RE: General Vikes Talkk

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 Talkk

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: Chris Olson

Printable Version

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

Page: << < prev 140 141 [142] 143 144 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/3/2026 12:22:02 PM

Jeff Jesser

Posts: 20262
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: Southern Cal
Status: offline

My second concern defensively would be aimed more at the S position than CB.

I'm actually ok with S position for now. Agree that Mettellus can't be a FS and needs to play closer to the line of scrimmage. He's not fast enough for a traditional role.

Post #: 3526

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/3/2026 1:33:01 PM

Bill Johanesen

Posts: 33923
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

Was anybody at the practice last night? Obviously, still early, but the former beat writer pod that am listening to said that KM killed it and JJM was still struggling. Would be curious to hear if others were there to confirm/contradict. ect..

Apparently, KM to JJ was on point all night.

murray is getting more snaps out of shotgun than mccarthy...from what i've heard mccarthy had played better than murray the other couple of days at camp...i think that the loss of playaction will hurt the running game, but o'connell has yet to demonstrate that it matters to him...o'connell has yet to prove to me that he's an exceptional playcaller....

i'm pulling for mccarthy, and would love to give him two more years to prove it...i wonder, if teasley thinks that giving the team a chance with a young, affordable quarterback for a couple of years would convey that feeling to his head coach?....

So at least 4 years for McCarthy to prove himself?

Two years was enough for me. At this point, job #1 is find/trade/draft a good starting QB. If it's not Murray, keep looking.

Post #: 3527

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/3/2026 1:56:33 PM

Phil Riewer

Posts: 32770
Joined: 8/24/2007
From: MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

Was anybody at the practice last night? Obviously, still early, but the former beat writer pod that am listening to said that KM killed it and JJM was still struggling. Would be curious to hear if others were there to confirm/contradict. ect..

Apparently, KM to JJ was on point all night.

murray is getting more snaps out of shotgun than mccarthy...from what i've heard mccarthy had played better than murray the other couple of days at camp...i think that the loss of playaction will hurt the running game, but o'connell has yet to demonstrate that it matters to him...o'connell has yet to prove to me that he's an exceptional playcaller....

i'm pulling for mccarthy, and would love to give him two more years to prove it...i wonder, if teasley thinks that giving the team a chance with a young, affordable quarterback for a couple of years would convey that feeling to his head coach?....

So at least 4 years for McCarthy to prove himself?

Two years was enough for me. At this point, job #1 is find/trade/draft a good starting QB. If it's not Murray, keep looking.

The problem is 2 fold....he has to stay healthy enough to see if you can develop him or get value in a trade.

_____________________________

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

Post #: 3528

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/3/2026 1:58:14 PM

Trekgeekscott

Posts: 40883
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

Was anybody at the practice last night? Obviously, still early, but the former beat writer pod that am listening to said that KM killed it and JJM was still struggling. Would be curious to hear if others were there to confirm/contradict. ect..

Apparently, KM to JJ was on point all night.

murray is getting more snaps out of shotgun than mccarthy...from what i've heard mccarthy had played better than murray the other couple of days at camp...i think that the loss of playaction will hurt the running game, but o'connell has yet to demonstrate that it matters to him...o'connell has yet to prove to me that he's an exceptional playcaller....

i'm pulling for mccarthy, and would love to give him two more years to prove it...i wonder, if teasley thinks that giving the team a chance with a young, affordable quarterback for a couple of years would convey that feeling to his head coach?....

So at least 4 years for McCarthy to prove himself?

Two years was enough for me. At this point, job #1 is find/trade/draft a good starting QB. If it's not Murray, keep looking.

He hasn't had two years.

Injured his entire rookie season. He's only played 10 games. Not saying we should hold onto him for 4-5 years but it took Darnold that long to work it all out. Rodgers, Love both sat for years before getting to play... You don't give up on a guy after just 10 games.

_____________________________

All my life I thought air was free, until I bought a bag of chips.

Post #: 3529

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/3/2026 2:33:12 PM

ratoppenheimer

Posts: 9918
Joined: 12/9/2007
From: cascais, portugal...still in exile
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

Was anybody at the practice last night? Obviously, still early, but the former beat writer pod that am listening to said that KM killed it and JJM was still struggling. Would be curious to hear if others were there to confirm/contradict. ect..

Apparently, KM to JJ was on point all night.

murray is getting more snaps out of shotgun than mccarthy...from what i've heard mccarthy had played better than murray the other couple of days at camp...i think that the loss of playaction will hurt the running game, but o'connell has yet to demonstrate that it matters to him...o'connell has yet to prove to me that he's an exceptional playcaller....

i'm pulling for mccarthy, and would love to give him two more years to prove it...i wonder, if teasley thinks that giving the team a chance with a young, affordable quarterback for a couple of years would convey that feeling to his head coach?....

So at least 4 years for McCarthy to prove himself?

Two years was enough for me. At this point, job #1 is find/trade/draft a good starting QB. If it's not Murray, keep looking.

.
mccarthy has only had one year, and if not for a gross special teams failure, he should have a record of 7-3 over 10 games started....

all i'm saying is, give the guy a chance....

_____________________________

the journey...is paradise.

Post #: 3530

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/3/2026 2:51:08 PM

mcj

Posts: 2
Joined: 7/29/2026
Status: offline

How could JJM still be struggling to learn the offense in year 3? Is he stupid? I certainly hope that isn't the case.

Post #: 3531

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/3/2026 3:17:16 PM

Bill Johanesen

Posts: 33923
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

Was anybody at the practice last night? Obviously, still early, but the former beat writer pod that am listening to said that KM killed it and JJM was still struggling. Would be curious to hear if others were there to confirm/contradict. ect..

Apparently, KM to JJ was on point all night.

murray is getting more snaps out of shotgun than mccarthy...from what i've heard mccarthy had played better than murray the other couple of days at camp...i think that the loss of playaction will hurt the running game, but o'connell has yet to demonstrate that it matters to him...o'connell has yet to prove to me that he's an exceptional playcaller....

i'm pulling for mccarthy, and would love to give him two more years to prove it...i wonder, if teasley thinks that giving the team a chance with a young, affordable quarterback for a couple of years would convey that feeling to his head coach?....

So at least 4 years for McCarthy to prove himself?

Two years was enough for me. At this point, job #1 is find/trade/draft a good starting QB. If it's not Murray, keep looking.

He hasn't had two years.

Injured his entire rookie season. He's only played 10 games. Not saying we should hold onto him for 4-5 years but it took Darnold that long to work it all out. Rodgers, Love both sat for years before getting to play... You don't give up on a guy after just 10 games.

He has had two years. By your reasoning if he goes on IR for the season (again) he will still only have had one year.

He can hang around and get some reps but, again, they better be bringing legit talent in the quest to get a good QB, and they better be doing it 100% of the time. And the legit talent better be getting the majority of the reps.

Rodgers and Love are terrible examples that do not fit this scenario. They each "sat" because they were behind a Hall of Fame QB. In fact, Rodgers won the NFL MVP the year Love was drafted!

Speaking of only 10 games, he's had 4 injuries in that time:
- Right Knee Meniscus Tear (August 2024)
- Right High-Ankle Sprain (September 2025)
- Concussion (November 2025)
- Right Hand Hairline Fracture (December 2025 – January 2026)
Essentially an injury every 2.5 games. That has to be a record!

And late last season he was still throwing fastballs... to the point Jefferson even remarked negatively about it.

Wonder if he figured out his footwork?

< Message edited by Bill Johanesen -- 8/3/2026 4:05:36 PM >

Post #: 3532

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/3/2026 3:44:34 PM

Bill Johanesen

Posts: 33923
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeff Jesser

Was anybody at the practice last night? Obviously, still early, but the former beat writer pod that am listening to said that KM killed it and JJM was still struggling. Would be curious to hear if others were there to confirm/contradict. ect..

Apparently, KM to JJ was on point all night.

murray is getting more snaps out of shotgun than mccarthy...from what i've heard mccarthy had played better than murray the other couple of days at camp...i think that the loss of playaction will hurt the running game, but o'connell has yet to demonstrate that it matters to him...o'connell has yet to prove to me that he's an exceptional playcaller....

i'm pulling for mccarthy, and would love to give him two more years to prove it...i wonder, if teasley thinks that giving the team a chance with a young, affordable quarterback for a couple of years would convey that feeling to his head coach?....

So at least 4 years for McCarthy to prove himself?

Two years was enough for me. At this point, job #1 is find/trade/draft a good starting QB. If it's not Murray, keep looking.

.
mccarthy has only had one year, and if not for a gross special teams failure, he should have a record of 7-3 over 10 games started....

all i'm saying is, give the guy a chance....

JJM's 30th (out of 32) QBR in 2025 suggests he was not the reason he "should have" been 7-3 over his 10 games.

And as it stands, he was 6-4. Which included the last game playing GB Packer legends led by (actual players) QB Clayton Tune, RB Chris Brooks, and WR Jakobie Kenney-James. A few weeks prior, JJM started against the real GB team and the offense didn't score a TD. Reichard kicked a 52 and a 59 yard FG. Hell, without him we would have been shut out. As an aside, the week prior Brosmer was the QB when the Vikes beat the Lions with Goff, Gibbs, etc.

What you are saying, or said, was to give JJM a four year chance. And that's fine for you. For perspective, Ponder was given 2.5 years and that is widely portrayed as way too long.

Post #: 3533

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/3/2026 3:50:22 PM

David Levine

Posts: 81490
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott
Rodgers, Love both sat for years before getting to play...

And we'll never know if that helped or hindered them.

Obviously it worked in the end for Rodgers - he's a HoF QB. But would he have done more if he played those first 3 years?

Favre went 4-12 and 8-8 in Rodgers first 2 seasons. There is no excuse for Rodgers to have only 31 pass attempts over those 2 years.

(Packers did go 13-3 in Favre's last year, but that has no bearing on how he played the previous 2).

But Jordan Love will be 28 when the season starts and we still don't know if he's good enough. Did losing those 2 years of real game play retard his growth?

Post #: 3534

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/3/2026 4:18:16 PM

Bill Johanesen

Posts: 33923
Status: offline

Have to wonder about Carson Wentz. Last year he played with half a torso and had a better QBR than JJM.

Post #: 3535

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 8:43:30 AM

Trekgeekscott

Posts: 40883
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

Have to wonder about Carson Wentz. Last year he played with half a torso and had a better QBR than JJM.

Carson Wentz had experience. JJM by all accounts has improved on many aspects that he struggled with last year.

Murray is likely to win the Competition this year, but JJM is not making it an easy decision from all I've heard. JJM hasn't had the chance to let the game "slow down" for him. Injuries are part of that. I don't think the Vikings have given up on him. And they would be foolish to do so. Murray has had injury issues the last couple/few years. It is likely JJM will have to start some games this year even if he does lose the initial competition.

Back to Wentz. If he were any better than a back up QB at this point...he wouldn't have signed back here.

_____________________________

All my life I thought air was free, until I bought a bag of chips.

Post #: 3536

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 8:46:13 AM

Trekgeekscott

Posts: 40883
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott
Rodgers, Love both sat for years before getting to play...

And we'll never know if that helped or hindered them.

Obviously it worked in the end for Rodgers - he's a HoF QB. But would he have done more if he played those first 3 years?

Favre went 4-12 and 8-8 in Rodgers first 2 seasons. There is no excuse for Rodgers to have only 31 pass attempts over those 2 years.

(Packers did go 13-3 in Favre's last year, but that has no bearing on how he played the previous 2).

But Jordan Love will be 28 when the season starts and we still don't know if he's good enough. Did losing those 2 years of real game play retard his growth?

OR could they have rushed hin into the lineup and destroyed his confidence before he truly understood the speed and complexity of the pro game

I think most young QBs are not ready in their rookie year. Love may not be Rodgers, or Favre....But he's no slouch either. I maintain that holding the clipboard was a benefit. It may benefit JJM as well.

_____________________________

All my life I thought air was free, until I bought a bag of chips.

Post #: 3537

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 10:30:30 AM

Phil Riewer

Posts: 32770
Joined: 8/24/2007
From: MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott
Rodgers, Love both sat for years before getting to play...

And we'll never know if that helped or hindered them.

Obviously it worked in the end for Rodgers - he's a HoF QB. But would he have done more if he played those first 3 years?

Favre went 4-12 and 8-8 in Rodgers first 2 seasons. There is no excuse for Rodgers to have only 31 pass attempts over those 2 years.

(Packers did go 13-3 in Favre's last year, but that has no bearing on how he played the previous 2).

But Jordan Love will be 28 when the season starts and we still don't know if he's good enough. Did losing those 2 years of real game play retard his growth?

OR could they have rushed hin into the lineup and destroyed his confidence before he truly understood the speed and complexity of the pro game

I think most young QBs are not ready in their rookie year. Love may not be Rodgers, or Favre....But he's no slouch either. I maintain that holding the clipboard was a benefit. It may benefit JJM as well.

Kyler Murray is 28---same age as Love. He is still young.

If he performs well JJ may get traded but you still need 2 good QBs.......not sure I would put Wentz in the good category. Biggest key is the total cost of the QB room......it is very low this year and allowing them to fill other needs.

_____________________________

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

Post #: 3538

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 10:35:16 AM

Phil Riewer

Posts: 32770
Joined: 8/24/2007
From: MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

I think the O'Connell offense was exposed in 24 (Det & LAR) games. Perhaps the addition of Frank Smith to the coaching staff could help. But in the end O'Connell has to lean more into the run game which I simply don't think is in his DNA.

Defensively, I worry about the young IDL. Hargrave and Allen may have been lacking but they absorbed about 1300 snaps between the two. Doubt Orange and Banks can achieve this (being rookies) and the depth behind them is not great.

IDL depth shouldn't be an issue. Still have Redmond, Ingram-Dawkins, and Rodriguez. Redmond was probably our best lineman last year and the other 2 were just as effective as the 2025 FA which is why they sent them packing.

< Message edited by Phil Riewer -- 8/4/2026 10:39:35 AM >

_____________________________

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

Post #: 3539

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 12:22:23 PM

David Levine

Posts: 81490
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott
Rodgers, Love both sat for years before getting to play...

And we'll never know if that helped or hindered them.

Obviously it worked in the end for Rodgers - he's a HoF QB. But would he have done more if he played those first 3 years?

Favre went 4-12 and 8-8 in Rodgers first 2 seasons. There is no excuse for Rodgers to have only 31 pass attempts over those 2 years.

(Packers did go 13-3 in Favre's last year, but that has no bearing on how he played the previous 2).

But Jordan Love will be 28 when the season starts and we still don't know if he's good enough. Did losing those 2 years of real game play retard his growth?

OR could they have rushed hin into the lineup and destroyed his confidence before he truly understood the speed and complexity of the pro game

I think most young QBs are not ready in their rookie year. Love may not be Rodgers, or Favre....But he's no slouch either. I maintain that holding the clipboard was a benefit. It may benefit JJM as well.

Sure. But you have no way of knowing either way. That's why I've never bought into "so and so did it this way", so that's the best way.

Peyton Manning played his first year. Took his lumps, won 3 games and led the league in INTs.

His 2nd year, he led the team to 13 wins. His 3rd he led the league in TDs.

Would he have been as good as fast if he sat that first year and took his lumps in Year 2?

If your "confidence is destroyed" from a rough 1st year, you were never going to have the mental fortitude to succeed anyways.

< Message edited by David Levine -- 8/4/2026 12:23:26 PM >

Post #: 3540

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 12:44:50 PM

Trekgeekscott

Posts: 40883
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott
Rodgers, Love both sat for years before getting to play...

And we'll never know if that helped or hindered them.

Obviously it worked in the end for Rodgers - he's a HoF QB. But would he have done more if he played those first 3 years?

Favre went 4-12 and 8-8 in Rodgers first 2 seasons. There is no excuse for Rodgers to have only 31 pass attempts over those 2 years.

(Packers did go 13-3 in Favre's last year, but that has no bearing on how he played the previous 2).

But Jordan Love will be 28 when the season starts and we still don't know if he's good enough. Did losing those 2 years of real game play retard his growth?

OR could they have rushed hin into the lineup and destroyed his confidence before he truly understood the speed and complexity of the pro game

I think most young QBs are not ready in their rookie year. Love may not be Rodgers, or Favre....But he's no slouch either. I maintain that holding the clipboard was a benefit. It may benefit JJM as well.

Sure. But you have no way of knowing either way. That's why I've never bought into "so and so did it this way", so that's the best way.

Peyton Manning played his first year. Took his lumps, won 3 games and led the league in INTs.

His 2nd year, he led the team to 13 wins. His 3rd he led the league in TDs.

Would he have been as good as fast if he sat that first year and took his lumps in Year 2?

If your "confidence is destroyed" from a rough 1st year, you were never going to have the mental fortitude to succeed anyways.

Of course I don't know. I just think that MOST QBs benefit from sitting and learning and studying their first year.

Manning was a special case. There have been some that were so bad the team that drafted them just gave up almost right away.

Sometimes guys that other teams gave up on turn out to be decent down the road. Like Darnold.

My point is JJM shouldn't be something we can judge definitively after just 10 games in an injury marred horrible OLine situation season. Murray is almost certainly going to win this QB "competition". But JJM is almost certainly going to get some playing time this year because Murray has a concerning injury history and as a smaller guy will have more risk of injury.

I am not ready to throw in the towell on JJM like some in here are already doing...but each to their own.

_____________________________

All my life I thought air was free, until I bought a bag of chips.

Post #: 3541

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 12:51:53 PM

Tom Sykes

Posts: 6372
Joined: 7/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: David Levine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott
Rodgers, Love both sat for years before getting to play...

And we'll never know if that helped or hindered them.

Obviously it worked in the end for Rodgers - he's a HoF QB. But would he have done more if he played those first 3 years?

Favre went 4-12 and 8-8 in Rodgers first 2 seasons. There is no excuse for Rodgers to have only 31 pass attempts over those 2 years.

(Packers did go 13-3 in Favre's last year, but that has no bearing on how he played the previous 2).

But Jordan Love will be 28 when the season starts and we still don't know if he's good enough. Did losing those 2 years of real game play retard his growth?

OR could they have rushed hin into the lineup and destroyed his confidence before he truly understood the speed and complexity of the pro game

I think most young QBs are not ready in their rookie year. Love may not be Rodgers, or Favre....But he's no slouch either. I maintain that holding the clipboard was a benefit. It may benefit JJM as well.

The equation is, having the luxury of sitting a guy behind someone good … or … pushing a young dude into the line-up who is good enough to balance out the developmental problems.

Or getting Pondered. For us, its using a high draft pick on someone who is not ready in year three to start, skill-wise and because of excessive health issues … so we have to rental QB our way through it. JJ may eventually blossom, could happen, but he has already passed the, ‘even with mistakes, he’s too good to keep off the field’ designation. He’s got a ton to prove before we gamble again on him as a full-time starter … and Teasley doesn’t strike me as a Kwesi ‘going to prove my higher mathematical smart is bigger than your plain ol’ football smart’ type of operator.

KOC keeps talking about our success rate when we have stable qb play … the pattern I see is getting a lot out of a cousins darnold level player with a system that causes their head to explode playoff time. And then have them move on to a ginormous contract elsewhere while we fiddle with a ‘cap friendlier’ draft plan. Murray is the perfect candidate to continue this pattern. Has the talent to win games, wilted playoff time for az, has already flirted with potential suitors before signing here.

I see nothing in Murray’s interviews / comments besides polite lip service to impress me with his desire to be a great vikings qb for years to come. He seems like he’s trying to exploit a situation to further his career. He has mentioned liking this team as a youngster, but in my cynical opinion - up to this point - it seems like we are using him and he is using us.

As far as JJM getting a chance to develop behind Murry including some starts during Murry’s inevitable injury time … more likely these two dudes will be tag team jumping out of the ring, not into it. And we’ll have to watch in horror again as Wentz gets disembowelled over and over.

Post #: 3542

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 2:50:37 PM

Bill Johanesen

Posts: 33923
Status: offline

He has mentioned liking this team as a youngster, but in my cynical opinion - up to this point - it seems like we are using him and he is using us.

Can't pass up agreeing with a cynical opinion. Right now Murray is perfectly fine considering he only counts about $1M against the cap while earning about $37M. Murray is no stranger to big $ contracts, Arizona gave him a 5 yr, $230M extension. $46M AAV. IMO, if he plays just decent I believe he is going to want at least, IDK, $40M a year. Whatever the figure, it will be tall cotton. Far more than $1.3M.

For us, its using a high draft pick on someone who is not ready in year three to start.

Pretty vague way to outline his time as a Viking but it's catchy, accurate, and has a nice ring to it. I was thinking he's been a Viking for 2.3 years, but using that format requires constant updating. He's 42% of his way through his contract? He's been here as long as Teddy Bridgewater (except for a Week 15 appearance with two pass attempts eons after TBs knee injury)? Been here since before the cicada's last emerged?

Since his total time as a Viking seems to mean nothing to some people, maybe a run through time-space continuum stuff will unearth a more suitable measurement. For now, "in year three" sounds great!

< Message edited by Bill Johanesen -- 8/4/2026 3:32:14 PM >

Post #: 3543

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 3:05:43 PM

Bill Johanesen

Posts: 33923
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

I think the O'Connell offense was exposed in 24 (Det & LAR) games. Perhaps the addition of Frank Smith to the coaching staff could help. But in the end O'Connell has to lean more into the run game which I simply don't think is in his DNA.

Defensively, I worry about the young IDL. Hargrave and Allen may have been lacking but they absorbed about 1300 snaps between the two. Doubt Orange and Banks can achieve this (being rookies) and the depth behind them is not great.

IDL depth shouldn't be an issue. Still have Redmond, Ingram-Dawkins, and Rodriguez. Redmond was probably our best lineman last year and the other 2 were just as effective as the 2025 FA which is why they sent them packing.

There is no way you know that. Almost all the DL are questionmarks due to lack of playing time, being platoon guys, specialists, and having two rookies. For example, Ingram-Dawkins had 250 snaps. For perspective Thielen had 183.

And the way you wrote your posts insinuates Banks and Orange will start.

DL is the biggest unknown position on the team. Redmond is the only player on the DL one can point to and say yeah we have to keep that guy.

Post #: 3544

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 3:35:09 PM

Tom Sykes

Posts: 6372
Joined: 7/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

He has mentioned liking this team as a youngster, but in my cynical opinion - up to this point - it seems like we are using him and he is using us.

Can't pass up agreeing with a cynical opinion .

Right now Murray is perfectly fine considering he only counts about $1M against the cap while earning about $37M. Murray is no stranger to big $ contracts, Arizona gave him a 5 yr, $230M extension. $46M AAV. IMO, if he plays just decent I believe he is going to want at least, IDK, $40M a year. Whatever the figure, it will be tall cotton. Far more than $1.3M.

I’m all talk.

Secretly, I expect Murray to be enormously entertaining … in spurts.

Maybe even forcing me to budge off of my debbie downer low expectations near playoff time.

Forcing me to take up the philosophical position I take on after every viking season …

https://makeagif.com/i/lrWgXG

Post #: 3545

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 3:39:46 PM

David Levine

Posts: 81490
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: offline

Vikings QB’s JJ McCarthy and Kyler Murray unofficial passing stats through the first 5 days of training camp, per Zulgad:

Murray: 43/64, including 33/44 in team and 10/20 in 7 on 7.

McCarthy: 38/56, including 24/36 in team and 14/20 in 7 on 7.

Post #: 3546

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 6:10:45 PM

Phil Riewer

Posts: 32770
Joined: 8/24/2007
From: MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

I think the O'Connell offense was exposed in 24 (Det & LAR) games. Perhaps the addition of Frank Smith to the coaching staff could help. But in the end O'Connell has to lean more into the run game which I simply don't think is in his DNA.

Defensively, I worry about the young IDL. Hargrave and Allen may have been lacking but they absorbed about 1300 snaps between the two. Doubt Orange and Banks can achieve this (being rookies) and the depth behind them is not great.

IDL depth shouldn't be an issue. Still have Redmond, Ingram-Dawkins, and Rodriguez. Redmond was probably our best lineman last year and the other 2 were just as effective as the 2025 FA which is why they sent them packing.

There is no way you know that. Almost all the DL are questionmarks due to lack of playing time, being platoon guys, specialists, and having two rookies. For example, Ingram-Dawkins had 250 snaps. For perspective Thielen had 183.

And the way you wrote your posts insinuates Banks and Orange will start.

DL is the biggest unknown position on the team. Redmond is the only player on the DL one can point to and say yeah we have to keep that guy.

Allen and Hargrove were the biggest disappointment. The only thing I said is Redmond out played both and the other two played just as well. I don’t care who starts…..Flores may only need one or two on the field at times.

_____________________________

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

Post #: 3547

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 7:02:57 PM

Bill Johanesen

Posts: 33923
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

I think the O'Connell offense was exposed in 24 (Det & LAR) games. Perhaps the addition of Frank Smith to the coaching staff could help. But in the end O'Connell has to lean more into the run game which I simply don't think is in his DNA.

Defensively, I worry about the young IDL. Hargrave and Allen may have been lacking but they absorbed about 1300 snaps between the two. Doubt Orange and Banks can achieve this (being rookies) and the depth behind them is not great.

IDL depth shouldn't be an issue. Still have Redmond, Ingram-Dawkins, and Rodriguez. Redmond was probably our best lineman last year and the other 2 were just as effective as the 2025 FA which is why they sent them packing.

There is no way you know that. Almost all the DL are questionmarks due to lack of playing time, being platoon guys, specialists, and having two rookies. For example, Ingram-Dawkins had 250 snaps. For perspective Thielen had 183.

And the way you wrote your posts insinuates Banks and Orange will start.

DL is the biggest unknown position on the team. Redmond is the only player on the DL one can point to and say yeah we have to keep that guy.

Allen and Hargrove were the biggest disappointment. The only thing I said is Redmond out played both and the other two played just as well. I don’t care who starts…..Flores may only need one or two on the field at times.

So you said Redmond outplayed both? Where was that?

And the other two played just as well? How so? Even if they were equal based on a far lower number of snaps the reason the vets were released was due to their inflated salary. Which your man Kwesi created.

Post #: 3548

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 7:08:17 PM

Phil Riewer

Posts: 32770
Joined: 8/24/2007
From: MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

I think the O'Connell offense was exposed in 24 (Det & LAR) games. Perhaps the addition of Frank Smith to the coaching staff could help. But in the end O'Connell has to lean more into the run game which I simply don't think is in his DNA.

Defensively, I worry about the young IDL. Hargrave and Allen may have been lacking but they absorbed about 1300 snaps between the two. Doubt Orange and Banks can achieve this (being rookies) and the depth behind them is not great.

IDL depth shouldn't be an issue. Still have Redmond, Ingram-Dawkins, and Rodriguez. Redmond was probably our best lineman last year and the other 2 were just as effective as the 2025 FA which is why they sent them packing.

There is no way you know that. Almost all the DL are questionmarks due to lack of playing time, being platoon guys, specialists, and having two rookies. For example, Ingram-Dawkins had 250 snaps. For perspective Thielen had 183.

And the way you wrote your posts insinuates Banks and Orange will start.

DL is the biggest unknown position on the team. Redmond is the only player on the DL one can point to and say yeah we have to keep that guy.

Allen and Hargrove were the biggest disappointment. The only thing I said is Redmond out played both and the other two played just as well. I don’t care who starts…..Flores may only need one or two on the field at times.

So you said Redmond outplayed both? Where was that?

And the other two played just as well? How so? Even if they were equal based on a far lower number of snaps the reason the vets were released was due to their inflated salary. Which your man Kwesi created.

Look up the stats for Redmond versus both. Strange you didn’t post them but you posted snaps for the other two. You went from attacking the backup QB then IDL both seem just fine. Kwesi is worth bitching about but now long gone.

< Message edited by Phil Riewer -- 8/4/2026 7:36:34 PM >

_____________________________

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

Post #: 3549

RE: General Vikes Talkk - 8/4/2026 7:55:17 PM

Bill Johanesen

Posts: 33923
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

I think the O'Connell offense was exposed in 24 (Det & LAR) games. Perhaps the addition of Frank Smith to the coaching staff could help. But in the end O'Connell has to lean more into the run game which I simply don't think is in his DNA.

Defensively, I worry about the young IDL. Hargrave and Allen may have been lacking but they absorbed about 1300 snaps between the two. Doubt Orange and Banks can achieve this (being rookies) and the depth behind them is not great.

IDL depth shouldn't be an issue. Still have Redmond, Ingram-Dawkins, and Rodriguez. Redmond was probably our best lineman last year and the other 2 were just as effective as the 2025 FA which is why they sent them packing.

There is no way you know that. Almost all the DL are questionmarks due to lack of playing time, being platoon guys, specialists, and having two rookies. For example, Ingram-Dawkins had 250 snaps. For perspective Thielen had 183.

And the way you wrote your posts insinuates Banks and Orange will start.

DL is the biggest unknown position on the team. Redmond is the only player on the DL one can point to and say yeah we have to keep that guy.

Allen and Hargrove were the biggest disappointment. The only thing I said is Redmond out played both and the other two played just as well. I don’t care who starts…..Flores may only need one or two on the field at times.

So you said Redmond outplayed both? Where was that?

And the other two played just as well? How so? Even if they were equal based on a far lower number of snaps the reason the vets were released was due to their inflated salary. Which your man Kwesi created.

Look up the stats for Redmond versus both. Strange you didn’t post them but you posted snaps for the other two. You went from attacking the backup QB then IDL both seem just fine. Kwesi is worth bitching about but now long gone.

I was just wondering how you determined Redmond outplayed both of the jettisoned vets. And as I said "Redmond is the only player on the DL one can point to and say yeah we have to keep that guy." Did you miss that?

Didn't post snap counts for "the other two", just I-D. Pay attention. And put your "strange" to bed.

So you are put out because I "attacked" the DL based on you saying the DL is fine and I said the DL is almost all unproven? OK then!

Attacking the b/u QB? Who Wentz?