Dolmonite26 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 4 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said: And the same, of course, can be said about those teams that depend on the passing game. If a defense doesn't have to defend against the run, then the passing attack will get stuffed...ala' the JDF scheme in 2018. The problem with his offense wasn't that it passed too much. The problem was he didn't know how to use personnel and it was generally just poorly designed. Passing offense can lose, no one is disputing that and when you're offense doesn't have a capable plan B, C and D you're going to lose against good teams. Passing is more efficient no matter which way you look at it which makes it a more effective philosophy to build around and the Vikings have the personnel to do that but they're stubbornly trying not to be that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Dolmonite26 said: The problem with his offense wasn't that it passed too much. The problem was he didn't know how to use personnel and it was generally just poorly designed. Passing offense can lose, no one is disputing that and when you're offense doesn't have a capable plan B, C and D you're going to lose against good teams. Passing is more efficient no matter which way you look at it which makes it a more effective philosophy to build around and the Vikings have the personnel to do that but they're stubbornly trying not to be that Whichever way you look at it, the Vikings offensive line isn't as good at pass-blocking, therefore, I'm not sure how you can indicate that they're stubbornly trying not to be that. They are putting them in position to succeed based on their current skill level. I think it was clearly evident from the games against the 49ers/Bears/Packers. If they can't pass-block, Cousins doesn't have a chance. Therefore, don't set him to just get killed, ala John DeFilippo, just because you think that's a more effective offense in the NFL today. That's why he got fired. Edited January 27, 2020 by swede700 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolmonite26 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 10 minutes ago, swede700 said: Whichever way you look at it, the Vikings offensive line isn't as good at pass-blocking, therefore, I'm not sure how you can indicate that they're stubbornly trying not to be that. They are putting them in position to succeed based on their current skill level. I think it was clearly evident from the games against the 49ers/Bears/Packers. If they can't pass-block, Cousins doesn't have a chance. Therefore, don't set him to just get killed, ala John DeFilippo, just because you think that's a more effective offense in the NFL today. That's why he got fired. It's a more effective offense, but you also have to actively work to be good at it. Let's remember, this entire discussion is about whether Cook should be signed to a new contract or traded this off-season. If you're answer to the quandry of, "my quarterback doesn't handle pressure well" is to pay a running 10+ million, you need to find a new QB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 Who's to say that they weren't actively working to be good at it? There's only so much work you can do in-season to develop that. Most of the development of offensive linemen comes in the offseason, not in-season...and it's a very short window where they can do so. On your other point, there are very few QBs that handle pressure well...even HOF QBs (see current version of Drew Brees) aren't all that good at it. While I think it's a valid question on whether to pay Cook $10M+, that's only one aspect of the conversation. As I've indicated, I wouldn't pay him any more than $10M, but it's feasible to pay him that amount of money with better development from the current version of the offensive line. Now, if they want to pay him Zeke money, that's a whole different question. I personally don't think (and I'm not sure there is a soul here that would disagree) that would be a great allocation of resources and would certainly be open to criticism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolmonite26 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 It's a lot harder to get better on the line if you're over investing in their running back. Which is the point. Stop being stubborned with the running game (which doesn't mean you abandon it) and work to get better around your qb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 12 minutes ago, Dolmonite26 said: It's a lot harder to get better on the line if you're over investing in their running back. Which is the point. Stop being stubborned with the running game (which doesn't mean you abandon it) and work to get better around your qb No, it's harder to get better on the line if you don't draft well. How much you pay a RB is irrelevant. The Cowboys are example #1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolmonite26 Posted January 27, 2020 Share Posted January 27, 2020 11 minutes ago, swede700 said: No, it's harder to get better on the line if you don't draft well. How much you pay a RB is irrelevant. The Cowboys are example #1. So trade your running back for high draft pick and use the cap savings on FAs... Why is this hard? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 15 hours ago, Dolmonite26 said: So trade your running back for high draft pick and use the cap savings on FAs... Why is this hard? FAs are meant to fill in gaps, not redo your entire team...and tell me the last team that also re-did their entire offensive line through FA and won the Super Bowl? I'm waiting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
babababa Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 (edited) 16 hours ago, Dolmonite26 said: So trade your running back for high draft pick and use the cap savings on FAs... Why is this hard? Because if I'm a quality FA running back I'm not going to sign with the Vikings knowing how you just did Cook and your general attitude regarding running backs -- "shrewd" and "just business" -- making them expendable. Players don't like being used. They like making their own moves. And if you want to encourage a player to fight for you, to work hard, to win a superbowl, you don't want something like this to hit the locker room: https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2859771-lions-darius-slay-says-nobodys-safe-after-quandre-diggs-trade-to-seahawks https://www.prideofdetroit.com/2019/12/9/21002344/quandre-diggs-trade-officially-disaster-detroit-lions I get that maybe you'd rather have just replacement level talent at the position, just don't expect that replacement level talent to want to break any tackles for you. Don't expect that guy to initiate contact with a linebacker, or fight for extra yards. Don't expect that he'll push for that extra yard to get the 1st down. Don't expect him lay it on the line late in the game. Expect him to run out of bounds instead of trying to juke or stiff-arm a safety. Expect him not to play through pain, or work at his game. Most importantly, expect that this running back isn't in the mood to do these things that you would ask of him because he would already feel expendable. Running backs are underpaid on the whole if you consider their useage and what's asked of them. It's not all about what you or analytics deem as value. They take a massive amount of punishment -- more than any other position. Cook laid it on the line for this team and other running backs will see how he's been treated. This article proves the general mood running backs are already in. https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/08/15/effort-emerges-to-create-separate-union-for-running-backs/ Edited January 28, 2020 by babababa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolmonite26 Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 1 hour ago, swede700 said: FAs are meant to fill in gaps, not redo your entire team...and tell me the last team that also re-did their entire offensive line through FA and won the Super Bowl? I'm waiting. good thing I didn't suggest any of this... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywindO2 Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 16 hours ago, Dolmonite26 said: So trade your running back for high draft pick and use the cap savings on FAs... Why is this hard? Because no one is going to trade a high draft pick for a RB when they can just draft one with less mileage with the same draft pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolmonite26 Posted January 28, 2020 Share Posted January 28, 2020 2 minutes ago, skywindO2 said: Because no one is going to trade a high draft pick for a RB when they can just draft one with less mileage with the same draft pick. Maybe, but dont pay him then (I.e. the original reason we're having this discussion) I bet you can get a 3rd or maybe even a 2nd tho Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolmonite26 Posted February 1, 2020 Share Posted February 1, 2020 (edited) On 1/22/2020 at 10:01 AM, Vikes_Bolts1228 said: And I don't expect Zimmer to change is entire philosophy into a two TE type of offense. It's just not what he does. So I'm digging this up since I came across some info regarding it (rather randomly), but the Vikings ran plays with multiple TEs 56.7% of the time, which was second most in the league. Edited February 1, 2020 by Dolmonite26 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolmonite26 Posted February 1, 2020 Share Posted February 1, 2020 On 1/28/2020 at 8:54 AM, babababa said: It's not all about what you or analytics deem as value. They're the second lowest paid position in the game, excluding specialists Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDBrocks Posted February 1, 2020 Share Posted February 1, 2020 I’m curious - which team most recently paid a RB a market setting contract (top 5-7) and has seen sustained team success (winning playoff games) with that player as the focal point of the offense? It’s just not a good allocation of resources with the way the game is played today when you can routinely draft productive talent on day 3. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.