Ozzy Posted April 12, 2019 Share Posted April 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, SemperFeist said: A QBs running ability has nothing to do with play action. Play action is not intended for the QB to be a running threat. And if you don’t think that Kirk Cousins is a fit for the “Denver ZBS”, you might want to go back and look at who developed that system, and who drafted Kirk Cousins. Hint, it’s the same guy. Kirk Cousins was drafted as a injury safety net for RGIII which was totally and absolutely necessary because he clearly got injured a lot and they had no other real QB on the roster to be the main backup. RGIII was the one that system wanted, Kirk was just a potential solid backup that turned into a decent starting QB over time and that system they ran was not really the same and changed because of it. Mike Shanahan was out long before Kirk ever became the full time starter in Washington and under McVay clearly they did not run the exact same stuff.... I disagree, the QBs running has a lot to do with play action passing, just ask John Elway, Steve Young etc. One can be greatly successful if the QB can move a little on those run fakes especially when the defense bites. Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are the exception of an insanely good play action passer who was not a great runner but Kirk is no where close to the command or ball handling ability Peyton and Tom have. Maybe in time he can get a little better at it, but he will clearly never be a John Elway out of the pocket type QB who is a threat in the run game which hurts in a zone blocking system potentially. Will see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted April 12, 2019 Author Share Posted April 12, 2019 Many have claimed, including the QB himself, that Shanahan didn’t want RGIII. And that Kirk Cousins was Shanahan’s pick. And McVay’s offense, as well as Kyle Shanahan’s offense, are heavily influenced by Mike Shanahan’s scheme. And both coached Cousins, and utilized play action heavily. Because it’s one of Cousins biggest attributes. Defenses don’t bite on play action because they are focused on the QB running the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted April 12, 2019 Share Posted April 12, 2019 13 hours ago, Cearbhall said: Amen! Say it louder! And please keep reminding people about this. It is the results. Is he unlucky? Not good at it? A victim of some other circumstance? More importantly, does it matter? Nope, not by this point. The time where excuses matters has passed him by. The more relevant question at this point is, does Zygi Wilf have what it takes to lead this team? If not, we might as well pack our bags because Wilf seems to be in it for the long haul. It should also be noted that they've had multiple offensive line schemes throughout his tenure, which makes it difficult to ever develop any consistency. In fact, even in Zimmer's tenure alone they are now going to their 4th offensive line coaching staff in 6 years...all of which require different skill-sets out of their offensive linemen. In reality, this new coaching staff appears to be the first one whose scheme actually seems to match the skill-set of their current offensive linemen, which can't be said about when they moved from Davidson to Sparano...and then from Sparano's untimely departure from this earth to Clancy Barone. You may continue to say that that's not an excuse...that's fine. But, you certainly have to also acknowledge that there aren't many people who could have gone through that much coaching turnover at one position and have been successful either. I think that's been proven time and time again...and only Belichick has been able to overcome such turnover (except, of course at the offensive line position, which is the one position coach that has been remarkably stable, outside of when Scarnecchia retired for 2 years, and the offensive line fell apart in the 2nd year he was away). Either way, I thought this thread was about Griffen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted April 12, 2019 Author Share Posted April 12, 2019 When you look at the league’s top offensive lines, continuity in scheme/system is a common denominator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cearbhall Posted April 12, 2019 Share Posted April 12, 2019 3 hours ago, swede700 said: You may continue to say that that's not an excuse...that's fine. But, you certainly have to also acknowledge that there aren't many people who could have gone through that much coaching turnover at one position and have been successful either. I think that's been proven time and time again...and only Belichick has been able to overcome such turnover (except, of course at the offensive line position, which is the one position coach that has been remarkably stable, outside of when Scarnecchia retired for 2 years, and the offensive line fell apart in the 2nd year he was away). Agreed, there aren't many people that could go through that many transitions and been successful. But I also know who is responsible for those transitions. He could have hired anyone he wanted and it didn't have to be someone that changed schemes. I would have been heavily in favor of trading Griffen for Zeitler. Still, if the GM can't stick with a plan and see it through causing them to transition schemes every year you are right, it probably wouldn't matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrplChilPill Posted April 12, 2019 Share Posted April 12, 2019 17 hours ago, vikestyle said: Not a great start, has been better recently, has to nail this one. It's been better lately because he's used valuable draft capital......which, of course, is what some of us have been pointing out.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gopherwrestler Posted April 12, 2019 Share Posted April 12, 2019 Let’s try and keep the draft talk, in the draft talk threads. We also have an offensive line thread to discuss the offensive line. Lets use this thread for discussing Everson. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted April 16, 2019 Share Posted April 16, 2019 Quote Defensive end Everson Griffen was faced with a decision this offseason that many other NFL Players have faced at points in their careers. Griffen said, via Chris Tomasson of the Pioneer Press, that the pay cut was a “tough pill to swallow,” but a 2018 season that featured a drop in production and an absence to deal with mental health issues left him little choice if he wanted to realize his goal of being a Viking for his entire career. https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/04/16/everson-griffen-pay-cut-tough-to-swallow-but-i-want-to-be-a-viking-for-life/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VikeManDan Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 Not sure this has been posted. 2020-2022 contract years void if Griffen gets 6 sacks or plays 57% of defensive snaps in 2019; if so he would become a free agent in 2020. Griffen's 2019 cash earnings drop from $11.5 million to base value of $8 million up to $8.5 million with incentives. Source: https://overthecap.com/player/everson-griffen/1774/ I think it is pretty likely he's a FA next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cearbhall Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 21 minutes ago, VikeManDan said: I think it is pretty likely he's a FA next year. Yeah, I think that is by design. The Vikings probably know they wouldn't want to pay out those years of the contract. By making them voidable it will qualify Griffen for the compensatory formula. If they had to cut him they would get nothing. It was a great move to change those years to be voided. If he doesn't get six sacks they'll still have to cut him but at that level of production he wouldn't be counting as a very high round level anyway. And, if he does that poorly there is a chance he simply agrees to a huge pay cut to stay with the Vikings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VikeManDan Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 Assuming he performs and reaches the 6 sacks and the contract is voided that would free up ~$14M in cap space. Do they try to re-sign him to a deal or would that money be better served potentially extending Waynes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingsrule Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 4 minutes ago, VikeManDan said: Assuming he performs and reaches the 6 sacks and the contract is voided that would free up ~$14M in cap space. Do they try to re-sign him to a deal or would that money be better served potentially extending Waynes? Or Stephen Weatherly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VikeManDan Posted April 24, 2019 Share Posted April 24, 2019 4 minutes ago, vikingsrule said: Or Stephen Weatherly. True, hopefully he has a good year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.