"ScHeMe FiT"

I think you have to draft accordingly, it wouldn’t be smart to hire a guy and then not give him the chance to succeed.
I also think Kubiak is here mentoring OC Stefanski and teaching him his offense, so the scheme should stay the same even if Kubiak leaves.
Maybe that mentoring/teaching process takes a year or two, but if Zimmer stays then the offense shoukd stay.
I don’t think changing up OC’s is unique to the Vikings. look how long Lovie Smith was in Chicago and how many different OC’s the Bears had.

At this point, it's why the hell not. The OL has been a steaming pile for a while and what they had wasn't working. Change was needed. And Zimmer and Spielman are kind of playing for their jobs right now so who knows what will happen next. But for now, it's worth a shot to try something new. It will be interesting to see Kubiak's influence and to see what Stefanski has learned. 

@"Riphawkins" said: I think you have to draft accordingly, it wouldn’t be smart to hire a guy and then not give him the chance to succeed. I also think Kubiak is here mentoring OC Stefanski and teaching him his offense, so the scheme should stay the same even if Kubiak leaves. Maybe that mentoring/teaching process takes a year or two, but if Zimmer stays then the offense shoukd stay. I don’t think changing up OC’s is unique to the Vikings. look how long Lovie Smith was in Chicago and how many different OC’s the Bears had.

If the offense clicks,  I think we see Zimmer retire in a couple years and Stefanski takes over the HC position with lil Kubiak getting the OC job,  if it doesnt.... then the whole thing gets blown up regardless.

@"pattersaur" said:

So I've seen this term used on the board a ton lately to describe our recent draft picks. In regards to defensive players, this seems sensible. So long as Zimmer is the coach, we'll be running a similar defense year to year. But is it wise for the Vikings to be drafting players just because they fit Kubiak's scheme?

I understand all of us fans want a winner NOW, but GM's are supposed to think longer term, beyond just the immediate season. I doubt any team in the league has had a carousel of Offensive Coordinators like we have since Zimmer has been HC. Is "Assistant HC" Gary Kubiak expected to stay around for longer than a cup of coffee (unlike all the others) or next year are we going to be running an entirely new offensive scheme yet again, and drafting to fit some other guy's scheme?
I don't mean for this to sound overly negative, I'm genuinely curious if you guys think our FA/Draft strategy was a good one this year?

Everybody have a good Sunday!

What we appear to be doing is designing our run game and blocking scheme after the very successful Kubiak model. But with Stefanski in the long-term role. 

There are valid arguments out there that this offense is more Kubiak's than Mike Shanahan's--that Kubiak was far more successful without Shanahan than vice versa. Kyle Shanahan is a disciple of this offense. Stefanski will soon be another. And the beauty of it isn't just the running game. It's the offense that Cousins learned in Washington. And the reason Kyle wanted Cousins so badly in San Francisco. Lotta dot connecting here. 

@"pattersaur" said:

So I've seen this term used on the board a ton lately to describe our recent draft picks. In regards to defensive players, this seems sensible. So long as Zimmer is the coach, we'll be running a similar defense year to year. But is it wise for the Vikings to be drafting players just because they fit Kubiak's scheme?

I understand all of us fans want a winner NOW, but GM's are supposed to think longer term, beyond just the immediate season. I doubt any team in the league has had a carousel of Offensive Coordinators like we have since Zimmer has been HC. Is "Assistant HC" Gary Kubiak expected to stay around for longer than a cup of coffee (unlike all the others) or next year are we going to be running an entirely new offensive scheme yet again, and drafting to fit some other guy's scheme?
I don't mean for this to sound overly negative, I'm genuinely curious if you guys think our FA/Draft strategy was a good one this year?

Everybody have a good Sunday!

@"greediron" said:

The simple answer is what other scheme would you draft for? Longer answer, I think we have been gearing towards that scheme since Shurmur was here.  Flip didn't really know what he was doing, but I think we were still running a flavor of the ZBS.

@"pattersaur" said:

@"greediron" said:

The simple answer is what other scheme would you draft for? Longer answer, I think we have been gearing towards that scheme since Shurmur was here.  Flip didn't really know what he was doing, but I think we were still running a flavor of the ZBS.

I agree with you, I guess I'm just hoping for more continuity on the offensive side than we have gotten or I think that side of the ball will continue to be this team's weak spot. Thanks for the reply!

I think the OP is essentially asking, "Shouldn't a GM be taking a long-term view that goes beyond the scheme, coach, or players currently on this team, and instead foster an attitude of adding talent that is the best available regardless of those immediate factors?"
Ideally - yes, absolutely. When Mike Lynn was GM, he had confidence he would be around and acquired players even if they weren't a perfect fit. Herschel Walker was an example - great RB, not suited for Jerry Burns' offense. I don't choose that example to condemn Lynn, just to show that when GMs stayed in their jobs a long time, most did take a long-term approach that was scheme-agnostic or even coach-agnostic.
I think Rick Spielman has acted that way at times, but now can't afford to do so. IMO, this draft showed a lot of evidence that our GM really needs to build results immediately, and that leads to "scheme fit". I don't know if Spielman is under a "win Super Bowl" demand - personally, I think he is under pressure to demonstrate that his choice for "Franchise QB", Kirk Cousins, is truly as great as his contract...or at least better than Sam Bradford, Christian Ponder, maybe even Sam Cassel and Donovan McNabb, the other QB choices Spielman made.
As a result we are acquiring OL who specifically fit a ZBS intended to protect Cousins. We drafted a TE who can play a role similar to Jordan Reed, one of Cousins' favorite receivers. We picked a RB in round 3 to ensure the new run-heavy offense doesn't fail due to another Dalvin Cook injury. Spielman is in win-now mode.
The other problem you alluded to was the merry-go-round of offensive schemes and coordinators. That's a very real problem lately and the name of the problem is Zimmer. Most head coaches start out with a strength on one side of the ball or the other, but good ones pretty quickly grow until they have enough interest and capacity to be a strong influence on the entire team. Zimmer continues to seek a new offensive solution or guru every season, so Sparano's power-blocking attitude seems as valid to him as Shurmur's zone blocking, and DeFilippi's offensive plans excited him just as much as Norv Turner's. He's a one-sided coach.

I think increasing use of analytics leads to more scheme fits in player acquisition. It only makes sense to acquire players that potentially fit the systems the coaches want to use. The trick seems to be balancing the high priced veterans with enough low priced, young players, and not having glaring weaknesses in your team.
Paying Cousins means this team will have to get younger and a highly paid vet or two will be moving on next season; and maybe in this season.
If the team tanks this year, there will likely be new schemes and new people selecting players next year. 
Let's hope these players fit the schemes well. Winning makes long term planning a lot easier.