Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@"BarrNone55" said:
I guess I'm going on the premise that we won't be able to keep everyone...Brez, prove me wrong...Do I sacrifice Hunter? Nope, upside is tremendous and we are uber thin at DE... Do I sacrifice Barr? The defensive signal caller and the straw that stirs the drink? Nope. Waynes? We were number 2 in pass D, and considering how tight the roads were closed on the other side, no I don't.
We've played more games without Diggs the past few years than any of those guys...always banged up going back to H.S...our O despite the $84 million dollar man is going to focus on Cook and Murray...that's hard wired into Zim' s DNA...throw in McGlinchy, the best G at #30 left...our window stays open far longer without paying crazy money to an always injured WR...
I get the "why" of this. Stay ahead of the game. Make moves that keep your window open not just longer, but permanently. But think of the downside. OK, you trade Diggs for McGlinchey. I like McGlinchey just fine, but he does have some serious bust factor. Watch his Miami game. In the NFL every game will be the Miami game. So McGlinchey comes in and is Erick Flowers or Greg Robinson...a bust. And you just gave up the player who might have been your best draft pick in a decade? A 24 year old phenom (same age as McGlinchey by the way) who was the best contested catch receiver in the NFL (because he had to be), a receiver rated by PFF as just under "elite" and improving every year, a guy who was the darling of Minneapolis and one of the most popular players on the team, and who was probably the subject of all Kirk Cousins' fantasies this spring? Because he's tweaked a hammy a couple of times?
No. Hell no. Diggs is a huge part of why this team now has an offense and is a Super Bowl contender. If we need to trade money away (and we don't yet), I'd start looking at older guys: Griffen, Joseph, Harry...and if we're unable to sign Diggs next year, at least we'll get a 3rd rounder as comp.
of the 3 you listed, we could maybe survive losing Griff, (wouldnt want to find out) take away LJ and Harry and you might as well trade away the rest of the defense as well start over from scratch.
I would say that run stuffing nose tackles are maybe a little easier to find in the draft than pass rushers like Griffen. I would probably go with Harry, since safety is a lower impact position than the other two. Bottom line is all three are pro bowl players, and there are no good answers here, but hey it's a good problem to have.
Couple months ago I said if we could somehow get Richardson and Cousins and get Cook back to full strength, watch us win 19 in '19. So far, so good. I just want to see this undeniably loaded for bear roster stay as loaded as possible for at least this year. After that, we can talk about how to keep it together and what sacrifices we need to make.
Our defense took a huge step forward when Harry came in, and its noticeably weaker when he has missed under Zim, in most defenses maybe a S would be a spot to target, but HS is such a versatile piece of what this D does that I think losing Smith would be crippling. Same goes for LJ, in his absence this D line has gotten shoved all over the place. I think Diggs is the most replaceable of all in conversation thus far because the offense has proven that it can operate in his absence or with him playing at less than full go.... it has proven it on quite a few occasions. Would it be nice to keep everybody, yes, but receivers seem to be far more readily available than players like we are discussing here.
Fine. All I'm saying is don't make that decision now. Let him test the market in '19. If we lose him we lose him (and get a 3rd in compensation), but don't weaken a Super Bowl contender just before its peak season, especially when the Eagles and Rams are doing everything they can to field an equally loaded roster.
honestly I am not expecting this year to be the stellar success that many are. adding a new QB typically takes a little time for things to gel, a new QB, and a new OC...coupled with what is likely to be the most brutal schedule in the league... if we go 10-6 I will be happy. If we can put things together this year, and keep things together, I think 19 and 20 could be something special. ( as long as we get our interior OL issues resolved.)
Can't agree there. Best defense in the NFL loses no one, has several key players (Waynes, Kendricks, Barr, Hunter) entering their primes, added one of the NFL's premiere 3Ts to its AA gap package; gets back the NFL's leading rusher last season (before he went down); gives the NFL's best receiving duo a much more accurate QB...and one who can actually throw the ball more than 40 yards; gives that RB and that QB (the NFL's best play action QB) one of the NFL's bright young minds, who just happens to specialize in play action and RPO, which gave this very defense fits a couple months ago....all behind a much improved line looking to add another starter from the draft? Oh my...yes, I'm bullish. Bigly.
But yeah....injuries, time to get in sync, etc. It's the NFL. Anything can happen. And this IS the Vikings. But if THIS team goes 10-6 without significant injuries, Zimmer should be fired.
wait until Thursday, I am fully expecting the league to deliver the biggest fist F*#K of a schedule.
You mean in terms of order? Because we already know our opponents. Philly and Rams away are by far the toughest games. But we get Philly first up and that's a very good thing.
Quote: @Jor-El said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@"BarrNone55" said:
I guess I'm going on the premise that we won't be able to keep everyone...Brez, prove me wrong...Do I sacrifice Hunter? Nope, upside is tremendous and we are uber thin at DE... Do I sacrifice Barr? The defensive signal caller and the straw that stirs the drink? Nope. Waynes? We were number 2 in pass D, and considering how tight the roads were closed on the other side, no I don't.
We've played more games without Diggs the past few years than any of those guys...always banged up going back to H.S...our O despite the $84 million dollar man is going to focus on Cook and Murray...that's hard wired into Zim' s DNA...throw in McGlinchy, the best G at #30 left...our window stays open far longer without paying crazy money to an always injured WR...
I get the "why" of this. Stay ahead of the game. Make moves that keep your window open not just longer, but permanently. But think of the downside. OK, you trade Diggs for McGlinchey. I like McGlinchey just fine, but he does have some serious bust factor. Watch his Miami game. In the NFL every game will be the Miami game. So McGlinchey comes in and is Erick Flowers or Greg Robinson...a bust. And you just gave up the player who might have been your best draft pick in a decade? A 24 year old phenom (same age as McGlinchey by the way) who was the best contested catch receiver in the NFL (because he had to be), a receiver rated by PFF as just under "elite" and improving every year, a guy who was the darling of Minneapolis and one of the most popular players on the team, and who was probably the subject of all Kirk Cousins' fantasies this spring? Because he's tweaked a hammy a couple of times?
No. Hell no. Diggs is a huge part of why this team now has an offense and is a Super Bowl contender. If we need to trade money away (and we don't yet), I'd start looking at older guys: Griffen, Joseph, Harry...and if we're unable to sign Diggs next year, at least we'll get a 3rd rounder as comp.
of the 3 you listed, we could maybe survive losing Griff, (wouldnt want to find out) take away LJ and Harry and you might as well trade away the rest of the defense as well start over from scratch.
I would say that run stuffing nose tackles are maybe a little easier to find in the draft than pass rushers like Griffen. I would probably go with Harry, since safety is a lower impact position than the other two. Bottom line is all three are pro bowl players, and there are no good answers here, but hey it's a good problem to have.
Couple months ago I said if we could somehow get Richardson and Cousins and get Cook back to full strength, watch us win 19 in '19. So far, so good. I just want to see this undeniably loaded for bear roster stay as loaded as possible for at least this year. After that, we can talk about how to keep it together and what sacrifices we need to make.
Our defense took a huge step forward when Harry came in, and its noticeably weaker when he has missed under Zim, in most defenses maybe a S would be a spot to target, but HS is such a versatile piece of what this D does that I think losing Smith would be crippling. Same goes for LJ, in his absence this D line has gotten shoved all over the place. I think Diggs is the most replaceable of all in conversation thus far because the offense has proven that it can operate in his absence or with him playing at less than full go.... it has proven it on quite a few occasions. Would it be nice to keep everybody, yes, but receivers seem to be far more readily available than players like we are discussing here.
Fine. All I'm saying is don't make that decision now. Let him test the market in '19. If we lose him we lose him (and get a 3rd in compensation), but don't weaken a Super Bowl contender just before its peak season, especially when the Eagles and Rams are doing everything they can to field an equally loaded roster.
honestly I am not expecting this year to be the stellar success that many are. adding a new QB typically takes a little time for things to gel, a new QB, and a new OC...coupled with what is likely to be the most brutal schedule in the league... if we go 10-6 I will be happy. If we can put things together this year, and keep things together, I think 19 and 20 could be something special. ( as long as we get our interior OL issues resolved.)
Yeah, I am also expecting a bit of a step-back this year. But that might actually help keep some players, like Diggs, on reasonable salaries.
What is it with you guys? Irrational pessimism? Victim mentality? Can't have anything nice syndrome? Dudes, we went 13-3 last year, lost no one and added Kirk Cousins and Sheldon Freaking Richardson. Jesus, it's OK to be optimistic. Doesn't mean the football gods will smite you.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@"BarrNone55" said:
I guess I'm going on the premise that we won't be able to keep everyone...Brez, prove me wrong...Do I sacrifice Hunter? Nope, upside is tremendous and we are uber thin at DE... Do I sacrifice Barr? The defensive signal caller and the straw that stirs the drink? Nope. Waynes? We were number 2 in pass D, and considering how tight the roads were closed on the other side, no I don't.
We've played more games without Diggs the past few years than any of those guys...always banged up going back to H.S...our O despite the $84 million dollar man is going to focus on Cook and Murray...that's hard wired into Zim' s DNA...throw in McGlinchy, the best G at #30 left...our window stays open far longer without paying crazy money to an always injured WR...
I get the "why" of this. Stay ahead of the game. Make moves that keep your window open not just longer, but permanently. But think of the downside. OK, you trade Diggs for McGlinchey. I like McGlinchey just fine, but he does have some serious bust factor. Watch his Miami game. In the NFL every game will be the Miami game. So McGlinchey comes in and is Erick Flowers or Greg Robinson...a bust. And you just gave up the player who might have been your best draft pick in a decade? A 24 year old phenom (same age as McGlinchey by the way) who was the best contested catch receiver in the NFL (because he had to be), a receiver rated by PFF as just under "elite" and improving every year, a guy who was the darling of Minneapolis and one of the most popular players on the team, and who was probably the subject of all Kirk Cousins' fantasies this spring? Because he's tweaked a hammy a couple of times?
No. Hell no. Diggs is a huge part of why this team now has an offense and is a Super Bowl contender. If we need to trade money away (and we don't yet), I'd start looking at older guys: Griffen, Joseph, Harry...and if we're unable to sign Diggs next year, at least we'll get a 3rd rounder as comp.
of the 3 you listed, we could maybe survive losing Griff, (wouldnt want to find out) take away LJ and Harry and you might as well trade away the rest of the defense as well start over from scratch.
I would say that run stuffing nose tackles are maybe a little easier to find in the draft than pass rushers like Griffen. I would probably go with Harry, since safety is a lower impact position than the other two. Bottom line is all three are pro bowl players, and there are no good answers here, but hey it's a good problem to have.
Couple months ago I said if we could somehow get Richardson and Cousins and get Cook back to full strength, watch us win 19 in '19. So far, so good. I just want to see this undeniably loaded for bear roster stay as loaded as possible for at least this year. After that, we can talk about how to keep it together and what sacrifices we need to make.
Our defense took a huge step forward when Harry came in, and its noticeably weaker when he has missed under Zim, in most defenses maybe a S would be a spot to target, but HS is such a versatile piece of what this D does that I think losing Smith would be crippling. Same goes for LJ, in his absence this D line has gotten shoved all over the place. I think Diggs is the most replaceable of all in conversation thus far because the offense has proven that it can operate in his absence or with him playing at less than full go.... it has proven it on quite a few occasions. Would it be nice to keep everybody, yes, but receivers seem to be far more readily available than players like we are discussing here.
Fine. All I'm saying is don't make that decision now. Let him test the market in '19. If we lose him we lose him (and get a 3rd in compensation), but don't weaken a Super Bowl contender just before its peak season, especially when the Eagles and Rams are doing everything they can to field an equally loaded roster.
honestly I am not expecting this year to be the stellar success that many are. adding a new QB typically takes a little time for things to gel, a new QB, and a new OC...coupled with what is likely to be the most brutal schedule in the league... if we go 10-6 I will be happy. If we can put things together this year, and keep things together, I think 19 and 20 could be something special. ( as long as we get our interior OL issues resolved.)
Can't agree there. Best defense in the NFL loses no one, has several key players (Waynes, Kendricks, Barr, Hunter) entering their primes, added one of the NFL's premiere 3Ts to its AA gap package; gets back the NFL's leading rusher last season (before he went down); gives the NFL's best receiving duo a much more accurate QB...and one who can actually throw the ball more than 40 yards; gives that RB and that QB (the NFL's best play action QB) one of the NFL's bright young minds, who just happens to specialize in play action and RPO, which gave this very defense fits a couple months ago....all behind a much improved line looking to add another starter from the draft? Oh my...yes, I'm bullish. Bigly.
But yeah....injuries, time to get in sync, etc. It's the NFL. Anything can happen. And this IS the Vikings. But if THIS team goes 10-6 without significant injuries, Zimmer should be fired.
wait until Thursday, I am fully expecting the league to deliver the biggest fist F*#K of a schedule.
You mean in terms of order? Because we already know our opponents. Philly and Rams away are by far the toughest games. But we get Philly first up and that's a very good thing.
order and timing. you know, the usual, getting our toughest opponents, on the road, in primetime, with them coming off bye weeks or other such shit. or short prep weeks for important games against opponents that get full preparation. and as a result of our record last year, we will have one of the tougher opponent schedules by design.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
honestly I am not expecting this year to be the stellar success that many are. adding a new QB typically takes a little time for things to gel, a new QB, and a new OC...coupled with what is likely to be the most brutal schedule in the league... if we go 10-6 I will be happy. If we can put things together this year, and keep things together, I think 19 and 20 could be something special. ( as long as we get our interior OL issues resolved.)
The Vikings have had to adjust to a new OC and new QB the past two seasons... and the QB that started the majority of those games had to take over early in the regular season (Bradford in Week 2 with a week of practice and Keenum in Week 2). The team still went 21-11...
Yes, we're changing our offensive coordinator and QB again, but the difference between this year and previous seasons is that the OC and QB will have an entire offseason to get on the same page. We didn't have that luxury when we brought in Bradford days before our first regular season game or when he got hurt heading into Week 2 this past season.
The schedule may look tough, but everyone thought last season's schedule looked brutal and we went 13-3.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ Jor-El said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@"BarrNone55" said:
I guess I'm going on the premise that we won't be able to keep everyone...Brez, prove me wrong...Do I sacrifice Hunter? Nope, upside is tremendous and we are uber thin at DE... Do I sacrifice Barr? The defensive signal caller and the straw that stirs the drink? Nope. Waynes? We were number 2 in pass D, and considering how tight the roads were closed on the other side, no I don't.
We've played more games without Diggs the past few years than any of those guys...always banged up going back to H.S...our O despite the $84 million dollar man is going to focus on Cook and Murray...that's hard wired into Zim' s DNA...throw in McGlinchy, the best G at #30 left...our window stays open far longer without paying crazy money to an always injured WR...
I get the "why" of this. Stay ahead of the game. Make moves that keep your window open not just longer, but permanently. But think of the downside. OK, you trade Diggs for McGlinchey. I like McGlinchey just fine, but he does have some serious bust factor. Watch his Miami game. In the NFL every game will be the Miami game. So McGlinchey comes in and is Erick Flowers or Greg Robinson...a bust. And you just gave up the player who might have been your best draft pick in a decade? A 24 year old phenom (same age as McGlinchey by the way) who was the best contested catch receiver in the NFL (because he had to be), a receiver rated by PFF as just under "elite" and improving every year, a guy who was the darling of Minneapolis and one of the most popular players on the team, and who was probably the subject of all Kirk Cousins' fantasies this spring? Because he's tweaked a hammy a couple of times?
No. Hell no. Diggs is a huge part of why this team now has an offense and is a Super Bowl contender. If we need to trade money away (and we don't yet), I'd start looking at older guys: Griffen, Joseph, Harry...and if we're unable to sign Diggs next year, at least we'll get a 3rd rounder as comp.
of the 3 you listed, we could maybe survive losing Griff, (wouldnt want to find out) take away LJ and Harry and you might as well trade away the rest of the defense as well start over from scratch.
I would say that run stuffing nose tackles are maybe a little easier to find in the draft than pass rushers like Griffen. I would probably go with Harry, since safety is a lower impact position than the other two. Bottom line is all three are pro bowl players, and there are no good answers here, but hey it's a good problem to have.
Couple months ago I said if we could somehow get Richardson and Cousins and get Cook back to full strength, watch us win 19 in '19. So far, so good. I just want to see this undeniably loaded for bear roster stay as loaded as possible for at least this year. After that, we can talk about how to keep it together and what sacrifices we need to make.
Our defense took a huge step forward when Harry came in, and its noticeably weaker when he has missed under Zim, in most defenses maybe a S would be a spot to target, but HS is such a versatile piece of what this D does that I think losing Smith would be crippling. Same goes for LJ, in his absence this D line has gotten shoved all over the place. I think Diggs is the most replaceable of all in conversation thus far because the offense has proven that it can operate in his absence or with him playing at less than full go.... it has proven it on quite a few occasions. Would it be nice to keep everybody, yes, but receivers seem to be far more readily available than players like we are discussing here.
Fine. All I'm saying is don't make that decision now. Let him test the market in '19. If we lose him we lose him (and get a 3rd in compensation), but don't weaken a Super Bowl contender just before its peak season, especially when the Eagles and Rams are doing everything they can to field an equally loaded roster.
honestly I am not expecting this year to be the stellar success that many are. adding a new QB typically takes a little time for things to gel, a new QB, and a new OC...coupled with what is likely to be the most brutal schedule in the league... if we go 10-6 I will be happy. If we can put things together this year, and keep things together, I think 19 and 20 could be something special. ( as long as we get our interior OL issues resolved.)
Yeah, I am also expecting a bit of a step-back this year. But that might actually help keep some players, like Diggs, on reasonable salaries.
What is it with you guys? Irrational pessimism? Victim mentality? Can't have anything nice syndrome? Dudes, we went 13-3 last year, lost no one and added Kirk Cousins and Sheldon Freaking Richardson. Jesus, it's OK to be optimistic. Doesn't mean the football gods will smite you.
my 40+ year track record as a Vikings fan kind of proves you wrong. we should be better, on paper we are better, but is it really the Vikings way to win when they are supposed to win?
Quote: @Wetlander said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
honestly I am not expecting this year to be the stellar success that many are. adding a new QB typically takes a little time for things to gel, a new QB, and a new OC...coupled with what is likely to be the most brutal schedule in the league... if we go 10-6 I will be happy. If we can put things together this year, and keep things together, I think 19 and 20 could be something special. ( as long as we get our interior OL issues resolved.)
The Vikings have had to adjust to a new OC and new QB the past two seasons... and the QB that started the majority of those games had to take over early in the regular season (Bradford in Week 2 with a week of practice and Keenum in Week 2). The team still went 21-11...
Yes, we're changing our offensive coordinator and QB again, but the difference between this year and previous seasons is that the OC and QB will have an entire offseason to get on the same page. We didn't have that luxury when we brought in Bradford days before our first regular season game or when he got hurt heading into Week 2 this past season.
The schedule may look tough, but everyone thought last season's schedule looked brutal and we went 13-3.
I thought all along that last years team had a floor of 10 wins and said that 12 was my thoughts with that schedule.... so not everybody.
I just am not going to get crazy jazzed until we see what we are dealing with. we should have had home field last year pretty easy, but shit happens.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ Jor-El said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@"BarrNone55" said:
I guess I'm going on the premise that we won't be able to keep everyone...Brez, prove me wrong...Do I sacrifice Hunter? Nope, upside is tremendous and we are uber thin at DE... Do I sacrifice Barr? The defensive signal caller and the straw that stirs the drink? Nope. Waynes? We were number 2 in pass D, and considering how tight the roads were closed on the other side, no I don't.
We've played more games without Diggs the past few years than any of those guys...always banged up going back to H.S...our O despite the $84 million dollar man is going to focus on Cook and Murray...that's hard wired into Zim' s DNA...throw in McGlinchy, the best G at #30 left...our window stays open far longer without paying crazy money to an always injured WR...
I get the "why" of this. Stay ahead of the game. Make moves that keep your window open not just longer, but permanently. But think of the downside. OK, you trade Diggs for McGlinchey. I like McGlinchey just fine, but he does have some serious bust factor. Watch his Miami game. In the NFL every game will be the Miami game. So McGlinchey comes in and is Erick Flowers or Greg Robinson...a bust. And you just gave up the player who might have been your best draft pick in a decade? A 24 year old phenom (same age as McGlinchey by the way) who was the best contested catch receiver in the NFL (because he had to be), a receiver rated by PFF as just under "elite" and improving every year, a guy who was the darling of Minneapolis and one of the most popular players on the team, and who was probably the subject of all Kirk Cousins' fantasies this spring? Because he's tweaked a hammy a couple of times?
No. Hell no. Diggs is a huge part of why this team now has an offense and is a Super Bowl contender. If we need to trade money away (and we don't yet), I'd start looking at older guys: Griffen, Joseph, Harry...and if we're unable to sign Diggs next year, at least we'll get a 3rd rounder as comp.
of the 3 you listed, we could maybe survive losing Griff, (wouldnt want to find out) take away LJ and Harry and you might as well trade away the rest of the defense as well start over from scratch.
I would say that run stuffing nose tackles are maybe a little easier to find in the draft than pass rushers like Griffen. I would probably go with Harry, since safety is a lower impact position than the other two. Bottom line is all three are pro bowl players, and there are no good answers here, but hey it's a good problem to have.
Couple months ago I said if we could somehow get Richardson and Cousins and get Cook back to full strength, watch us win 19 in '19. So far, so good. I just want to see this undeniably loaded for bear roster stay as loaded as possible for at least this year. After that, we can talk about how to keep it together and what sacrifices we need to make.
Our defense took a huge step forward when Harry came in, and its noticeably weaker when he has missed under Zim, in most defenses maybe a S would be a spot to target, but HS is such a versatile piece of what this D does that I think losing Smith would be crippling. Same goes for LJ, in his absence this D line has gotten shoved all over the place. I think Diggs is the most replaceable of all in conversation thus far because the offense has proven that it can operate in his absence or with him playing at less than full go.... it has proven it on quite a few occasions. Would it be nice to keep everybody, yes, but receivers seem to be far more readily available than players like we are discussing here.
Fine. All I'm saying is don't make that decision now. Let him test the market in '19. If we lose him we lose him (and get a 3rd in compensation), but don't weaken a Super Bowl contender just before its peak season, especially when the Eagles and Rams are doing everything they can to field an equally loaded roster.
honestly I am not expecting this year to be the stellar success that many are. adding a new QB typically takes a little time for things to gel, a new QB, and a new OC...coupled with what is likely to be the most brutal schedule in the league... if we go 10-6 I will be happy. If we can put things together this year, and keep things together, I think 19 and 20 could be something special. ( as long as we get our interior OL issues resolved.)
Yeah, I am also expecting a bit of a step-back this year. But that might actually help keep some players, like Diggs, on reasonable salaries.
What is it with you guys? Irrational pessimism? Victim mentality? Can't have anything nice syndrome? Dudes, we went 13-3 last year, lost no one and added Kirk Cousins and Sheldon Freaking Richardson. Jesus, it's OK to be optimistic. Doesn't mean the football gods will smite you.
my 40+ year track record as a Vikings fan kind of proves you wrong. we should be better, on paper we are better, but is it really the Vikings way to win when they are supposed to win?
I hear ya. And as a long-suffering Viking fan you have every right to be skeptical. To that I will only say this: I've been watching this team for 45 years, and not just as a fan, but as a GM wannabe fan, not a game-day fan. You know the type. We get much more jacked about the off season than the season. Preseason games are more interesting to us than regular season games. Free agency and the draft are our Super Bowls. And as a close watcher of this team's personnel moves for 45 years, I can honestly say that I have never seen a more stacked roster. Ever.
Does it mean anything? If your goal is to win the Super Bowl, no it doesn't. But it does mean that if it doesn't happen it won't be due to lack of talent. It will be because we were outcoached. Again.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ Jor-El said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@"BarrNone55" said:
I guess I'm going on the premise that we won't be able to keep everyone...Brez, prove me wrong...Do I sacrifice Hunter? Nope, upside is tremendous and we are uber thin at DE... Do I sacrifice Barr? The defensive signal caller and the straw that stirs the drink? Nope. Waynes? We were number 2 in pass D, and considering how tight the roads were closed on the other side, no I don't.
We've played more games without Diggs the past few years than any of those guys...always banged up going back to H.S...our O despite the $84 million dollar man is going to focus on Cook and Murray...that's hard wired into Zim' s DNA...throw in McGlinchy, the best G at #30 left...our window stays open far longer without paying crazy money to an always injured WR...
I get the "why" of this. Stay ahead of the game. Make moves that keep your window open not just longer, but permanently. But think of the downside. OK, you trade Diggs for McGlinchey. I like McGlinchey just fine, but he does have some serious bust factor. Watch his Miami game. In the NFL every game will be the Miami game. So McGlinchey comes in and is Erick Flowers or Greg Robinson...a bust. And you just gave up the player who might have been your best draft pick in a decade? A 24 year old phenom (same age as McGlinchey by the way) who was the best contested catch receiver in the NFL (because he had to be), a receiver rated by PFF as just under "elite" and improving every year, a guy who was the darling of Minneapolis and one of the most popular players on the team, and who was probably the subject of all Kirk Cousins' fantasies this spring? Because he's tweaked a hammy a couple of times?
No. Hell no. Diggs is a huge part of why this team now has an offense and is a Super Bowl contender. If we need to trade money away (and we don't yet), I'd start looking at older guys: Griffen, Joseph, Harry...and if we're unable to sign Diggs next year, at least we'll get a 3rd rounder as comp.
of the 3 you listed, we could maybe survive losing Griff, (wouldnt want to find out) take away LJ and Harry and you might as well trade away the rest of the defense as well start over from scratch.
I would say that run stuffing nose tackles are maybe a little easier to find in the draft than pass rushers like Griffen. I would probably go with Harry, since safety is a lower impact position than the other two. Bottom line is all three are pro bowl players, and there are no good answers here, but hey it's a good problem to have.
Couple months ago I said if we could somehow get Richardson and Cousins and get Cook back to full strength, watch us win 19 in '19. So far, so good. I just want to see this undeniably loaded for bear roster stay as loaded as possible for at least this year. After that, we can talk about how to keep it together and what sacrifices we need to make.
Our defense took a huge step forward when Harry came in, and its noticeably weaker when he has missed under Zim, in most defenses maybe a S would be a spot to target, but HS is such a versatile piece of what this D does that I think losing Smith would be crippling. Same goes for LJ, in his absence this D line has gotten shoved all over the place. I think Diggs is the most replaceable of all in conversation thus far because the offense has proven that it can operate in his absence or with him playing at less than full go.... it has proven it on quite a few occasions. Would it be nice to keep everybody, yes, but receivers seem to be far more readily available than players like we are discussing here.
Fine. All I'm saying is don't make that decision now. Let him test the market in '19. If we lose him we lose him (and get a 3rd in compensation), but don't weaken a Super Bowl contender just before its peak season, especially when the Eagles and Rams are doing everything they can to field an equally loaded roster.
honestly I am not expecting this year to be the stellar success that many are. adding a new QB typically takes a little time for things to gel, a new QB, and a new OC...coupled with what is likely to be the most brutal schedule in the league... if we go 10-6 I will be happy. If we can put things together this year, and keep things together, I think 19 and 20 could be something special. ( as long as we get our interior OL issues resolved.)
Yeah, I am also expecting a bit of a step-back this year. But that might actually help keep some players, like Diggs, on reasonable salaries.
What is it with you guys? Irrational pessimism? Victim mentality? Can't have anything nice syndrome? Dudes, we went 13-3 last year, lost no one and added Kirk Cousins and Sheldon Freaking Richardson. Jesus, it's OK to be optimistic. Doesn't mean the football gods will smite you.
my 40+ year track record as a Vikings fan kind of proves you wrong. we should be better, on paper we are better, but is it really the Vikings way to win when they are supposed to win?
I hear ya. And as a long-suffering Viking fan you have every right to be skeptical. To that I will only say this: I've been watching this team for 45 years, and not just as a fan, but as a GM wannabe fan, not a game-day fan. You know the type. We get much more jacked about the off season than the season. Preseason games are more interesting to us than regular season games. Free agency and the draft are our Super Bowls. And as a close watcher of this team's personnel moves for 45 years, I can honestly say that I have never seen a more stacked roster. Ever.
Does it mean anything? If your goal is to win the Super Bowl, no it doesn't. But it does mean that if it doesn't happen it won't be due to lack of talent. It will be because we were outcoached. Again.
I think my optimism was a bit dampened when I looked at the moves our biggest (projected) NFC rivals have made, we have gotten better, but so have they. this bitch is gonna be a battle. I dont honestly recall a time where you really could say any of 4 teams is a favorite to win the NFC, and be able to argue it, and then factor in that all 4 of those team could possibly not win their own division. The NFC is going to be a bloodied mess by the time somebody finally wins the thing.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ ap88ap28 said:
Randy Moss Troy Williamson. We can just replace him with that shiny new draft pick. How did that work out.
Are you honestly putting Diggs in the same conversation as Moss?
Same conversation as Troy Williamson. You know what you have. A First-round pick is not always a done-deal, I think was his point. Treadwell, another case in point.
Quote: @Montana Tom said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ ap88ap28 said:
Randy Moss Troy Williamson. We can just replace him with that shiny new draft pick. How did that work out.
Are you honestly putting Diggs in the same conversation as Moss?
Same conversation as Troy Williamson. You know what you have. A First-round pick is not always a done-deal, I think was his point. Treadwell, another case in point.
I know what his point was, but he was equating us trading away Moss, to trading away Diggs in terms of giving and what we would get in return. of course a first round pick comes with no guarantees, but neither does Diggs, especially on a 1 year contract which is what he will be essentially under this year.
|
