2024 QB Watch

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"dadevike" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"dadevike" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"dadevike" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"dadevike" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"StickyBun" said:

@"FLVike" said: I think with the 35 million saved from Cousins we will be active in FA and get oline good enough to give a rookie ample time to chuck it downfield.

I'll have what he's smoking.

Hes right,  with the cap savings from Cousins over the next 2 years they could really add a lot of talent to the roster,  but I doubt you find enough available talent in 1 year in FA to create an OL that is among the tops in the league and would make a rookie QB comfortable.  To many moving pieces for that to happen.

Not in 2024. If Cousins is not extended by March 13, $28.5M will hit the Vikings' salary cap in '24 in dead money. Cousins' cap number likely comes down if he is extended. Of course, the $28.5M is a one-time hit in 2024 and we would be completely done with Cousins after that, if he is not extended. 

Yes,  but you arent going to get any quality free agents to sign 1 year deals so any added players deals would be able to be configured to use the cap savings from Kirk in year 2.  And no,  his cap number of 28.5 is not likely to come down with an extension unless the fuck around and push that money out past his playing time,  which how we got into this stupid situation in the first place.  Dumb as hell that they let it get to this point.  

That's not how the cap works. You can push money paid this year to have a bigger cap hit next year where you have a lot more cap space. Everyone does it all the time. So yes, you can sign relevant FAs for more than one year with our current cap situation. And I strongly suspect that if we re-sign KC, his cap number for 2024 will go down. You can call it fuck around if you like but all 32 teams are fucking around. The cap situation now is actually pretty good. Your criticism is better directed at years past.

Yep, the cap number will go down for every contract we extend. Right now, JJ's hit is $19M because of the 5th year average of the franchise tender for WR. If he's extended, that number becomes whatever we want it to be. If we want it to be $5M so we can add some other players? Then it's $5M. That's why people call the cap a myth. It has 53 dimensions of flexibility. And what you choose to do with it is much more about where you are in your window than it is about money. 

I know it sounds great to pay as you go. But all teams use future years. If you don't, you can't compete. Teams not using future years would be like a business not having a line of credit to invest in equipment, staffing, etc. They wouldn't be able to compete. 

I have no problem with using future years... when you really have a reason to do it.  This team was not realistically ready to contend last offseason,  extending Kirk and creating the issues this offseason did nothing.  Maybe they would have  found lightning in a bottle,  but realistically we all know that this team was not ready to make a playoff run with the issues we were facing.

It's easy to predict last year's results. It's harder to predict next year's. Coming off a 13 win season with Cousins having one more year in KOC's offense and getting rid of a terrible DC, it was not clear to all that we would lose our 2 best offensive players + Hockenson and miss the playoffs this season. But that's what happened. We know that now. It was hard to predict that before last season. It may have made some sense to try to do whatever we could to win last season considering our success the prior season. But view points can differ.

any objective fan would have told you that 22 was not the real Vikings team,  hell anybody that watched enough football could have looked at that team and said they were a 9-11 win team with major holes on the OL, and the DL,  which neither were adequately addressed in the offseason so why would anyone assume they would be better?  The team that got ousted by the Giants at home was closer to the real team as was evidenced by how this season started.

until they address,  in a major way,  the IOL and the DL,  this team is just wasting its time worrying about QBs and playoff runs.

The Vikings' biggest weakness in '22 was Donatell/defense. They replaced him with Flores. That was an upgrade. You really think that some hyper competitive athletes and coaches who won 13 games the prior year and were addressing their biggest weakness should have told themselves and each other that '22 was just a fluke; that we were not nearly that good; that there was no way we were ready to compete, even if we significantly improve our glaring weakness? I don't think those people make it to the NFL. People like that write about football. Usually in Minnesota.

You say the Vikings have not address the iol? In '22 and to start '23, the Vikings' iol consisted of a first round Center and 2 second round Guards. So by "address" you must mean that the Vikings did not spend first round picks at both guard spots?

When some NFL experts were predicting the Lions would win the NFCN in '23, the "objective fans" here went nuts. We all said we won the division and we did it with a lousy defense and the D will be much better under Flores and the Detroit Kittens never win anything, etc. etc. In other words, we sounded exactly like you would expect Vikings fans to sound. 

Like I said above, everything is clearer in hindsight.

No,  meant the IOL sucked ass in pass pro in 22,  and they ran it back in 23,  that's called not addressing it. Sure some believe the answer is keep doing the same thing over and over and it will fix itself through continuity,  I just didn't buy it then,  and I still don't.
   

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"dadevike" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"dadevike" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"dadevike" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"dadevike" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"StickyBun" said:

@"FLVike" said: I think with the 35 million saved from Cousins we will be active in FA and get oline good enough to give a rookie ample time to chuck it downfield.

I'll have what he's smoking.

Hes right,  with the cap savings from Cousins over the next 2 years they could really add a lot of talent to the roster,  but I doubt you find enough available talent in 1 year in FA to create an OL that is among the tops in the league and would make a rookie QB comfortable.  To many moving pieces for that to happen.

Not in 2024. If Cousins is not extended by March 13, $28.5M will hit the Vikings' salary cap in '24 in dead money. Cousins' cap number likely comes down if he is extended. Of course, the $28.5M is a one-time hit in 2024 and we would be completely done with Cousins after that, if he is not extended. 

Yes,  but you arent going to get any quality free agents to sign 1 year deals so any added players deals would be able to be configured to use the cap savings from Kirk in year 2.  And no,  his cap number of 28.5 is not likely to come down with an extension unless the fuck around and push that money out past his playing time,  which how we got into this stupid situation in the first place.  Dumb as hell that they let it get to this point.  

That's not how the cap works. You can push money paid this year to have a bigger cap hit next year where you have a lot more cap space. Everyone does it all the time. So yes, you can sign relevant FAs for more than one year with our current cap situation. And I strongly suspect that if we re-sign KC, his cap number for 2024 will go down. You can call it fuck around if you like but all 32 teams are fucking around. The cap situation now is actually pretty good. Your criticism is better directed at years past.

Yep, the cap number will go down for every contract we extend. Right now, JJ's hit is $19M because of the 5th year average of the franchise tender for WR. If he's extended, that number becomes whatever we want it to be. If we want it to be $5M so we can add some other players? Then it's $5M. That's why people call the cap a myth. It has 53 dimensions of flexibility. And what you choose to do with it is much more about where you are in your window than it is about money. 

I know it sounds great to pay as you go. But all teams use future years. If you don't, you can't compete. Teams not using future years would be like a business not having a line of credit to invest in equipment, staffing, etc. They wouldn't be able to compete. 

I have no problem with using future years... when you really have a reason to do it.  This team was not realistically ready to contend last offseason,  extending Kirk and creating the issues this offseason did nothing.  Maybe they would have  found lightning in a bottle,  but realistically we all know that this team was not ready to make a playoff run with the issues we were facing.

It's easy to predict last year's results. It's harder to predict next year's. Coming off a 13 win season with Cousins having one more year in KOC's offense and getting rid of a terrible DC, it was not clear to all that we would lose our 2 best offensive players + Hockenson and miss the playoffs this season. But that's what happened. We know that now. It was hard to predict that before last season. It may have made some sense to try to do whatever we could to win last season considering our success the prior season. But view points can differ.

any objective fan would have told you that 22 was not the real Vikings team,  hell anybody that watched enough football could have looked at that team and said they were a 9-11 win team with major holes on the OL, and the DL,  which neither were adequately addressed in the offseason so why would anyone assume they would be better?  The team that got ousted by the Giants at home was closer to the real team as was evidenced by how this season started.

until they address,  in a major way,  the IOL and the DL,  this team is just wasting its time worrying about QBs and playoff runs.

The Vikings' biggest weakness in '22 was Donatell/defense. They replaced him with Flores. That was an upgrade. You really think that some hyper competitive athletes and coaches who won 13 games the prior year and were addressing their biggest weakness should have told themselves and each other that '22 was just a fluke; that we were not nearly that good; that there was no way we were ready to compete, even if we significantly improve our glaring weakness? I don't think those people make it to the NFL. People like that write about football. Usually in Minnesota.

You say the Vikings have not address the iol? In '22 and to start '23, the Vikings' iol consisted of a first round Center and 2 second round Guards. So by "address" you must mean that the Vikings did not spend first round picks at both guard spots?

When some NFL experts were predicting the Lions would win the NFCN in '23, the "objective fans" here went nuts. We all said we won the division and we did it with a lousy defense and the D will be much better under Flores and the Detroit Kittens never win anything, etc. etc. In other words, we sounded exactly like you would expect Vikings fans to sound. 

Like I said above, everything is clearer in hindsight.

No,  meant the IOL sucked ass in pass pro in 22,  and they ran it back in 23,  that's called not addressing it. Sure some believe the answer is keep doing the same thing over and over and it will fix itself through continuity,  I just didn't buy it then,  and I still don't.
   

do you actually believe that?  in your expert opinion,  do you think the Vikings IOL is adequate?   PFF is showing them as having a 100 grade,  are they really the best oline in the league or is PFF full of shit?  I tend to lean towards the later,  or there is a lot of context to be explained here.  

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

No,  meant the IOL sucked ass in pass pro in 22,  and they ran it back in 23,  that's called not addressing it. Sure some believe the answer is keep doing the same thing over and over and it will fix itself through continuity,  I just didn't buy it then,  and I still don't.
   

do you actually believe that?  in your expert opinion,  do you think the Vikings IOL is adequate?   PFF is showing them as having a 100 grade,  are they really the best oline in the league or is PFF full of shit?  I tend to lean towards the later,  or there is a lot of context to be explained here.  

@"supafreak84" said:

If you believed everything PFF and their grading system to be legit, then Josh Oliver is an All Pro Tight End 

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

If you believed everything PFF and their grading system to be legit, then Josh Oliver is an All Pro Tight End 

He's a good blocker and that's what he graded high in. You don't buy that?

l suspect All Pro voting is geared more toward receiving TEs and Olver only caught 22 passes. 

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

If you believed everything PFF and their grading system to be legit, then Josh Oliver is an All Pro Tight End 

He's a good blocker and that's what he graded high in. You don't buy that?

l suspect All Pro voting is geared more toward receiving TEs and Olver only caught 22 passes. 

Maybe, but that wasn't reflective in our ability to run the football. The pass catching skills were subpar, but all we heard about was he was PFF's 3rd, 4th, 5th rated TE in the league. Certainly makes me question their grading metrics 

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

If you believed everything PFF and their grading system to be legit, then Josh Oliver is an All Pro Tight End 

He's a good blocker and that's what he graded high in. You don't buy that?

l suspect All Pro voting is geared more toward receiving TEs and Olver only caught 22 passes. 

Maybe, but that wasn't reflective in our ability to run the football. The pass catching skills were subpar, but all we heard about was he was PFF's 3rd, 4th, 5th rated TE in the league. Certainly makes me question their grading metrics 

Christian Darrisaw grading high as a run blocker wasn't reflective of our ability to run the ball either. I suspect there's a few other factors that go into running the ball well. 

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

No,  meant the IOL sucked ass in pass pro in 22,  and they ran it back in 23,  that's called not addressing it. Sure some believe the answer is keep doing the same thing over and over and it will fix itself through continuity,  I just didn't buy it then,  and I still don't.
   

do you actually believe that?  in your expert opinion,  do you think the Vikings IOL is adequate?   PFF is showing them as having a 100 grade,  are they really the best oline in the league or is PFF full of shit?  I tend to lean towards the later,  or there is a lot of context to be explained here.  

I think the Vikings offensive line is well above average. I think if you watch other NFL games you see that pretty clearly. The thing about this graphic is that it doesn't just consider PFF. It's a composite of PFF, the SIS ranking and the ESPN win rate. It's also just pass blocking because that's what you mentioned in your post. The same composite ranked the Vikings run blocking 22nd. 

Also, this was after week 15 and the Vikings OL was terrible at the end of the year. I haven't seen an updated version. But FWIW, at the end of the season PFF ranked the Vikings offensive line (pass and run) 12th in the NFL. 

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

If you believed everything PFF and their grading system to be legit, then Josh Oliver is an All Pro Tight End 

He's a good blocker and that's what he graded high in. You don't buy that?

l suspect All Pro voting is geared more toward receiving TEs and Olver only caught 22 passes. 

Maybe, but that wasn't reflective in our ability to run the football. The pass catching skills were subpar, but all we heard about was he was PFF's 3rd, 4th, 5th rated TE in the league. Certainly makes me question their grading metrics 

Christian Darrisaw grading high as a run blocker wasn't reflective of our ability to run the ball either. I suspect there's a few other factors that go into running the ball well. 

Agreed, lots of different factors, but PFF "grades" certainly make you question certain things. If Oliver is a top 5 graded TE, Darrisaw is a top 5 (assuming) graded tackle, Ingram made a large jump this year in his all around game, and I'd assume Oneill is highly rated....it makes you wonder why we struggled running the ball all year. 

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

No,  meant the IOL sucked ass in pass pro in 22,  and they ran it back in 23,  that's called not addressing it. Sure some believe the answer is keep doing the same thing over and over and it will fix itself through continuity,  I just didn't buy it then,  and I still don't.
   

do you actually believe that?  in your expert opinion,  do you think the Vikings IOL is adequate?   PFF is showing them as having a 100 grade,  are they really the best oline in the league or is PFF full of shit?  I tend to lean towards the later,  or there is a lot of context to be explained here.  

I think the Vikings offensive line is well above average. I think if you watch other NFL games you see that pretty clearly. The thing about this graphic is that it doesn't just consider PFF. It's a composite of PFF, the SIS ranking and the ESPN win rate. It's also just pass blocking because that's what you mentioned in your post. The same composite ranked the Vikings run blocking 22nd. 

Also, this was after week 15 and the Vikings OL was terrible at the end of the year. I haven't seen an updated version. But FWIW, at the end of the season PFF ranked the Vikings offensive line (pass and run) 12th in the NFL. 

ive seen enough other games in the playoffs to know that our OL is no where near the top  of the damn league in anything positive.  its the PFF grade that fucks up your  composite rankings,  that 100 for pass blocking is the most absurd thing I have seen in a long time on here.  that is saying the Vikings are the best pass blocking team in the league?  No fucking way,  I saw a stat somewhere that listed QB sacks allowed and the Vikings were in the lower 1/3 of the league with 2.8 sacks per game allowed,  and they were actually worse in 2023 than in 2022 by .2 per game.

its ok,  you can be wrong once in a while,  you stuck to your convictions on the OL jelling and improving from 22 to 23 through continuity,  which typically I would agree if we had decent pieces in place,  but Cleveland hadnt impressed every since they flipped him from RG to LG,  Bradbury has never impressed except for a few rare run plays they he was able to get downfield and blow up a DB,  and Ingram is so inconsistent that about all you can say is win some lose some,  yes they move on from Cook but I dont think that was enough to account for the decline in the run game, so not only did they not do shit in pass pro,  they were pathetic in the run game as well,   if it werent for the studs making big plays in the passing game our O would likely be ranked at the bottom as well.

if this team is going to continue with an immobile aging QB,  they have to fix that IOL and do so with guys that can anchor as well as drive so we can at least find league average in both run and pass blocking or we are going to continue to be a one and done at best team.

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"dadevike" said:

No,  meant the IOL sucked ass in pass pro in 22,  and they ran it back in 23,  that's called not addressing it. Sure some believe the answer is keep doing the same thing over and over and it will fix itself through continuity,  I just didn't buy it then,  and I still don't.

It's only hindsight if you weren't paying attention last year when many of us said the same thing.  And not everyone was crying about the lions prediction,  several here in fact called it before the talking heads.  I wasn't picking them, but I wasn't saying the Vikes should be favored either.  They hadn't fixed their OL or DL issues.   

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

No,  meant the IOL sucked ass in pass pro in 22,  and they ran it back in 23,  that's called not addressing it. Sure some believe the answer is keep doing the same thing over and over and it will fix itself through continuity,  I just didn't buy it then,  and I still don't.
   

do you actually believe that?  in your expert opinion,  do you think the Vikings IOL is adequate?   PFF is showing them as having a 100 grade,  are they really the best oline in the league or is PFF full of shit?  I tend to lean towards the later,  or there is a lot of context to be explained here.  

I think the Vikings offensive line is well above average. I think if you watch other NFL games you see that pretty clearly. The thing about this graphic is that it doesn't just consider PFF. It's a composite of PFF, the SIS ranking and the ESPN win rate. It's also just pass blocking because that's what you mentioned in your post. The same composite ranked the Vikings run blocking 22nd. 

Also, this was after week 15 and the Vikings OL was terrible at the end of the year. I haven't seen an updated version. But FWIW, at the end of the season PFF ranked the Vikings offensive line (pass and run) 12th in the NFL. 

ive seen enough other games in the playoffs to know that our OL is no where near the top  of the damn league in anything positive.  its the PFF grade that fucks up your  composite rankings,  that 100 for pass blocking is the most absurd thing I have seen in a long time on here.  that is saying the Vikings are the best pass blocking team in the league?  No fucking way,  I saw a stat somewhere that listed QB sacks allowed and the Vikings were in the lower 1/3 of the league with 2.8 sacks per game allowed,  and they were actually worse in 2023 than in 2022 by .2 per game.

its ok,  you can be wrong once in a while,  you stuck to your convictions on the OL jelling and improving from 22 to 23 through continuity,  which typically I would agree if we had decent pieces in place,  but Cleveland hadnt impressed every since they flipped him from RG to LG,  Bradbury has never impressed except for a few rare run plays they he was able to get downfield and blow up a DB,  and Ingram is so inconsistent that about all you can say is win some lose some,  yes they move on from Cook but I dont think that was enough to account for the decline in the run game, so not only did they not do shit in pass pro,  they were pathetic in the run game as well,   if it werent for the studs making big plays in the passing game our O would likely be ranked at the bottom as well.

if this team is going to continue with an immobile aging QB,  they have to fix that IOL and do so with guys that can anchor as well as drive so we can at least find league average in both run and pass blocking or we are going to continue to be a one and done at best team.

You're not reading it correctly. 100 doesn't mean they were flawless. It's a curve, which means you give the highest graded team 100 and go from there. But that's just the PFF grade. There were two other evaluating groups who factored into this. Looks like the Vikings graded quite a bit lower among those groups, but still high enough to where a composite grade put them at #1. But again, this doesn't include the last three weeks. And yes, continuity is always a good thing. 

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

If you believed everything PFF and their grading system to be legit, then Josh Oliver is an All Pro Tight End 

He's a good blocker and that's what he graded high in. You don't buy that?

l suspect All Pro voting is geared more toward receiving TEs and Olver only caught 22 passes. 

Maybe, but that wasn't reflective in our ability to run the football. The pass catching skills were subpar, but all we heard about was he was PFF's 3rd, 4th, 5th rated TE in the league. Certainly makes me question their grading metrics 

Christian Darrisaw grading high as a run blocker wasn't reflective of our ability to run the ball either. I suspect there's a few other factors that go into running the ball well. 

Agreed, lots of different factors, but PFF "grades" certainly make you question certain things. If Oliver is a top 5 graded TE, Darrisaw is a top 5 (assuming) graded tackle, Ingram made a large jump this year in his all around game, and I'd assume Oneill is highly rated....it makes you wonder why we struggled running the ball all year. 

Agree. It does make you wonder. But I think the backs play a role in that, the OC plays a role and the QB plays a role as well. For example, if I'm a DC facing Hall, Dobbs or Mullens, I'm not going to be playing the pass. And remember, the Vikings ranked 22nd in run blocking. 

At some point you would think that fans would stop making excuses for why this team hasn't been competitive since 2009! 

If Cousins resigns, this would be a great scenario for Minnesota:

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/news/2024-nfl-mock-draft-exploring-what-qb-needy-teams-would-do-if-three-are-taken-with-the-first-three-picks/

https://www.foxsports.com/stories/nfl/2024-nfl-draft-qb-rankings-caleb-williams-leads-top-10-how-many-first-rounders

@"StickyBun" said: If Cousins resigns, this would be a great scenario for Minnesota:

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/news/2024-nfl-mock-draft-exploring-what-qb-needy-teams-would-do-if-three-are-taken-with-the-first-three-picks/

That would be ideal....

I think QB's 4-6 will be over-drafted with qb's so over-valued. The Jets are an example of maybe wanting someone behind Rogers for a year or so.

I dont think they'll get one ala Bridgewater. 

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

You're not reading it correctly. 100 doesn't mean they were flawless. It's a curve, which means you give the highest graded team 100 and go from there. But that's just the PFF grade. There were two other evaluating groups who factored into this. Looks like the Vikings graded quite a bit lower among those groups, but still high enough to where a composite grade put them at #1. But again, this doesn't include the last three weeks. And yes, continuity is always a good thing. 

I read it fine,  you didn't read my post.  The 100 says PFF ranked them the top unit and that is simply bull shit, not even close to reality,  and it's  that 100 that skews the other 2 so badly resulting in a flawed at best ranking.

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

You're not reading it correctly. 100 doesn't mean they were flawless. It's a curve, which means you give the highest graded team 100 and go from there. But that's just the PFF grade. There were two other evaluating groups who factored into this. Looks like the Vikings graded quite a bit lower among those groups, but still high enough to where a composite grade put them at #1. But again, this doesn't include the last three weeks. And yes, continuity is always a good thing. 

I read it fine,  you didn't read my post.  The 100 says PFF ranked them the top unit and that is simply bull shit, not even close to reality,  and it's  that 100 that skews the other 2 so badly resulting in a flawed at best ranking.

Are they stupid? Being paid off? Part of some vast Vike-wing conspiracy? Or is it possible that the Vikings actually do grade fairly well as a collection of individuals, but don't play well as a unit? 

@"jargomcfargo" said: At some point you would think that fans would stop making excuses for why this team hasn't been competitive since 2009!