Dalvin trending again

@"supafreak84" said:

@"1VikesFan" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: Watching the season team highlight recap on NFL Network today really makes you realize the impact Cook had last season in a lot of these come from behind wins;

- 53 yard TD run in the 4th quarter at Miami
- 81 yard TD run in the 3rd quarter at Buffalo
- 12 yard, one handed TD catch in the 4th quarter at Washington
- 64 yard TD reception versus the Colts in the 4th quarter taking a short pass and turning it into a huge play. 

All these plays were huge catalysts in coming back in these games. Anybody that doesn't think we are going to miss Cooks explosiveness and has "ho-hummed" his release is fooling themselves..

I don't think there's a Viking fan on the planet who would argue Cook wasn't a good running back. He was. One of the best in the NFL. So all these facts are unnecessary. We are unquestionably downgrading the RB position on paper.

But the pertinent question was is he worth his $12M cap hit? Or can we be almost as effective running the ball (or AS effective, or perhaps even MORE effective) with a the stable of lesser, but promising RBs in a committee at a fraction of the cost? 

Every decision is a cost/benefit analysis. And, I say this as one of the biggest Dalvin fans on the board, I think the Vikings made the right one. 

I think for KOC he really isn't interested in running the ball. He'd rather throw it around the yard 50 times a game and use the run as a clear secondary option, so it probably matters a lot less who the runner is. This has been brought up a lot on NFL Radio when discussing Cooks release. They just need a guy back there, and it's a far cry from the Zimmer era where we clearly wanted to establish a running game and play more physical on offense. All this makes the Oliver signing even more of a head scratcher. If you really want to run the ball and be more committed to it...wouldn't you want the best back you could get? 

We'll see. I think it will be a different offense this year. It remains to be seen if it's for the better. I just don't believe you cut a top 5 RB in his prime and can reasonably expect to get the same production 

Have you not been paying attention? Word on the street is that KOC intends to not only run the ball more, but run more effectively, more efficiently. Yes, likely fewer 60 yard runs, but also fewer 1-yard losses....and more 4-6 yard gains. I think that's the idea. And that's one of the reasons (money being the first) we're replacing Dalvin with a committee. And why we brought in the NFL's best run blocking TE. Though I will say that I think we'll all be surprised by what Oliver brings to the passing game. 

Oh I've been paying attention, but I'll believe it when I see it. Just like I'll believe Oliver becomes a big pass catching option in this offense when I see it. If I were a betting man, I'd bet we still pass the ball a ton more due to our defense still sucking and the running game being mediocre to just ineffective. Bradbury is still Bradbury. ONeill is returning from a major injury so we'll see how quickly he rounds into form. Ingram needs to show marked improvement from last season. We averaged 4.1 yards per run on the season, and the only playoff team that was worse was Tampa and their mash unit of an offensive line. We did nothing to improve our run game up front and we need to be better. Everybody blaming Cook for 1 yard runs or runs for loss is misguided 

Really sucks that your not the GM supafreak84, you have all the answers to what's ailing the team and what Kwesi should have done differently 

I didn't go to an Ivy League school, but otherwise my football resume is just as good as his...so maybe so 

Getting back to the matter at hand...
Dalvin= $12M
Josh Oliver + Mattison= $10M + $2M
Obviously it's not binary but I think it's fair to say this regime thinks they can get more out of the latter option than the former. I'm really not so sure. To my eye Mattison has been steady when given opportunities, but not great. I'm hoping with the full role and a full offseason of prep he will come in and play better than he ever has. That's the hope. Behind him is mostly lotto ticket type guys. Would love someone to emerge but that's far from a guarantee.
If Mattison can do 4+ ypc and Oliver can contribute then it will be a good decision. If our run game stinks once again then it will deserve some scrutiny. Full transparency this isn't how I'd have handled the RB room, but I do trust KO so I'm going to wait and see.
I do think we'll be in the market to draft an RB semi-early next year, which isn't ideal because we need a QB and don't have a ton of picks. If someone like Chandler or McBride can emerge as a real player that would absolutely be found gold and be a huge boost for the Vikings.
The X factor is Dalvin's legal troubles. If the team simply wanted to move on because of all that, I understand it and can begrudgingly get behind it. It's a mess.

@"medaille" said: I don't think this needs to be that complicated.  I think Dalvin wanted more money than the Vikings were willing to spend, so we moved on to Mattison who Kwesi thought would be a better value pick allowing for an overall better roster.

And it appears to have been the right choice. If a contender would have swooped in and given him the 10 mil, you have to question if the Vikings had made a mistake. As it stands now, Dalvin wants more money than any team in the league is willing to pay.

@"pattersaur" said:

Getting back to the matter at hand... Dalvin= $12M Josh Oliver + Mattison= $10M + $2M Obviously it's not binary but I think it's fair to say this regime thinks they can get more out of the latter option than the former. I'm really not so sure. To my eye Mattison has been steady when given opportunities, but not great. I'm hoping with the full role and a full offseason of prep he will come in and play better than he ever has. That's the hope. Behind him is mostly lotto ticket type guys. Would love someone to emerge but that's far from a guarantee. If Mattison can do 4+ ypc and Oliver can contribute then it will be a good decision. If our run game stinks once again then it will deserve some scrutiny. Full transparency this isn't how I'd have handled the RB room, but I do trust KO so I'm going to wait and see. I do think we'll be in the market to draft an RB semi-early next year, which isn't ideal because we need a QB and don't have a ton of picks. If someone like Chandler or McBride can emerge as a real player that would absolutely be found gold and be a huge boost for the Vikings. The X factor is Dalvin's legal troubles. If the team simply wanted to move on because of all that, I understand it and can begrudgingly get behind it. It's a mess.

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"1VikesFan" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: Watching the season team highlight recap on NFL Network today really makes you realize the impact Cook had last season in a lot of these come from behind wins;

- 53 yard TD run in the 4th quarter at Miami
- 81 yard TD run in the 3rd quarter at Buffalo
- 12 yard, one handed TD catch in the 4th quarter at Washington
- 64 yard TD reception versus the Colts in the 4th quarter taking a short pass and turning it into a huge play. 

All these plays were huge catalysts in coming back in these games. Anybody that doesn't think we are going to miss Cooks explosiveness and has "ho-hummed" his release is fooling themselves..

I don't think there's a Viking fan on the planet who would argue Cook wasn't a good running back. He was. One of the best in the NFL. So all these facts are unnecessary. We are unquestionably downgrading the RB position on paper.

But the pertinent question was is he worth his $12M cap hit? Or can we be almost as effective running the ball (or AS effective, or perhaps even MORE effective) with a the stable of lesser, but promising RBs in a committee at a fraction of the cost? 

Every decision is a cost/benefit analysis. And, I say this as one of the biggest Dalvin fans on the board, I think the Vikings made the right one. 

I think for KOC he really isn't interested in running the ball. He'd rather throw it around the yard 50 times a game and use the run as a clear secondary option, so it probably matters a lot less who the runner is. This has been brought up a lot on NFL Radio when discussing Cooks release. They just need a guy back there, and it's a far cry from the Zimmer era where we clearly wanted to establish a running game and play more physical on offense. All this makes the Oliver signing even more of a head scratcher. If you really want to run the ball and be more committed to it...wouldn't you want the best back you could get? 

We'll see. I think it will be a different offense this year. It remains to be seen if it's for the better. I just don't believe you cut a top 5 RB in his prime and can reasonably expect to get the same production 

Have you not been paying attention? Word on the street is that KOC intends to not only run the ball more, but run more effectively, more efficiently. Yes, likely fewer 60 yard runs, but also fewer 1-yard losses....and more 4-6 yard gains. I think that's the idea. And that's one of the reasons (money being the first) we're replacing Dalvin with a committee. And why we brought in the NFL's best run blocking TE. Though I will say that I think we'll all be surprised by what Oliver brings to the passing game. 

Oh I've been paying attention, but I'll believe it when I see it. Just like I'll believe Oliver becomes a big pass catching option in this offense when I see it. If I were a betting man, I'd bet we still pass the ball a ton more due to our defense still sucking and the running game being mediocre to just ineffective. Bradbury is still Bradbury. ONeill is returning from a major injury so we'll see how quickly he rounds into form. Ingram needs to show marked improvement from last season. We averaged 4.1 yards per run on the season, and the only playoff team that was worse was Tampa and their mash unit of an offensive line. We did nothing to improve our run game up front and we need to be better. Everybody blaming Cook for 1 yard runs or runs for loss is misguided 

Really sucks that your not the GM supafreak84, you have all the answers to what's ailing the team and what Kwesi should have done differently 

I didn't go to an Ivy League school, but otherwise my football resume is just as good as his...so maybe so 

Wow, I wasn't aware you spent 9 years in NFL front offices--4 years at manager level, 3 years at director level and 2 years at VP level--before jumping aboard the Longship. 

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"1VikesFan" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: Watching the season team highlight recap on NFL Network today really makes you realize the impact Cook had last season in a lot of these come from behind wins;

- 53 yard TD run in the 4th quarter at Miami
- 81 yard TD run in the 3rd quarter at Buffalo
- 12 yard, one handed TD catch in the 4th quarter at Washington
- 64 yard TD reception versus the Colts in the 4th quarter taking a short pass and turning it into a huge play. 

All these plays were huge catalysts in coming back in these games. Anybody that doesn't think we are going to miss Cooks explosiveness and has "ho-hummed" his release is fooling themselves..

I don't think there's a Viking fan on the planet who would argue Cook wasn't a good running back. He was. One of the best in the NFL. So all these facts are unnecessary. We are unquestionably downgrading the RB position on paper.

But the pertinent question was is he worth his $12M cap hit? Or can we be almost as effective running the ball (or AS effective, or perhaps even MORE effective) with a the stable of lesser, but promising RBs in a committee at a fraction of the cost? 

Every decision is a cost/benefit analysis. And, I say this as one of the biggest Dalvin fans on the board, I think the Vikings made the right one. 

I think for KOC he really isn't interested in running the ball. He'd rather throw it around the yard 50 times a game and use the run as a clear secondary option, so it probably matters a lot less who the runner is. This has been brought up a lot on NFL Radio when discussing Cooks release. They just need a guy back there, and it's a far cry from the Zimmer era where we clearly wanted to establish a running game and play more physical on offense. All this makes the Oliver signing even more of a head scratcher. If you really want to run the ball and be more committed to it...wouldn't you want the best back you could get? 

We'll see. I think it will be a different offense this year. It remains to be seen if it's for the better. I just don't believe you cut a top 5 RB in his prime and can reasonably expect to get the same production 

Have you not been paying attention? Word on the street is that KOC intends to not only run the ball more, but run more effectively, more efficiently. Yes, likely fewer 60 yard runs, but also fewer 1-yard losses....and more 4-6 yard gains. I think that's the idea. And that's one of the reasons (money being the first) we're replacing Dalvin with a committee. And why we brought in the NFL's best run blocking TE. Though I will say that I think we'll all be surprised by what Oliver brings to the passing game. 

Oh I've been paying attention, but I'll believe it when I see it. Just like I'll believe Oliver becomes a big pass catching option in this offense when I see it. If I were a betting man, I'd bet we still pass the ball a ton more due to our defense still sucking and the running game being mediocre to just ineffective. Bradbury is still Bradbury. ONeill is returning from a major injury so we'll see how quickly he rounds into form. Ingram needs to show marked improvement from last season. We averaged 4.1 yards per run on the season, and the only playoff team that was worse was Tampa and their mash unit of an offensive line. We did nothing to improve our run game up front and we need to be better. Everybody blaming Cook for 1 yard runs or runs for loss is misguided 

Really sucks that your not the GM supafreak84, you have all the answers to what's ailing the team and what Kwesi should have done differently 

I didn't go to an Ivy League school, but otherwise my football resume is just as good as his...so maybe so 

Wow, I wasn't aware you spent 9 years in NFL front offices--4 years at manager level, 3 years at director level and 2 years at VP level--before jumping aboard the Longship. 

Like I said, making sure the stadium has enough hot dogs on game days or diagnosing the winds effects on kickoffs doesn't qualify you to run an NFL team. We all know why he was hired and I'll just leave it at that 

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"1VikesFan" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: Watching the season team highlight recap on NFL Network today really makes you realize the impact Cook had last season in a lot of these come from behind wins;

- 53 yard TD run in the 4th quarter at Miami
- 81 yard TD run in the 3rd quarter at Buffalo
- 12 yard, one handed TD catch in the 4th quarter at Washington
- 64 yard TD reception versus the Colts in the 4th quarter taking a short pass and turning it into a huge play. 

All these plays were huge catalysts in coming back in these games. Anybody that doesn't think we are going to miss Cooks explosiveness and has "ho-hummed" his release is fooling themselves..

I don't think there's a Viking fan on the planet who would argue Cook wasn't a good running back. He was. One of the best in the NFL. So all these facts are unnecessary. We are unquestionably downgrading the RB position on paper.

But the pertinent question was is he worth his $12M cap hit? Or can we be almost as effective running the ball (or AS effective, or perhaps even MORE effective) with a the stable of lesser, but promising RBs in a committee at a fraction of the cost? 

Every decision is a cost/benefit analysis. And, I say this as one of the biggest Dalvin fans on the board, I think the Vikings made the right one. 

I think for KOC he really isn't interested in running the ball. He'd rather throw it around the yard 50 times a game and use the run as a clear secondary option, so it probably matters a lot less who the runner is. This has been brought up a lot on NFL Radio when discussing Cooks release. They just need a guy back there, and it's a far cry from the Zimmer era where we clearly wanted to establish a running game and play more physical on offense. All this makes the Oliver signing even more of a head scratcher. If you really want to run the ball and be more committed to it...wouldn't you want the best back you could get? 

We'll see. I think it will be a different offense this year. It remains to be seen if it's for the better. I just don't believe you cut a top 5 RB in his prime and can reasonably expect to get the same production 

Have you not been paying attention? Word on the street is that KOC intends to not only run the ball more, but run more effectively, more efficiently. Yes, likely fewer 60 yard runs, but also fewer 1-yard losses....and more 4-6 yard gains. I think that's the idea. And that's one of the reasons (money being the first) we're replacing Dalvin with a committee. And why we brought in the NFL's best run blocking TE. Though I will say that I think we'll all be surprised by what Oliver brings to the passing game. 

Oh I've been paying attention, but I'll believe it when I see it. Just like I'll believe Oliver becomes a big pass catching option in this offense when I see it. If I were a betting man, I'd bet we still pass the ball a ton more due to our defense still sucking and the running game being mediocre to just ineffective. Bradbury is still Bradbury. ONeill is returning from a major injury so we'll see how quickly he rounds into form. Ingram needs to show marked improvement from last season. We averaged 4.1 yards per run on the season, and the only playoff team that was worse was Tampa and their mash unit of an offensive line. We did nothing to improve our run game up front and we need to be better. Everybody blaming Cook for 1 yard runs or runs for loss is misguided 

Really sucks that your not the GM supafreak84, you have all the answers to what's ailing the team and what Kwesi should have done differently 

I didn't go to an Ivy League school, but otherwise my football resume is just as good as his...so maybe so 

Wow, I wasn't aware you spent 9 years in NFL front offices--4 years at manager level, 3 years at director level and 2 years at VP level--before jumping aboard the Longship. 

Like I said, making sure the stadium has enough hot dogs on game days or diagnosing the winds effects on kickoffs doesn't qualify you to run an NFL team. We all know why he was hired and I'll just leave it at that 

Well, we all know why YOU think he was hired. Because he's Black. It's OK, you can say that. Don't be shy. Own it. It might help others understand the agenda behind your bananas-level opposition to the man. 

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"1VikesFan" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: Watching the season team highlight recap on NFL Network today really makes you realize the impact Cook had last season in a lot of these come from behind wins;

- 53 yard TD run in the 4th quarter at Miami
- 81 yard TD run in the 3rd quarter at Buffalo
- 12 yard, one handed TD catch in the 4th quarter at Washington
- 64 yard TD reception versus the Colts in the 4th quarter taking a short pass and turning it into a huge play. 

All these plays were huge catalysts in coming back in these games. Anybody that doesn't think we are going to miss Cooks explosiveness and has "ho-hummed" his release is fooling themselves..

I don't think there's a Viking fan on the planet who would argue Cook wasn't a good running back. He was. One of the best in the NFL. So all these facts are unnecessary. We are unquestionably downgrading the RB position on paper.

But the pertinent question was is he worth his $12M cap hit? Or can we be almost as effective running the ball (or AS effective, or perhaps even MORE effective) with a the stable of lesser, but promising RBs in a committee at a fraction of the cost? 

Every decision is a cost/benefit analysis. And, I say this as one of the biggest Dalvin fans on the board, I think the Vikings made the right one. 

I think for KOC he really isn't interested in running the ball. He'd rather throw it around the yard 50 times a game and use the run as a clear secondary option, so it probably matters a lot less who the runner is. This has been brought up a lot on NFL Radio when discussing Cooks release. They just need a guy back there, and it's a far cry from the Zimmer era where we clearly wanted to establish a running game and play more physical on offense. All this makes the Oliver signing even more of a head scratcher. If you really want to run the ball and be more committed to it...wouldn't you want the best back you could get? 

We'll see. I think it will be a different offense this year. It remains to be seen if it's for the better. I just don't believe you cut a top 5 RB in his prime and can reasonably expect to get the same production 

Have you not been paying attention? Word on the street is that KOC intends to not only run the ball more, but run more effectively, more efficiently. Yes, likely fewer 60 yard runs, but also fewer 1-yard losses....and more 4-6 yard gains. I think that's the idea. And that's one of the reasons (money being the first) we're replacing Dalvin with a committee. And why we brought in the NFL's best run blocking TE. Though I will say that I think we'll all be surprised by what Oliver brings to the passing game. 

Oh I've been paying attention, but I'll believe it when I see it. Just like I'll believe Oliver becomes a big pass catching option in this offense when I see it. If I were a betting man, I'd bet we still pass the ball a ton more due to our defense still sucking and the running game being mediocre to just ineffective. Bradbury is still Bradbury. ONeill is returning from a major injury so we'll see how quickly he rounds into form. Ingram needs to show marked improvement from last season. We averaged 4.1 yards per run on the season, and the only playoff team that was worse was Tampa and their mash unit of an offensive line. We did nothing to improve our run game up front and we need to be better. Everybody blaming Cook for 1 yard runs or runs for loss is misguided 

Really sucks that your not the GM supafreak84, you have all the answers to what's ailing the team and what Kwesi should have done differently 

I didn't go to an Ivy League school, but otherwise my football resume is just as good as his...so maybe so 

Wow, I wasn't aware you spent 9 years in NFL front offices--4 years at manager level, 3 years at director level and 2 years at VP level--before jumping aboard the Longship. 

Like I said, making sure the stadium has enough hot dogs on game days or diagnosing the winds effects on kickoffs doesn't qualify you to run an NFL team. We all know why he was hired and I'll just leave it at that 

Well, we all know why YOU think he was hired. Because he's Black. It's OK, you can say that. Don't be shy. Own it. It might help others understand the agenda behind your bananas-level opposition to the man. 

I've said it. I'm not running from anything. Look at the finalists for the job: Poles, Kwesi, and the female from Philly. Do you NOT believe politics were at least partially in play after we just fired two old white guys? We passed over every white male candidate we interviewed who had far better resumes outside of everybody but Poles. Lol. Don't miss the forest through the trees my friend. I don't care that he's black. What I care about is we did not hire the best person for the job and his inexperience has shown in trades, free agency, and most glaring...the draft.

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"1VikesFan" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: Watching the season team highlight recap on NFL Network today really makes you realize the impact Cook had last season in a lot of these come from behind wins;

- 53 yard TD run in the 4th quarter at Miami
- 81 yard TD run in the 3rd quarter at Buffalo
- 12 yard, one handed TD catch in the 4th quarter at Washington
- 64 yard TD reception versus the Colts in the 4th quarter taking a short pass and turning it into a huge play. 

All these plays were huge catalysts in coming back in these games. Anybody that doesn't think we are going to miss Cooks explosiveness and has "ho-hummed" his release is fooling themselves..

I don't think there's a Viking fan on the planet who would argue Cook wasn't a good running back. He was. One of the best in the NFL. So all these facts are unnecessary. We are unquestionably downgrading the RB position on paper.

But the pertinent question was is he worth his $12M cap hit? Or can we be almost as effective running the ball (or AS effective, or perhaps even MORE effective) with a the stable of lesser, but promising RBs in a committee at a fraction of the cost? 

Every decision is a cost/benefit analysis. And, I say this as one of the biggest Dalvin fans on the board, I think the Vikings made the right one. 

I think for KOC he really isn't interested in running the ball. He'd rather throw it around the yard 50 times a game and use the run as a clear secondary option, so it probably matters a lot less who the runner is. This has been brought up a lot on NFL Radio when discussing Cooks release. They just need a guy back there, and it's a far cry from the Zimmer era where we clearly wanted to establish a running game and play more physical on offense. All this makes the Oliver signing even more of a head scratcher. If you really want to run the ball and be more committed to it...wouldn't you want the best back you could get? 

We'll see. I think it will be a different offense this year. It remains to be seen if it's for the better. I just don't believe you cut a top 5 RB in his prime and can reasonably expect to get the same production 

Have you not been paying attention? Word on the street is that KOC intends to not only run the ball more, but run more effectively, more efficiently. Yes, likely fewer 60 yard runs, but also fewer 1-yard losses....and more 4-6 yard gains. I think that's the idea. And that's one of the reasons (money being the first) we're replacing Dalvin with a committee. And why we brought in the NFL's best run blocking TE. Though I will say that I think we'll all be surprised by what Oliver brings to the passing game. 

Oh I've been paying attention, but I'll believe it when I see it. Just like I'll believe Oliver becomes a big pass catching option in this offense when I see it. If I were a betting man, I'd bet we still pass the ball a ton more due to our defense still sucking and the running game being mediocre to just ineffective. Bradbury is still Bradbury. ONeill is returning from a major injury so we'll see how quickly he rounds into form. Ingram needs to show marked improvement from last season. We averaged 4.1 yards per run on the season, and the only playoff team that was worse was Tampa and their mash unit of an offensive line. We did nothing to improve our run game up front and we need to be better. Everybody blaming Cook for 1 yard runs or runs for loss is misguided 

Really sucks that your not the GM supafreak84, you have all the answers to what's ailing the team and what Kwesi should have done differently 

I didn't go to an Ivy League school, but otherwise my football resume is just as good as his...so maybe so 

Wow, I wasn't aware you spent 9 years in NFL front offices--4 years at manager level, 3 years at director level and 2 years at VP level--before jumping aboard the Longship. 

@"greediron" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"1VikesFan" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: Watching the season team highlight recap on NFL Network today really makes you realize the impact Cook had last season in a lot of these come from behind wins;

- 53 yard TD run in the 4th quarter at Miami
- 81 yard TD run in the 3rd quarter at Buffalo
- 12 yard, one handed TD catch in the 4th quarter at Washington
- 64 yard TD reception versus the Colts in the 4th quarter taking a short pass and turning it into a huge play. 

All these plays were huge catalysts in coming back in these games. Anybody that doesn't think we are going to miss Cooks explosiveness and has "ho-hummed" his release is fooling themselves..

I don't think there's a Viking fan on the planet who would argue Cook wasn't a good running back. He was. One of the best in the NFL. So all these facts are unnecessary. We are unquestionably downgrading the RB position on paper.

But the pertinent question was is he worth his $12M cap hit? Or can we be almost as effective running the ball (or AS effective, or perhaps even MORE effective) with a the stable of lesser, but promising RBs in a committee at a fraction of the cost? 

Every decision is a cost/benefit analysis. And, I say this as one of the biggest Dalvin fans on the board, I think the Vikings made the right one. 

I think for KOC he really isn't interested in running the ball. He'd rather throw it around the yard 50 times a game and use the run as a clear secondary option, so it probably matters a lot less who the runner is. This has been brought up a lot on NFL Radio when discussing Cooks release. They just need a guy back there, and it's a far cry from the Zimmer era where we clearly wanted to establish a running game and play more physical on offense. All this makes the Oliver signing even more of a head scratcher. If you really want to run the ball and be more committed to it...wouldn't you want the best back you could get? 

We'll see. I think it will be a different offense this year. It remains to be seen if it's for the better. I just don't believe you cut a top 5 RB in his prime and can reasonably expect to get the same production 

Have you not been paying attention? Word on the street is that KOC intends to not only run the ball more, but run more effectively, more efficiently. Yes, likely fewer 60 yard runs, but also fewer 1-yard losses....and more 4-6 yard gains. I think that's the idea. And that's one of the reasons (money being the first) we're replacing Dalvin with a committee. And why we brought in the NFL's best run blocking TE. Though I will say that I think we'll all be surprised by what Oliver brings to the passing game. 

Oh I've been paying attention, but I'll believe it when I see it. Just like I'll believe Oliver becomes a big pass catching option in this offense when I see it. If I were a betting man, I'd bet we still pass the ball a ton more due to our defense still sucking and the running game being mediocre to just ineffective. Bradbury is still Bradbury. ONeill is returning from a major injury so we'll see how quickly he rounds into form. Ingram needs to show marked improvement from last season. We averaged 4.1 yards per run on the season, and the only playoff team that was worse was Tampa and their mash unit of an offensive line. We did nothing to improve our run game up front and we need to be better. Everybody blaming Cook for 1 yard runs or runs for loss is misguided 

Really sucks that your not the GM supafreak84, you have all the answers to what's ailing the team and what Kwesi should have done differently 

I didn't go to an Ivy League school, but otherwise my football resume is just as good as his...so maybe so 

Wow, I wasn't aware you spent 9 years in NFL front offices--4 years at manager level, 3 years at director level and 2 years at VP level--before jumping aboard the Longship. 

Better yet, his draft resume is incomparable, not a single bust on it.

@"greediron" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"1VikesFan" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: Watching the season team highlight recap on NFL Network today really makes you realize the impact Cook had last season in a lot of these come from behind wins;

- 53 yard TD run in the 4th quarter at Miami
- 81 yard TD run in the 3rd quarter at Buffalo
- 12 yard, one handed TD catch in the 4th quarter at Washington
- 64 yard TD reception versus the Colts in the 4th quarter taking a short pass and turning it into a huge play. 

All these plays were huge catalysts in coming back in these games. Anybody that doesn't think we are going to miss Cooks explosiveness and has "ho-hummed" his release is fooling themselves..

I don't think there's a Viking fan on the planet who would argue Cook wasn't a good running back. He was. One of the best in the NFL. So all these facts are unnecessary. We are unquestionably downgrading the RB position on paper.

But the pertinent question was is he worth his $12M cap hit? Or can we be almost as effective running the ball (or AS effective, or perhaps even MORE effective) with a the stable of lesser, but promising RBs in a committee at a fraction of the cost? 

Every decision is a cost/benefit analysis. And, I say this as one of the biggest Dalvin fans on the board, I think the Vikings made the right one. 

I think for KOC he really isn't interested in running the ball. He'd rather throw it around the yard 50 times a game and use the run as a clear secondary option, so it probably matters a lot less who the runner is. This has been brought up a lot on NFL Radio when discussing Cooks release. They just need a guy back there, and it's a far cry from the Zimmer era where we clearly wanted to establish a running game and play more physical on offense. All this makes the Oliver signing even more of a head scratcher. If you really want to run the ball and be more committed to it...wouldn't you want the best back you could get? 

We'll see. I think it will be a different offense this year. It remains to be seen if it's for the better. I just don't believe you cut a top 5 RB in his prime and can reasonably expect to get the same production 

Have you not been paying attention? Word on the street is that KOC intends to not only run the ball more, but run more effectively, more efficiently. Yes, likely fewer 60 yard runs, but also fewer 1-yard losses....and more 4-6 yard gains. I think that's the idea. And that's one of the reasons (money being the first) we're replacing Dalvin with a committee. And why we brought in the NFL's best run blocking TE. Though I will say that I think we'll all be surprised by what Oliver brings to the passing game. 

Oh I've been paying attention, but I'll believe it when I see it. Just like I'll believe Oliver becomes a big pass catching option in this offense when I see it. If I were a betting man, I'd bet we still pass the ball a ton more due to our defense still sucking and the running game being mediocre to just ineffective. Bradbury is still Bradbury. ONeill is returning from a major injury so we'll see how quickly he rounds into form. Ingram needs to show marked improvement from last season. We averaged 4.1 yards per run on the season, and the only playoff team that was worse was Tampa and their mash unit of an offensive line. We did nothing to improve our run game up front and we need to be better. Everybody blaming Cook for 1 yard runs or runs for loss is misguided 

Really sucks that your not the GM supafreak84, you have all the answers to what's ailing the team and what Kwesi should have done differently 

I didn't go to an Ivy League school, but otherwise my football resume is just as good as his...so maybe so 

Wow, I wasn't aware you spent 9 years in NFL front offices--4 years at manager level, 3 years at director level and 2 years at VP level--before jumping aboard the Longship. 

Better yet, his draft resume is incomparable, not a single bust on it.

@"IHatekwesi84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"1VikesFan" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: Watching the season team highlight recap on NFL Network today really makes you realize the impact Cook had last season in a lot of these come from behind wins;

- 53 yard TD run in the 4th quarter at Miami
- 81 yard TD run in the 3rd quarter at Buffalo
- 12 yard, one handed TD catch in the 4th quarter at Washington
- 64 yard TD reception versus the Colts in the 4th quarter taking a short pass and turning it into a huge play. 

All these plays were huge catalysts in coming back in these games. Anybody that doesn't think we are going to miss Cooks explosiveness and has "ho-hummed" his release is fooling themselves..

I don't think there's a Viking fan on the planet who would argue Cook wasn't a good running back. He was. One of the best in the NFL. So all these facts are unnecessary. We are unquestionably downgrading the RB position on paper.

But the pertinent question was is he worth his $12M cap hit? Or can we be almost as effective running the ball (or AS effective, or perhaps even MORE effective) with a the stable of lesser, but promising RBs in a committee at a fraction of the cost? 

Every decision is a cost/benefit analysis. And, I say this as one of the biggest Dalvin fans on the board, I think the Vikings made the right one. 

I think for KOC he really isn't interested in running the ball. He'd rather throw it around the yard 50 times a game and use the run as a clear secondary option, so it probably matters a lot less who the runner is. This has been brought up a lot on NFL Radio when discussing Cooks release. They just need a guy back there, and it's a far cry from the Zimmer era where we clearly wanted to establish a running game and play more physical on offense. All this makes the Oliver signing even more of a head scratcher. If you really want to run the ball and be more committed to it...wouldn't you want the best back you could get? 

We'll see. I think it will be a different offense this year. It remains to be seen if it's for the better. I just don't believe you cut a top 5 RB in his prime and can reasonably expect to get the same production 

Have you not been paying attention? Word on the street is that KOC intends to not only run the ball more, but run more effectively, more efficiently. Yes, likely fewer 60 yard runs, but also fewer 1-yard losses....and more 4-6 yard gains. I think that's the idea. And that's one of the reasons (money being the first) we're replacing Dalvin with a committee. And why we brought in the NFL's best run blocking TE. Though I will say that I think we'll all be surprised by what Oliver brings to the passing game. 

Oh I've been paying attention, but I'll believe it when I see it. Just like I'll believe Oliver becomes a big pass catching option in this offense when I see it. If I were a betting man, I'd bet we still pass the ball a ton more due to our defense still sucking and the running game being mediocre to just ineffective. Bradbury is still Bradbury. ONeill is returning from a major injury so we'll see how quickly he rounds into form. Ingram needs to show marked improvement from last season. We averaged 4.1 yards per run on the season, and the only playoff team that was worse was Tampa and their mash unit of an offensive line. We did nothing to improve our run game up front and we need to be better. Everybody blaming Cook for 1 yard runs or runs for loss is misguided 

Really sucks that your not the GM supafreak84, you have all the answers to what's ailing the team and what Kwesi should have done differently 

I didn't go to an Ivy League school, but otherwise my football resume is just as good as his...so maybe so 

Wow, I wasn't aware you spent 9 years in NFL front offices--4 years at manager level, 3 years at director level and 2 years at VP level--before jumping aboard the Longship. 

Like I said, making sure the stadium has enough hot dogs on game days or diagnosing the winds effects on kickoffs doesn't qualify you to run an NFL team. We all know why he was hired and I'll just leave it at that 

Well, we all know why YOU think he was hired. Because he's Black. It's OK, you can say that. Don't be shy. Own it. It might help others understand the agenda behind your bananas-level opposition to the man. 

I've said it. I'm not running from anything. Look at the finalists for the job: Poles, Kwesi, and the female from Philly. Do you NOT believe politics were at least partially in play after we just fired two old white guys? We passed over every white male candidate we interviewed who had far better resumes outside of everybody but Poles. Lol. Don't miss the forest through the trees my friend. I don't care that he's black. What I care about is we did not hire the best person for the job and his inexperience has shown in trades, free agency, and most glaring...the draft.