|
Post by jhjackhammer on Sept 17, 2020 8:23:58 GMT -6
I don’t want to lose for Lawrence. I would rather play hard and then if we see a qb we like, then fuck it. Move up the draft and get him. Stop farting about and hoping we can suck to get one. The chiefs just showed everyone that even if you have a decent qb, but you see one you really like. Don’t wait, get him and stop aiming for mediocrity.
|
|
mgb8
■━■━■━■
Posts: 1,278
|
Post by mgb8 on Sept 17, 2020 9:07:38 GMT -6
Here is our remaining schedule, how many "easy games" do you see? I see maybe 3 games where the current Vikings would be favored by more than 3. Getting Hunter back on the field and Ngakoue up to speed will help but if the game is on the line do you trust the current CBs to make a stop? This is a tough schedule, sadly I could see the Vikings 3 - 13 without even trying to tank. 2 @indianapolis colts 3 tennessee titans 4 @houston texans 5 @seattle seahawks 6 atlanta falcons 7 bye week 8 @green bay packers 9 detroit lions 10 @chicago bears 11 dallas cowboys 12 carolina panthers 13 jacksonville jaguars 14 @tampa bay buccaneers 15 chicago bears 16 @new orleans saints 17 @detroit lions This is a critical point. The Vikes have no more than four "easy" games - Indy, Jacksonville, Carolina and Atlanta. The rest of the games are against either divisional teams, playoff teams last seasons, or the Bucs, who had a positive point differential last season and added Brady, Gronk, Wirth, etc. Of those easy games, Atlanta was competitive against a very good Seattle team in the first half, and Matt Ryan threw for 450 yards (granted, like Kirk much was in garbage time) -- while Atlanta's defense sacked the elusive Russell Wilson 3 times, and they also had a fairly even time of possession. So it's quite possible that the Falcons are a better team than last year's 7-9 team (which also had a mid-level point differential of -18). Carolina was 5-11 last season, but they almost beat the Vegas Raiders - a relatively weak team that was 7-9 last season and not a "strong" 7-9. Carolina out-gained the raiders and too the lead, 30 to 26, half-way through the 4th, but the Raiders scored on the next possession, and the Panthers were unable to convert a 4th and 1 at just past mid-field after that. Interestingly, the Panthers didn't sack Carr, despite having the 2nd highest sack total in the NFL last season (and top quarter in terms of overall pressure) - so that may speak to an improved Raiders offensive line as much as anything - though the Panthers did have some turnover at the DL (losing Mario Addison and Vernon Butler to the Bills, Bruce Irvin to the Seahawks, Gerald McCory and Dontarie Poe) - but added Derrick Brown and Yetur Gross-Matos to 2019 first round pick Brian Burns (7.5 sacks last season) and coming-off injury Kawann Short (and Weatherly)... so by week 12... And if anyone thinks that even one victory is guaranteed in our four combined matchups against the Bears and Lions, they are kidding themselves.
|
|
|
Post by birdsorbees on Sept 17, 2020 9:12:49 GMT -6
Loser mentality always escapes me. Nothing is a guarantee and really how well do tanking teams do? Look at the Lions have they really recovered from the 0-fer season. How about the Rams all those Number 1's that that they traded for and had 1 run, Cleveland lets talk about them 17 and 18 they were the first pick. How about the Giants 3 first round picks and never sniffed the playoffs? Nope never bought into the 1 player idea ever since the trade for Herchel. Look at Kansas City 2 top 10's since 2013 Mahomes #10 2017 Fisher #1 2013 everybody else is in the +20's or no longer with the team Philly how about Philly they gave all of that draft capital for Wentz and he did not even play in the game. Sorry but Football is a TEAM sport that tanking a entire season for does not make sense. Plus if you ever did it and the NFL could prove it you would be in a world of hurt Agree. How many championships did “suck for luck” provide? While I would love for this team to draft QBs until we got a true franchise QB, tanking isn’t the answer. I think spending every penny of cap space when your team clearly doesn’t have what it takes is a mistake, but that’s a different discussion. .
|
|
|
Post by autobon7 on Sept 17, 2020 12:01:02 GMT -6
Loser mentality always escapes me. Nothing is a guarantee and really how well do tanking teams do? Look at the Lions have they really recovered from the 0-fer season. How about the Rams all those Number 1's that that they traded for and had 1 run, Cleveland lets talk about them 17 and 18 they were the first pick. How about the Giants 3 first round picks and never sniffed the playoffs? Nope never bought into the 1 player idea ever since the trade for Herchel. Look at Kansas City 2 top 10's since 2013 Mahomes #10 2017 Fisher #1 2013 everybody else is in the +20's or no longer with the team Philly how about Philly they gave all of that draft capital for Wentz and he did not even play in the game. Sorry but Football is a TEAM sport that tanking a entire season for does not make sense. Plus if you ever did it and the NFL could prove it you would be in a world of hurt Agree. How many championships did “suck for luck” provide? While I would love for this team to draft QBs until we got a true franchise QB, tanking isn’t the answer. I think spending every penny of cap space when your team clearly doesn’t have what it takes is a mistake, but that’s a different discussion. . Agree.... losing on purpose only creates a losing mentality. How has it worked out for the Sixers? Or the above mentioned Colts/Luck? Vikings have enough issues they don't need another one
|
|
lunas
■━■━■━■
Posts: 2,273
|
Post by lunas on Sept 17, 2020 14:33:05 GMT -6
Look at all the dynasties throughout history that had a string of multiple Lombardi’s:
Packers Dolphins Steelers Cowboys 49ers Cowboys Broncos Patriots.
All... with HOF QB’s.
There are always aberrations in every sport. Johnson, Dilfer, etc. but they had a bigger aberration which is a All-Time great defense which are littered with HOF defensive players. Much harder to construct and keep in today’s NFL.
It’s been 59 years....with a wall of HOF defensive and offensive players across all eras. The only difference of these eras is the 70’s where we have our only HOF QB who took us to the dance 3 times.
If you didn’t know anything about the game of football and analyzed the key components to have a chance to win a SB, it starts and ends with the QB.
|
|
RF54
■━■━■━■
Posts: 3,864
|
Post by RF54 on Sept 17, 2020 15:59:11 GMT -6
Super bowl drought; Cleveland =====never Detroit=======never Houston======never Jacksonville====never New York Jets===51 years since last SB Win MINNESOTA*****never won, 43 years since last appearance
I'll take my chances with the top pick, on a rookie contract for 5 years.
|
|
|
Post by birdsorbees on Sept 17, 2020 16:17:35 GMT -6
Super bowl drought; Cleveland =====never Detroit=======never Houston======never Jacksonville====never New York Jets===51 years since last SB Win MINNESOTA*****never won, 43 years since last appearance I'll take my chances with the top pick, on a rookie contract for 5 years. I’m confused. You know that detroit has had a #1 overall pick at QB for over a decade, right? The Browns also currently have a first overall at QB. Sam Darnold was #3 overall. Meanwhile: Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Mahommes, need I go on. Yes, you need a QB. No, he absolutely doesn’t have to be the first overall pick. Was that your point?
|
|
lunas
■━■━■━■
Posts: 2,273
|
Post by lunas on Sept 17, 2020 17:14:51 GMT -6
Super bowl drought; Cleveland =====never Detroit=======never Houston======never Jacksonville====never New York Jets===51 years since last SB Win MINNESOTA*****never won, 43 years since last appearance I'll take my chances with the top pick, on a rookie contract for 5 years. I’m confused. You know that detroit has had a #1 overall pick at QB for over a decade, right? The Browns also currently have a first overall at QB. Sam Darnold was #3 overall. Meanwhile: Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Mahommes, need I go on. Yes, you need a QB. No, he absolutely doesn’t have to be the first overall pick. Was that your point? His point is you need a great QB to have a chance: I think we can all agree on that right? The draft is about odds. You could find a Brady or Wilson in the later rounds but the odds are against you. Namath (AFL), Bradshaw, Plunkett, Aikman, Young, Elway, P. Manning, E. Manning were the first overall pick. They have won a combined 17 Super Bowls. There are only 16 QBs in 52 years that have won a SB who were not a first round pick. This means 70% percent of the time, the SB is won by a first round draft pick. The odds are terrible with Cousins. Tanking for Lawrence is like Tanking for Tua last year. You never know but the point is to draft a blue chip QB early and take your chances. If they bomb, do it again..and again until you get it right.
|
|
|
Post by birdsorbees on Sept 17, 2020 18:02:59 GMT -6
I’m confused. You know that detroit has had a #1 overall pick at QB for over a decade, right? The Browns also currently have a first overall at QB. Sam Darnold was #3 overall. Meanwhile: Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Wilson, Mahommes, need I go on. Yes, you need a QB. No, he absolutely doesn’t have to be the first overall pick. Was that your point? His point is you need a great QB to have a chance: I think we can all agree on that right? The draft is about odds. You could find a Brady or Wilson in the later rounds but the odds are against you. Namath (AFL), Bradshaw, Plunkett, Aikman, Young, Elway, P. Manning, E. Manning were the first overall pick. They have won a combined 17 Super Bowls. There are only 16 QBs in 52 years that have won a SB who were not a first round pick. This means 70% percent of the time, the SB is won by a first round draft pick. The odds are terrible with Cousins. Tanking for Lawrence is like Tanking for Tua last year. You never know but the point is to draft a blue chip QB early and take your chances. If they bomb, do it again..and again until you get it right. Absolutely agree an elite QB is the best blueprint. Disagree they have to be early first round. Definitely think they are more likely to bomb if they’re on a crap team, and the same 70% of SB winning quarterbacks weren’t first overall picks. I’ll grant you more first overall picks win than any other draft position, but more QBs are taken first overall than any other team position. I think we’re all aware of the litany of busted first overalls. I’m saying tanking as a strategy guarantees you nothing, and now you have a crap team that people have no faith or interest in. All those firsts for Detroit and Cleveland, and they still suck. I will agree that you draft QB over and over until you get it right. I’m confident Arizona regrets nothing about drafting Murray. I wish the Vikings would have been doing exactly that. Maybe minor differences of opinion, I guess, but using Stafford, Mayfield, Darnold, Bortles, and David Carr’s teams as an example of why you have to draft an early or first overall QB is self defeating, can we agree on that?
|
|
|
Post by viperdk on Sept 17, 2020 18:04:33 GMT -6
If I'm the Vikings, finish strong. If it doesn't happen, so be it. If I want 1 of 3 top QBs in Lawrence, Fields or Lance, make a package deal of picks and maybe players we don't keep long term (Rudolph, Rieff, etc) and trade up.
I stand by what I said earlier. You DON'T tank
|
|
lunas
■━■━■━■
Posts: 2,273
|
Post by lunas on Sept 17, 2020 19:51:57 GMT -6
If I'm the Vikings, finish strong. If it doesn't happen, so be it. If I want 1 of 3 top QBs in Lawrence, Fields or Lance, make a package deal of picks and maybe players we don't keep long term (Rudolph, Rieff, etc) and trade up. I stand by what I said earlier. You DON'T tank How do you feel about the Cowboys strategy in the early nineties when they traded away practically anyone who had value to acquire a ton of draft picks to make an attempt to reset the ballclub? Exactly what Jacksonville is doing now. They realize they will go nowhere with Minshew and the cast of characters so trade to increase their odds of landing the top QB and players next season. It’s technically not tanking... It’s a great idea if you know you will be spinning your wheels for years to come and want to get that ring.
|
|
|
Post by jhjackhammer on Sept 17, 2020 22:53:37 GMT -6
I wait to see where we stand at the end of this year. If our cornerbacks grow and one of our backup oline looks good. Then we are back in it again next year. But if we flounder and suck, then maybe we should just offload any older players we can and go full rebuild.
|
|
|
Post by redbird87 on Sept 17, 2020 23:04:33 GMT -6
Should have moved up to pick up Eason in the 4th
|
|
|
Post by mjollnir on Sept 18, 2020 8:20:32 GMT -6
Look at all the dynasties throughout history that had a string of multiple Lombardi’s: Packers Dolphins Steelers Cowboys 49ers Cowboys Broncos Patriots. All... with HOF QB’s. There are always aberrations in every sport. Johnson, Dilfer, etc. but they had a bigger aberration which is a All-Time great defense which are littered with HOF defensive players. Much harder to construct and keep in today’s NFL. It’s been 59 years....with a wall of HOF defensive and offensive players across all eras. The only difference of these eras is the 70’s where we have our only HOF QB who took us to the dance 3 times. If you didn’t know anything about the game of football and analyzed the key components to have a chance to win a SB, it starts and ends with the QB. Umm look at Terry Bradshaw, Bob Griese, Staubach and Bart Star's numbers.. not spectacular. But all had stellar Defenses, in todays game they would be 2nd tier QB's. The 9'ers were solid on both sides but even then Joe Cool was not a big numbers QB one could say Steve Young was a big numbers guy . Aikmens Cowboys were a offensive power house but then again his number were not that great (3 years in the league before he finally threw more TD's then picks and that was by 1), but he did have a lot of weapons around him. The Broncos 1st Super Bowl Victory was not because of Elway the second was a master piece and a hell of a way for him to retire. The Patriots...well we will see how good the Cheater is. Bar this year as he finally realized for the first time in 18 years he does not have the same name suiting up at QB opening day.
|
|
|
Post by bedrock62 on Sept 18, 2020 19:31:02 GMT -6
I wouldnt suggest and don't believe that any Nfl team could or would ( though the colts certainly were close when they got Luck) but i'm afraid we will go 8-8 and be in no position to improve much, someone said no one player would change us ala Herschel, no one player except a franchise QB imo, you dont think Mahomes would make us a super bowl contender right now!!!! i guess im say i'd rather see us win 4 then 8 but i wouldnt suggest anyone not try just saying i wouldnt be heartbroken by a bad call in the 4th that cost us, that said i could see this offense being dynamic, the defense worries me but if we get Hunter back at his usual self and get 91 going we could get a win streak going, not sure if our tackles are talented enough to stop the run
|
|