Jump to content

2019 Cornerback Coffee Talk, no big whoop...


vike daddy

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, VikeManDan said:

What's the worst case scenario look like for next year?

Rhodes - cut
Waynes, Alexander, Harris, and Kearse - leave in FA

We're left with...

CB: Hughes, Hill, and Boyd

S: Smith and Sendejo

I highly doubt that scenario plays out but that doesn't look pretty. At all.

The team probably makes an effort to re-sign Waynes, Alexander and Harris (Sendejo if Harris leaves).  They should trade Rhodes, draft 3-tech round 1, CB round 2, LG round 3, DB round 3 (compensatory).  That would leave the team in decent position heading into next season.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Antoine Winfield Sr. lives in suburban Houston but has spent plenty of time this fall in the Twin Cities since his son, Antoine Winfield Jr., is a star safety for the University of Minnesota. But while the elder Winfield is not bashful about discussing his own tackling ability, he said his son could end up becoming a better player than he was.

Winfield Sr: "Absolutely, that was the goal. That’s why I taught him everything I can do and he plays exactly like I do, but has better hands, so of course he can be better than me. I’m very excited, he’s doing his thing and it’s crazy. What he’s doing this year is, wow. His confidence level is through the roof. He’s making so many plays. I just love his approach every time the ball is in the air. I keep seeing NFL teams talking about his size, but they did the same thing with me. I was a great player, 5-9, 180. He’s 5-10, 205. I wish I had that body. He lived in the weight room. He built that body up. The sky is the limit for him.”

Winfield Sr. was taken with the No. 23 pick by the Bills in the 1999 draft. He offered no predictions on where his son will be drafted.

https://www.twincities.com/2019/11/28/antoine-winfield-says-he-was-the-best-tackler-in-vikings-history-but-son-could-be-a-better-player/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know how good Trumaine Brock is but just wanted to throw it out there to see what you guys thought.  As bad as Xavier Rhodes has been, I was thinking Brock might be someone worth considering.  Maybe over the bye week, Zim has been able to make some adjustments to help the CBs improve. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Uncle Buck said:

I don't know how good Trumaine Brock is but just wanted to throw it out there to see what you guys thought.  As bad as Xavier Rhodes has been, I was thinking Brock might be someone worth considering.  Maybe over the bye week, Zim has been able to make some adjustments to help the CBs improve. 

The best thing the Vikings got out of Brock last time they had him was the compensatory pick awards after losing him. It is likely that a compensatory loss would again be the best thing they would get out of him. I don't know that it is worth the cost of using a roster spot on him for the rest of the year. The team would have to cut someone else. And there is a very real chance that Brock wouldn't end up signing a contract that results in him counting as a compensatory loss either.

As far as Brock's play being able to help the team. I have my doubts on his fit based on his previous year in the system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Uncle Buck said:

I don't know how good Trumaine Brock is but just wanted to throw it out there to see what you guys thought.  As bad as Xavier Rhodes has been, I was thinking Brock might be someone worth considering.  Maybe over the bye week, Zim has been able to make some adjustments to help the CBs improve. 

If we didn't already have Hill and Hughes on the roster it would make more sense to add someone to the back end of the roster who could push for playing time down the road

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are we ready to talk about benching Rhodes again? Because I no longer have an argument for why he is on the field.

Last night, in the play that finally broke the camel's back, the 60 yard TD to Moore the Vikings are faking their double A gap blitz and then playing cover 1 man behind that. Harrison Smith has the Seattle RB in man coverage, as he should. Anthony Harris then shades over to the wide side of the field, since there are 2 Seahawks WRs on that side of the formation. Rhodes then gives David Moore a free release expecting safety help.

Hughes or Hill would not have missed the defensive call and definitely wouldn't allow the Seahawks 3rd or 4th best WR to run straight by them in man coverage. Understanding coverage calls shouldn't be something a corner who has been in this system for 6 years is struggling with. We know exactly what we have in Rhodes, he isn't going to magically develop into a better player. Hughes, Hill or Mac would all be an upgrade AND they could develop into a capable starter for years to come with added game reps.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Nozizaki said:

Are we ready to talk about benching Rhodes again? Because I no longer have an argument for why he is on the field.

Last night, in the play that finally broke the camel's back, the 60 yard TD to Moore the Vikings are faking their double A gap blitz and then playing cover 1 man behind that. Harrison Smith has the Seattle RB in man coverage, as he should. Anthony Harris then shades over to the wide side of the field, since there are 2 Seahawks WRs on that side of the formation. Rhodes then gives David Moore a free release expecting safety help.

Hughes or Hill would not have missed the defensive call and definitely wouldn't allow the Seahawks 3rd or 4th best WR to run straight by them in man coverage. Understanding coverage calls shouldn't be something a corner who has been in this system for 6 years is struggling with. We know exactly what we have in Rhodes, he isn't going to magically develop into a better player. Hughes, Hill or Mac would all be an upgrade AND they could develop into a capable starter for years to come with added game reps.

We don't know for sure that they wouldn't have missed the call but man the looked slow trying to catch up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, vikesfan89 said:

We don't know for sure that they wouldn't have missed the call but man the looked slow trying to catch up

I agree with that.  That played tipped me over the edge...I'm all for giving more time to Hughes.  I can't defend Rhodes any longer (I think there's an oxymoron in there somewhere).  You still have to play Rhodes, but I'd have him split more time with Hughes, even if it means that Rhodes will only be on the field 30-40% of the time.    

Edited by swede700
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, swede700 said:

I agree with that.  That played tipped me over the edge...I'm all for giving more time to Hughes.  I can't defend Rhodes any longer (I think there's an oxymoron in there somewhere).  You still have to play Rhodes, but I'd have him split time with Hughes.  

He is splitting time to an extent but Hughes should be playing more than Rhodes no question

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We still have to play Rhodes because Zimmer is too loyal to underperforming player(s).  At least in that case.  
 

Literally every single game, I look to see where Rhodes is.  Every time.  I want to see which no name receiver is going to be on ESPN the next day for having a career day against that shell of a once great player. Now turned liability.  A full on one.  The longer he is out there and playing, the more capable and confident an offense is.  From what I’ve seen, (correct me if I’m wrong) but most teams have even veered away from Hughes in order to attack Rhodes. 
 

What does he have to do for Zimmer to bench him?  What is he getting out of this except exhibiting a portrayal of obvious stubbornness.  
 

2nd or 3rd round should be a defensive back. After O Line and D line are addressed... We could have Hughes, Alexander and Hill (assuming we don’t resign Wayne’s), and then have a rookie to get the 4th spot.  That’s just how I see it. 

Edited by Torchezim
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...