best place for him... that is only in play if the Vikings want him.

Overall, it looks like everything has to be on the table and all parameters agreed to with Minnesota, Darnold, and the trading partner. I don't know the protocol/unwritten rules between GMs but on the surface it seems like there is still a risk the other team balks at the 11th hour.

And I don't even think that is legal, right?? Legal tampering is a week after franchise deadline.

Could we bend the rules and get something done? Maybe. But a team that wanted Darnold and didn't get the chance might want an investigation.

Is it tampering if Darnold is not under contract?

It sounds like there was a lot of talk with teams at the combine.

Stafford staying in LA. Darnold has a lot of value with the poor crop of college QBs.

Can we capitalize on this?

Very fine line....we could get stuck with him.
Advantage of using a Transition Tag is we can rescind it....so the play may be using the Transition Tag early and see if someone bites on it?

_____________________________

SSG Riewer, Greg A Co 2/136 CAB
KIA 23 March 2007 Habbaniyah Iraq

Post #: 5955

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/3/2025 1:23:28 PM

Jeff Jesser

Posts: 19634
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: Southern Cal
Status: online

I can see GM's being in a washing machine over Darnold. Did the light finally come on or did it come on because KOC kept flipping the switch and he had incredible weapons? Those last 2 games may haunt Darnold. If I were a GM, I wouldn't give him 40+ million.

The only 2 teams that could keep propping him up were/are SF and LAR. Both seem to have their QB situation tied down now. You think if he goes to Cle/Pitt/LV ect...he continues with high level play? I don't.

Post #: 5956

RE: General Vikes Talk - 3/3/2025 1:31:26 PM

TJSweens

Posts: 45262
Joined: 7/16/2007
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mark Anderson

And I don't even think that is legal, right?? Legal tampering is a week after franchise deadline.

Could we bend the rules and get something done? Maybe. But a team that wanted Darnold and didn't get the chance might want an investigation.

Is it tampering if Darnold is not under contract?

I thought Sam was considered under contract until the free agent signing window opens. Either way, I remember teams giving players and their agents permission to negotiate with other teams ahead of a potential trade.

_____________________________

"The eternal fate of the noble and enlightened: to be brutally crushed by the armed and dumb."

Post #: 5957