Posts: 1,860
Threads: 1,860
Joined: May 2013
Reputation:
0
The Bucs have a very good D-line. Vita Vea will be Bradbury's new Daddy. I'm sure they'll bring some heat with that 3-4. The Vikings are starting the exact same O-line as last year. Might be tough sledding for Mattison inside.
If there's a game to show for those that think another season for Ingram will help, its this one. I'm very skeptical.
Some advocate that all that is needed is time and consistencyalong the front 5, I say a weak interior is going to be a weak interior no matter how much time the play together. I think we needed to find a stronger center and possibly have looked at moving Cleveland back to RG, where I thought he looked better early on in his career, he's not bad now, I just think he looked stronger on the right.... oh well the table is set, strap em up, the season starts today.
im hoping to see CJ Ham and Oliver and Mattison lay the wood a few times on O, will make me feel better about our IOL gettting ass handed.
Just keep Kirko outta the ambulance and we should be ok.
Quote: @"JimmyinSD" said:
Some advocate that all that is needed is time and consistencyalong the front 5,
I don't think anyone thinks time and consistency are "all that is needed" to fix the IOL. But will returning all five linemen for the first time in a decade, and Ingram going from rookie to 2nd year player, result in incremental improvement? Yeah, it should. We'll see. But that's the question.
Same with the defense. An attacking philosophy is not all we need to fix the D. But can it improve it enough to make the Vikings a better overall team? Maybe. We'll see. But that's the question. No one should think the defense is now fixed.
Quote: @"MaroonBells" said:
@"JimmyinSD" said:
Some advocate that all that is needed is time and consistencyalong the front 5,
I don't think anyone thinks time and consistency are "all that is needed" to fix the IOL. But will returning all five linemen for the first time in a decade, and Ingram going from rookie to 2nd year player, result in incremental improvement? Yeah, it should. We'll see. But that's the question.
Same with the defense. An attacking philosophy is not all we need to fix the D. But can it improve it enough to make the Vikings a better overall team? Maybe. We'll see. But that's the question. No one should think the defense is now fixed.
LOL....our IOL cant get much worse, so by default it can only go up, but even that small growth that comes from returning the same 5 is still going to likely lead to Kirk getting his ass pounded to often for a guy his age. Smart money would have been to get get off the bradbury merry go round and put somebody in there that can actually anchor and get push when the play calls for it, even if they werent as technically sound. I dont care what he weighs, he plays like hes about 275. if opposing defenses didnt have DTs that needed blocking, an athletic center is nice, but unfortunately sometimes the defense will force him to block a big nasty and he has never shown that ability.
Quote: @"JimmyinSD" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"JimmyinSD" said:
Some advocate that all that is needed is time and consistencyalong the front 5,
I don't think anyone thinks time and consistency are "all that is needed" to fix the IOL. But will returning all five linemen for the first time in a decade, and Ingram going from rookie to 2nd year player, result in incremental improvement? Yeah, it should. We'll see. But that's the question.
Same with the defense. An attacking philosophy is not all we need to fix the D. But can it improve it enough to make the Vikings a better overall team? Maybe. We'll see. But that's the question. No one should think the defense is now fixed.
LOL....our IOL cant get much worse, so by default it can only go up, but even that small growth that comes from returning the same 5 is still going to likely lead to Kirk getting his ass pounded to often for a guy his age. Smart money would have been to get get off the bradbury merry go round and put somebody in there that can actually anchor and get push when the play calls for it, even if they werent as technically sound. I dont care what he weighs, he plays like hes about 275. if opposing defenses didnt have DTs that needed blocking, an athletic center is nice, but unfortunately sometimes the defense will force him to block a big nasty and he has never shown that ability.
When you're talking about a top 5-10 offense with Cousins, Jefferson, Addison, TJH and maybe the best bookend tackles in the NFL, marginal improvement from its weak point (the IOL), can make a big difference.
And about this "smart money" paid to "somebody" that can anchor is a nice dream. But I'm curious who you had in mind.
Quote: @"MaroonBells" said:
@"JimmyinSD" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"JimmyinSD" said:
Some advocate that all that is needed is time and consistencyalong the front 5,
I don't think anyone thinks time and consistency are "all that is needed" to fix the IOL. But will returning all five linemen for the first time in a decade, and Ingram going from rookie to 2nd year player, result in incremental improvement? Yeah, it should. We'll see. But that's the question.
Same with the defense. An attacking philosophy is not all we need to fix the D. But can it improve it enough to make the Vikings a better overall team? Maybe. We'll see. But that's the question. No one should think the defense is now fixed.
LOL....our IOL cant get much worse, so by default it can only go up, but even that small growth that comes from returning the same 5 is still going to likely lead to Kirk getting his ass pounded to often for a guy his age. Smart money would have been to get get off the bradbury merry go round and put somebody in there that can actually anchor and get push when the play calls for it, even if they werent as technically sound. I dont care what he weighs, he plays like hes about 275. if opposing defenses didnt have DTs that needed blocking, an athletic center is nice, but unfortunately sometimes the defense will force him to block a big nasty and he has never shown that ability.
When you're talking about a top 5-10 offense with Cousins, Jefferson, Addison, TJH and maybe the best bookend tackles in the NFL, marginal improvement from its weak point (the IOL), can make a big difference.
And about this "smart money" paid to "somebody" that can anchor is a nice dream. But I'm curious who you had in mind.
i didnt go shopping as it wasnt happening, but there are more IOL out there that dont look like they play on roller skates than there are that do, somebody, even a lesser athletic center, would have been a better option than bradbury, i just think he was a bust of a pick and no amount of polish is going to change that. I acknowledge his ability to get to the 2nd level and beyond is great, but when he is so regularly beat at the first level, and that is where our QB and running game start from.... well then IMO he was a waste of money. I would not have gone into this season with him as my penciled in starting center. hes like Treadwell, the guy had some positives to his game, but he struggled so much in the most important parts ( getting separation ) it really overshadowed the high points. Its not a time thing with Bradbury, its just he flat out plays weak and time hasnt shown to fix that.
There are more good DTs/NTs in the NFL than there's ever been. Its rare that the center/guards get a game off from that. So this week its Vea....next week will be player X.....then watch out for Player Y! At some point, you have to want better than Bradbury at center. I know its not just as easy as replacing him, but I haven't seen any real attempt in the past 3 seasons to do that.
Quote: @"StickyBun" said:
There are more good DTs/NTs in the NFL than there's ever been. Its rare that the center/guards get a game off from that. So this week its Vea....next week will be player X.....then watch out for Player Y! At some point, you have to want better than Bradbury at center. I know its not just as easy as replacing him, but I haven't seen any real attempt in the past 3 seasons to do that.
I think the reason they committed to Bradbury (for three years no less) is because he's improved every season and they expect that to continue. Is he going to get beat by Vea, and others like Dexter Lawrence? Of course. Look at that clip. That's 5X all pro Jason Kelce getting repeatedly embarrassed by Vea. Here's one of Dexter Lawrence destroying 3X all pro Quenton Nelson. So is it going to happen to the three decidedly non-all-pro stooges on our IOL? Yes. But can it be limited or schemed out enough so that our offense can move the ball on occasion? We'll see.
To me the interesting one is Ingram. Will he better? Probably. We did hear some good things from camp. But unfortunately not the kind of raves that would seem to foretell a massive improvement. So will he be better enough to hold off Blake Brandel? KOC sounded almost giddy when talking about Brandel. If Ingram continues to struggle it wouldn't surprise me to see them put Brandel in...even week one.
|
