Wilfs Looking To Sell?

MaroonBells wrote:

Love the Wilfs. Hope they never sell. Some of us are old enough to know what bad ownership is.

Not sure I LOVE them as owners, but they also never have hesitated to invest in the team either.

Good partners with the state for the most part.

In the one metric that means the most? Not one owner has been able to make the SB since founding father Max Winter.

So the source of this vitriol against the Wilfs is hard for me to fully understand.

All that said? I would sure like to get back to the big game again while I'm walking the planet..And win it this time too.

===================================================

Max Winter: 61-86 (4 SB appearances)

Jacobs/Pohlad: 86-91 (0 SB appearances)

10 Prtner Syndicate: 91-98 (0 SB appearances)

McCombs: 98-2005 (0 SB appearances)

Wilfs: 2005 - present (0 SB appearances)

While I think we can all complain about the Vikings production being pretty mid throughout the last couple decades, the Wilfs are nowhere near the list of bad owners and by all non-production metrics the Wilfs are near the top of the league.  To compare the Vikings to the Jets is a laughable comparison.  Biggest complaint I have with the Vikings is just not doing enough to go get a franchise QB.

Guys. 3 playoff wins in 20 years. That isn't even mediocrity. We have been just over .500 in regular season during that tme.

From a facilities perspective they have knocked it out of the park. I'll take on field success.

Mike Olson wrote:

Guys. 3 playoff wins in 20 years. That isn't even mediocrity. We have been just over .500 in regular season during that tme.

From a facilities perspective they have knocked it out of the park. I'll take on field success.

I dont even think that it...For me it's about SB appearances and giving yourself a chance to win it all.

In that regard, they have neither distinguished themselves nor brought themselves shame.

purplefaithful wrote:

I dont even think that it...For me it's about SB appearances and giving yourself a chance to win it all.
In that regard, they have neither distinguished themselves nor brought themselves shame.

Yep. And what does ownership really have to do with the everyday, outside of Cleveland? The Vikings were pretty damn successful during the Red McCombs era and he was a bag of tightwad dogshit. This fan obsession with 'good' or 'bad' owners is hilariously myopic IMO.....this is an understatement, but you could do a hell of a lot worse than the Wilfs.

StickierBuns wrote:

Yep. And what does ownership really have to do with the everyday, outside of Cleveland? The Vikings were pretty damn successful during the Red McCombs era and he was a bag of tightwad dogshit. This fan obsession with 'good' or 'bad' owners is hilariously myopic IMO.....this is an understatement, but you could do a hell of a lot worse than the Wilfs.

Interesting that the Wilfs have now owned the team with the 2nd longest tenure only behind Max Winter...Everyone else in between only had runs of 5-7 years. Made their $$ and sold.

In a general sense, after the 70's, the Vikings have had a competitive team capable of winning it all about every 10 years. They haven't had that since 2009, so they are a bit overdue.

The Wilfs are great owners in many ways but started out as wealthy fans. There has been a learning curve for them and they have made some curious hires in an attempt to reinvent the wheel at times.

I believe they are at a crossroads with an opportunity to upgrade the team with the new GM hire. Their goal was to make their investment profitable and to win a championship.

They certainly have had great returns on their investment financially. It remains to be seen if their championship drive still burns within them. I think it does.

May 25th will mark 21 years of Wilf ownership. In that time span the Vikings are bottom dwellers in the league in playoff victories with 3. The ONLY teams with less playoff wins in that timespan are perennial league doormats the Lions, Browns, Dolphins and Raiders. That has everything to do with NUMEROUS poor decisions by the Wilfs themselves from front office dysfunction, triangles of authority, competitive mandates, to not hiring the best candidates for positions of power. They are "absentee" owners by all accounts who still spend a majority of their time in New Jersey. This latest offseason dysfunction just goes to show they've learned NOTHING in 21 years.

So again, in my best Dwayne Johnson, if you love "what the Wilf's are cooking" my question is...why? "Could be worse" really? 3 playoff wins folks. That's the only thing that ultimately matters.

supafreak84 wrote:

May 25th will mark 21 years of Wilf ownership. In that time span the Vikings are bottom dwellers in the league in playoff victories with 3. The ONLY teams with less playoff wins in that timespan are perennial league doormats the Lions, Browns, Dolphins and Raiders. That has everything to do with NUMEROUS poor decisions by the Wilfs themselves from front office dysfunction, triangles of authority, competitive mandates, to not hiring the best candidates for positions of power. They are "absentee" owners by all accounts who still spend a majority of their time in New Jersey. This latest offseason dysfunction just goes to show they've learned NOTHING in 21 years.
So again, in my best Dwayne Johnson, if you love "what the Wilf's are cooking" my question is...why? "Could be worse" really? 3 playoff wins folks. That's the only thing that ultimately matters.

So expanding on your logic...Red got to two NFCCGS, Wilfs Zero

Would u trade McCombs for Wilfs? How do you think most Viking fans would vote on that?

As fans we should expect and ask for more - but to call out the Wilfs as less then their predecessors doesnt hold water and the logic collapses.

It's all about SB appearances and nobody since Winter has done it - even once.

purplefaithful wrote:

So expanding on your logic...Red got to two NFCCGS, Wilfs Zero
Would u trade McCombs for Wilfs? How do you think most Viking fans would vote on that?
As fans we should expect and ask for more - but to call out the Wilfs as less then their predecessors doesnt hold water and the logic collapses.
It's all about SB appearances and nobody since Winter has done it even once.

McCombs sucked for numerous reasons and the fact that he had more playoff success in his short tenure as owner than the Wilfs have had in 21 years is absolutely telling because Red was a notorious cheapskate. There's no "either/or" because the real answer is they both suck. The biggest Wilf accomplishment with the organization is the stadium, and they should be commended for that, but their football related decisions have just been a continual pattern of dog shit and that is reflective in our complete lack of playoff success under their ownership. Is what it is. So again, someone sell me on the Wilfs being good owners from the perspective of making wise football decisions. If the only retort is "well it could be worse" then that doesn't speak well for them.

supafreak84 wrote:

McCombs sucked for numerous reasons and the fact that he had more playoff success in his short tenure as owner than the Wilfs have had in 21 years is absolutely telling because Red was a notorious cheapskate. There's no "either/or" because the real answer is they both suck. The biggest Wilf accomplishment with the organization is the stadium, and they should be commended for that, but their football related decisions have just been a continual pattern of dog shit and that is reflective in our complete lack of playoff success under their ownership. Is what it is. So again, someone sell me on the Wilfs being good owners from the perspective of making wise football decisions. If the only retort is "well it could be worse" then that doesn't speak well for them.

Dude, nobody is trying to sell you on anything. You're entrenched ad nauseam. There are just differing opinions. You know who sucks? Bud Grant. 4 Superbowls and zero wins?

supafreak84 wrote:

McCombs sucked for numerous reasons and the fact that he had more playoff success in his short tenure as owner than the Wilfs have had in 21 years is absolutely telling because Red was a notorious cheapskate. There's no "either/or" because the real answer is they both suck. The biggest Wilf accomplishment with the organization is the stadium, and they should be commended for that, but their football related decisions have just been a continual pattern of dog shit and that is reflective in our complete lack of playoff success under their ownership. Is what it is. So again, someone sell me on the Wilfs being good owners from the perspective of making wise football decisions. If the only retort is "well it could be worse" then that doesn't speak well for them.

Gets back to the Medaille post...QB has been the Vikings achilles.

Red lucked into Denny/Healthy Culpepper/Moss/CC

Those CG's had nothing to do with ownership

=========================================

Tarvaris Jackson

Brooks Bollinger

Gus Frerotte

Brad Johnson

2005 Culpepper

Favre

Freeman

McNabb

Webb

Bridgwater

Cassel

Ponder

Keenum

Bradford

Hill

Mannion

Cousins

Donald

Mullins

Dobbs

Hall

McCarthy

Murray (?)

purplefaithful wrote:

Gets back to the Medaille post...QB has been the Vikings achilles, not ownership.
Red lucked into Denny/Healthy Culpepper/Moss/CC
Those CG's had nothing to do with ownership

Soo, their football related decisions have had no bearing on the overall lack of playoff success? Ok. I'll disagree, and their long list of bad organizatiinal decisions backs my stance on the matter. Do you think "competitive mandates" or hiring the wrong decision makers has played any part in not being able to get that franchise quarterback? It's played a large part.

StickierBuns wrote:

Dude, nobody is trying to sell you on anything. You're entrenched ad nauseam. There are just differing opinions. You know who sucks? Bud Grant. 4 Superbowls and zero wins?

Lol Sticky, glad I can always count on you. Yes differing opinions are fine, but the receipts back mine regarding the Wilfs.

The further away from the ball you get the less impact a person or player has on winning and losing. If you look at winners, you'll typically see a great QB. A safety has less impact, a coach even less, a GM less than that and an owner even less.

I think you can find plenty of good owners with bad records and plenty of bad owners with good records. An owners job is to bring in quality leadership, to recognize a problem when there is one, and then fix it. They've done that well IMO. Good ownership serves the community, establishes team culture, hires leadership that supports that culture, provides the team with the facilities and resources to not just win, but be recognized by the rest of the NFL as a good place to work, where coaches, players and their families will be treated with respect. The Wilfs have done a great job of that. The Vikings rarely have contentious contract disputes. The Vikings have one of the best offensive coaches in the NFL; they also have one of the best defensive coaches in the NFL; they also have the best facilities in the NFL and often lead the league in money spent on UDFAs.

I hated McCombs but it wasn't his fault that Robert Smith kept running out of bounds in the '98 NFCC. It wasn't the Wilfs fault that Brett Favre threw across his body in the '09 NFCC. To blame ownership for all of our WTF moments is just ridiculous.

supafreak84 wrote:

Lol Sticky, glad I can always count on you. Yes differing opinions are fine, but the receipts back mine regarding the Wilfs.

I will say you've upped your gif game....

StickierBuns wrote:

Yep. And what does ownership really have to do with the everyday, outside of Cleveland? The Vikings were pretty damn successful during the Red McCombs era and he was a bag of tightwad dogshit. This fan obsession with 'good' or 'bad' owners is hilariously myopic IMO.....this is an understatement, but you could do a hell of a lot worse than the Wilfs.

I don't know Sticky, I look at the rooney's and see them being competitive and the Eagles and see them always competitive. And we end up with secret squirrel and the triangle of dipshittery. It's just I don't know. I feel like they are what they are. Real estate developers. I don't think football is really their thing. THey have built everything they need to field a competitive team but they just seem to hire people that can't get the job done. Wheter it is front office or coaching.

LOL 3 playoff wins in 20 years guys. come on. that's embarrassingly bad.

Mike Olson wrote:

I don't know Sticky, I look at the rooney's and see them being competitive and the Eagles and see them always competitive. And we end up with secret squirrel and the triangle of dipshittery. It's just I don't know. I feel like they are what they are. Real estate developers. I don't think football is really their thing. THey have built everything they need to field a competitive team but they just seem to hire people that can't get the job done. Wheter it is front office or coaching.