Moving On To 2020/2021.

[vike daddy]

32 minutes ago, VikeManDan said:

Next step in the offseason? Extend Ant Harris please. 

ok, sure. bring Everson back then too?

[vikingsrule]

28 minutes ago, SemperFeist said:

Extend Harris

Bring back Griffen

Bring in Dre Kirkpatrick

Not sure they can afford both Kirkpatrick and Griffen. Maybe they can do something with Reiff’s contract now that there is some leverage to move him to LG. I’d imagine a Harris extension probably opens up some cash now too.

Edited April 26, 2020 by vikingsrule

[CriminalMind]

36 minutes ago, SemperFeist said:

Extend Harris

Bring back Griffen

Bring in Dre Kirkpatrick

I would be down with this, plus adding a Reiff restructure (for cap savings) during training camp (assuming Ezra looks the LT part)

[SemperFeist]

I’m not sure I’m down to restructure Reiff’s contract. Restructuring almost always includes adding guaranteed money, and I don’t want to be any more tied to Reiff beyond this year than they currently are.

Approximately $7M in cap space plus more added after a Harris extension, should be more than enough to get Kirkpatrick and Griffen. If they’re interested in signing in Minnesota. 

[Cearbhall]

2 hours ago, rrgm said:

What am I missing..why are folks still asking for Rick to be fired..

I don't know how many people are asking for Rick to be fired here. I know that I am one that would like to see the team move on. My reason is considerably different that SemperFeist's reason:

2 hours ago, SemperFeist said:

He doesn’t spend every draft pick on offensive line. 

That would be foolish. Any GM that spent every draft pick at a position wouldn't last through his first contract. I am going to assume you were not being serious. 

2 hours ago, RpMc said:

Also doesn’t draft the right names people want. 

I saw mention in the draft thread of this, but when I asked about it there was nobody on this board that fell into this category. I was told I had to go to Twitter to find such people. As such, I do not think this is a reason that anyone here has wanted Rick Spielman fired.

The reason that I want Rick Spielman fired is the same as I have mentioned a few times before. Nothing has changed. I believe that a consistently winning team should have their identity built from the QB, and then the trenches outward. Rick Spielman has done a fine job in the building the trench on the defensive side of the ball.

However, the offensive line has continued to be a sore spot for pretty much the whole time Rick Spielman has been in charge of building the team as the GM. Over the years we have heard many excuses for this. At some point, excuses stop to matter. What matters is results. Excuses explain a short-term problem here or there. The problem, unfortunately, has been an ongoing problem. 

If Rick Spielman's goal was to build up a strong offensive line the only thing between him and him and his goal would be the excuses he keeps telling himself as to why he can't achieve it. It is possible that Spielman is simply incapable of building a strong offensive line. While I can't completely dismiss that possibility that is not what I see as the likely cause of the failure to build a strong offensive live. Whatever the reason, the results of the quality of the offensive lines that the Vikings have had through the years speak for themself. It has been bad.

In the cap era, it is not possible to have commodities known to be above average at all the positions. How one chooses to prioritize is a philosophical discussion. There is not one known right answer so rational people can have varying opinions on the matter. It just so happens that my philosophy for building a championship caliber team is different than Rick Spielman's philosophy. Understanding that it is a philosophical difference, I gave Rick Spielman the benefit fo the doubt for many years. Only last year did I decide I had enough of it. I didn't want to give Spielman's philosophy more time. It hasn't worked for years and I do not believe that it will work in the near future. I am ready for a new architect with a new philosophy.

The offensive line is one of the primary areas that I would not go into a season with question marks, even more than defensive line. This is because the defense gets to decide how to attack an offensive line. They get to decide how to exploit a weakness so the biggest weakness is more of a problem on the offensive line than it is on a defensive line. To have a solid offensive line it is more important to have the highest caliber weakest player. The same is somewhat true on defense too, but not as much. A couple really good defensive linemen can wreck offenses even if they have a linemate that is below average. on the defensive line it is more important to have the best top end players. With that, it is easier for a defensive coach to coach around individual weakness at one position via a platoon and other strategies.

I would do what it takes along the offensive line to have known commodities in the starting positions there. That means having high end backups that can grow into starting roles that can take over starting jobs as they open up only after they have proven they are capable. Rick Spielman is continually willing to leave question marks as his answer along the starting offensive line and frequently doesn't even have great contingency plans for the case something doesn't work out just right -- a question isn't answered exactly how it is needed to be answered. That is simply a philosophical difference with how I want to see the team built.

Given the difference in philosophy, I want to move on.

Or if it isn't a difference in philosophy and Spielman simply is not capable of assembling a solid offensive line then it is even more important to move on.

I hope that answers your questions on why I am hoping for Rick Spielman to be fired. If not, I am happy to try and explain further. Just ask.

Meanwhile, I have heard other reasons that other people want Rick fired. While I don't agree with a lot of them, like SemperFeist's reason, I am willing to work in alliance with those people to push public opinion in a direction that will achieve the goal. If any of you have other reasons you want Rick fired I will be happy to bring those to light too. Let me know what those reasons are. It will take many of us working together to have much impact on the general opinion here. 

[CriminalMind]

10 minutes ago, SemperFeist said:

I’m not sure I’m down to restructure Reiff’s contract. Restructuring almost always includes adding guaranteed money, and I don’t want to be any more tied to Reiff beyond this year than they currently are.

Approximately $7M in cap space plus more added after a Harris extension, should be more than enough to get Kirkpatrick and Griffen. If they’re interested in signing in Minnesota. 

Well i meant restructure, without adding money in future years. They have done this before, but it would only be under the premise of Ezra showing strong potential of starting LT capability in training camp. (Viable alternative)

[VikeManDan]

43 minutes ago, vike daddy said:

ok, sure. bring Everson back then too?

I would be on board. Would be a good veteran presence for Wonnum, Lynch, and Willekes. 

He would provide some production as well. It could be argued that Hunter could fill the veteran presence as well now. 

[SemperFeist]

25 minutes ago, CriminalMind said:

Well i meant restructure, without adding money in future years. They have done this before, but it would only be under the premise of Ezra showing strong potential of starting LT capability in training camp. (Viable alternative)

Who’s your guard? 

The only way you’re going to pressure Reiff into taking a pay cut is if you have something to leverage against him, like no job. 

Even if Cleveland looks like the next coming of Walter Jones, it still leaves the hole at left guard, which you’re now asking Reiff to try and fill. So, unless they have someone who they like at left guard, which would make Reiff expendable regardless, why would Reiff take a pay cut?

As Pat Kirwan has said many times on his show, “if you’re going to ask a guy to take a pay cut, you better be prepared to release him”.

Edited April 26, 2020 by SemperFeist

[Cearbhall]

48 minutes ago, CriminalMind said:

Well i meant restructure, without adding money in future years. They have done this before, but it would only be under the premise of Ezra showing strong potential of starting LT capability in training camp. (Viable alternative)

What you are talking about is a pay cut. That is different than a restructure.

But yeah, the team can ask Reiff to take a pay cut. He would weigh his options and may or may not agree to the cut. If he decides not to agree to it the team has to decide between keeping him at his current salary or releasing him.

When my company told me about my pay cut a couple weeks ago they didn't need to get me to agree to it because I don't have that kind of contract. But I am free to go find other employment during my furlough if I don't want to come back to the job at the reduced salary after the furlough.

Edited April 26, 2020 by Cearbhall

[RpMc]

I’d like to see Michael Schofield brought in - was with Kubiak in Denver and would likely be a starting caliber player on the OL

[SemperFeist]

1 hour ago, RpMc said:

I’d like to see Michael Schofield brought in - was with Kubiak in Denver and would likely be a starting caliber player on the OL

Can he play left guard? I thought he was a right guard?

[RpMc]

7 minutes ago, SemperFeist said:

Can he play left guard? I thought he was a right guard?

Played some left guard at Michigan, but you’re right, he’s primarily been a RG

[Dolmonite26]

5 hours ago, SemperFeist said:

I’m not sure I’m down to restructure Reiff’s contract. Restructuring almost always includes adding guaranteed money, and I don’t want to be any more tied to Reiff beyond this year than they currently are.

Approximately $7M in cap space plus more added after a Harris extension, should be more than enough to get Kirkpatrick and Griffen. If they’re interested in signing in Minnesota. 

It depends on the terms of the contract obviously but I'd be ok with Reiff manning the LG position for a few years. He profiles pretty well as a guy who could have a Joe Berger-esc finish to his career.

He has almost no injury history (at least not that I can think of off hand), doesn't look to be slowing down athletically, and has the kind of positional flexibility that is incredibly valuable for a position group that is otherwise very young.

He's over paid right now but if that number can be brought down going into the next few years, I'd really prefer they don't move on, provided he isn't the starter at LT going forward (post 2020 at least)

[SemperFeist]

11 minutes ago, Dolmonite26 said:

He's over paid right now but if that number can be brought down going into the next few years, I'd really prefer they don't move on

Is he really overpaid? PFF has him graded as the 26th ranked tackle of tackles who played 50% or more of offensive snaps. He’s the 18th highest paid tackle. Considering he was a FA signing, I would say his contract is on par with his performance. 

19 minutes ago, Dolmonite26 said:

but I'd be ok with Reiff manning the LG position for a few years.

And I wouldnt mind seeing him move to guard, either. But, that doesn’t give a reason as to why he would, or should, take a pay cut. 

[Dolmonite26]

6 minutes ago, SemperFeist said:

And I wouldnt mind seeing him move to guard, either. But, that doesn’t give a reason as to why he would, or should, take a pay cut. 

Probably true, but they can probably restructure/extent him and reduce his cap hit this year, but still give him the same amount of money.

Idk, I'm so capologist, but seems like they could make something happen to benefit both sides.

Fair point about his current contract btw