2020 Season Analysis

[Guest]

3 hours ago, swede700 said:

I don't think they are either, but the reality is that the Cowboys haven't won a Super Bowl without Jimmy Johnson or the players he drafted, so the reality is that what Jerry Jones has done hasn't worked either.  The Vikings have been far more competitive and have gotten closer than Jerry has...and without the QBs that Jerry has had.  Therefore, I think what the Vikings have done is better than what Jerry has.  Neither are satisfied, nor should they be, but I'm far more optimistic that the Wilfs' direction is more likely to result in a title than what Jerry has done.  

I wish I could be as optimistic as you.  As Cearbhall says above, the Joneses are trying very, very hard to meet their early success.  It just hasn't worked...badly!  I happen to think for a good many in the Viking organization...being in the playoffs is good enough.  I hate that attitude.  Again, if you don't hold the championship trophy at the end of the season, your season is a failure.

[vikingsrule]

1 hour ago, Cearbhall said:

I have no doubt that some owners of NFL teams are content making profit. As long as the team plays well enough to not hurt their profits they are happy. I do feel like the WIlf's, while being content turning profits, desire more than profit and are willing to do what it takes, to a point, to go beyond winning enough to maximize profits. However, I am not convinced that the Wilf's know what needs to be done. They are still learning.

Fwiw, I also don't think that Jerry Jones knows but he for sure is trying as hard as he can. Figuring out how to bring home a championship is not an easy riddle to solve for NFL owners. I would do a few things different than the Wilf's but I certainly could not guarantee those changes would bring a championship any sooner than the course they are taking.

The Wilfs are in real estate. They got their state of the art stadium from the state. The Vikes sellout regardless and there is profit sharing. I guess I don’t see how a real estate guy from NY is going to have a comparable desire to win as coaches and fans do. The Vikes are a stable, well liked and well run organization that doesn’t usually create bad headlines. That’s the priority above all IMO. Jerry Jones and Al Davis both have/had unbeatable passion for winning, but both seemed to hang on too long in terms of decision making. Doesn’t seem Jones trusts letting others make roster decisions. 

Regular turnover doesn’t help with culture and culture is more important than winning is what I have gathered. Obviously losing doesn’t help with culture either, but as mentioned, the every other year cycle of advancing to the playoffs seems to keep fans and players excited.

Edited January 19, 2021 by vikingsrule

[RpMc]

The Wilfs have spent a boatload of money on guaranteed contracts, signing bonuses, and other “all-in” aspects of winning a championship. To my knowledge, they’ve never turned down a potential player due to them costing too much guaranteed money  

 

Unlike the Davis’ and Jones’ they’re also smart enough to hire football people and not meddle in the player personnel side of the franchise. 
 

frankly, the Wilf’s are everything fans can want in an ownership group. Have they hired the right football people? That remains to be seen, but them staying out of the football side of the business other than cutting checks is as it should be. 

Edited January 19, 2021 by RpMc

[vikesfan89]

2 hours ago, Virginia Viking said:

I wish I could be as optimistic as you.  As Cearbhall says above, the Joneses are trying very, very hard to meet their early success.  It just hasn't worked...badly!  I happen to think for a good many in the Viking organization...being in the playoffs is good enough.  I hate that attitude.  Again, if you don't hold the championship trophy at the end of the season, your season is a failure.

How many failures in a row before you would clean house? Does Stefanski get a couple more years or should he be on the hot seat?

[Guest]

14 hours ago, vikesfan89 said:

How many failures in a row before you would clean house? Does Stefanski get a couple more years or should he be on the hot seat?

Turnover HAS to happen regularly in professional sports and most other aspects of professional life.  Everyone working a job has a shelf life.  Stability can sometimes lead to complacency.  Don't get me wrong.  I like the Wilfs and appreciate what they have done with the stadium, their relationship with Minnesota leaders, and the franchise...except for one small detail.  No Super Bowl appearance or trophy.

What does a head coach tell his players at training camp?  "Our mission is to win the Super Bowl."  If a coach communicates anything less to his players, he should be fired...immediately.  Can you imagine a Lombardi or a Belichick telling his players, "hey, I think we can make .500 this year!" or, "If we play hard, maybe we can make the playoffs."

Now, I am realistic and I know that after every season, there is one winner and 31 failures.  But failing at achieving your ultimate goal should leave a bad taste in your mouth.  You shouldn't like NOT winning the Super Bowl.  I happen to believe that it's not the Wilfs who are responsible for the Vikings winning or losing.  They have put resources towards winning and they have hired football people to get the job done. The responsibility belongs to Spielman, Zimmer and players on the team.  Sooner than later, the Wilfs need to take a look and ask themselves the question..."do we have championship quality people running the team?"  

As one lonely fan speaking only for himself, I am running out of patience.

Edited January 20, 2021 by Guest

[vikesfan89]

4 hours ago, Virginia Viking said:

Turnover HAS to happen regularly in professional sports and most other aspects of professional life.  Everyone working a job has a shelf life.  Stability can sometimes lead to complacency.  Don't get me wrong.  I like the Wilfs and appreciate what they have done with the stadium, their relationship with Minnesota leaders, and the franchise...except for one small detail.  No Super Bowl appearance or trophy.

What does a head coach tell his players at training camp?  "Our mission is to win the Super Bowl."  If a coach communicates anything less to his players, he should be fired...immediately.  Can you imagine a Lombardi or a Belichick telling his players, "hey, I think we can make .500 this year!" or, "If we play hard, maybe we can make the playoffs."

Now, I am realistic and I know that after every season, there is one winner and 31 failures.  But failing at achieving your ultimate goal should leave a bad taste in your mouth.  You shouldn't like NOT winning the Super Bowl.  I happen to believe that it's not the Wilfs who are responsible for the Vikings winning or losing.  They have put resources towards winning and they have hired football people to get the job done. The responsibility belongs to Spielman, Zimmer and players on the team.  Sooner than later, the Wilfs need to take a look and ask themselves the question..."do we have championship quality people running the team?"  

As one lonely fan speaking only for himself, I am running out of patience.

You didn't answer my question.  It seems like a bad business model if the 2nd best gets fired every few years

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, vikesfan89 said:

You didn't answer my question.  It seems like a bad business model if the 2nd best gets fired every few years

I think you are being purposefully obtuse.  I didn't answer the question, because I never, ever suggested that 2nd best should be fired.  I will stand by my opinion that those 31 teams that didn't win the Super Bowl every year finished their season in failure.  You can argue differently if you want.

[vikesfan89]

15 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said:

I think you are being purposefully obtuse.  I didn't answer the question, because I never, ever suggested that 2nd best should be fired.  I will stand by my opinion that those 31 teams that didn't win the Super Bowl every year finished their season in failure.  You can argue differently if you want.

There is different levels of failures and success.  I understand if you want to fire Zimmer but I would like to know how soon you would have.  I refuse to say that the Browns season was a failure

[Guest]

2 hours ago, vikesfan89 said:

There is different levels of failures and success.  I understand if you want to fire Zimmer but I would like to know how soon you would have.  I refuse to say that the Browns season was a failure

Ok.  I am expressing my opinion, and only my opinion.  No, the Browns should not fire Stefanski...they made progress to their goal.  But, if Stefanski learned anything about what NOT to do while working under Zimmer and company, is that pats on the back, declaring it the season a success produces complacency.  I hope Stefanski and the players keep the bad taste of losing to the Chiefs in their mouths and let it drive them to their goal of winning the Super Bowl.  The Browns should not be satisfied.  The Vikings are to satisfied under Zimmer/Spielman to just make the playoffs...every other year.  After the last loss of the year, rather than having Champagne in the locker room as champions, they are cracking open the Listerine so that they put the loss and the season behind them.  The Vikings have fresh breath and no gingivitis, but the also don't have rings.

[Cearbhall]

1 hour ago, Virginia Viking said:

Ok.  I am expressing my opinion, and only my opinion.  No, the Browns should not fire Stefanski...they made progress to their goal.  But, if Stefanski learned anything about what NOT to do while working under Zimmer and company, is that pats on the back, declaring it the season a success produces complacency.  I hope Stefanski and the players keep the bad taste of losing to the Chiefs in their mouths and let it drive them to their goal of winning the Super Bowl.  The Browns should not be satisfied.  The Vikings are to satisfied under Zimmer/Spielman to just make the playoffs...every other year.  After the last loss of the year, rather than having Champagne in the locker room as champions, they are cracking open the Listerine so that they put the loss and the season behind them.  The Vikings have fresh breath and no gingivitis, but the also don't have rings.

Except for on missing 'o', I agree with everything you wrote there and share that opinion. Failing to win a championship is okay as long as continual noticeable improvement towards the goal is being made and the failures are used to motivate a team to do better in the future. Often dynasties start with the bitter taste of playoff defeat that sticks in the craw of the organization and drives it forward. For the Browns sake, I hope that is the direction the go with it.

[Ozzy]

2 hours ago, Virginia Viking said:

Ok.  I am expressing my opinion, and only my opinion.  No, the Browns should not fire Stefanski...they made progress to their goal.  But, if Stefanski learned anything about what NOT to do while working under Zimmer and company, is that pats on the back, declaring it the season a success produces complacency.  I hope Stefanski and the players keep the bad taste of losing to the Chiefs in their mouths and let it drive them to their goal of winning the Super Bowl.  The Browns should not be satisfied.  The Vikings are to satisfied under Zimmer/Spielman to just make the playoffs...every other year.  After the last loss of the year, rather than having Champagne in the locker room as champions, they are cracking open the Listerine so that they put the loss and the season behind them.  The Vikings have fresh breath and no gingivitis, but the also don't have rings.

Who says the Browns should fire Stefanski?

PS Stefanski is not the main reason for their success, he was stable and they need that stability and did great, obviously should not be fired.  But to me the Browns were successful because they have three all pro or Pro bowl level offensive linemen.  Wills was great as a rookie he was not a pro bowler or all pro but did awesome, Conklin and Bitonio were awesome and so was Teller all made either the Pro bowl or all pro teams.  Oh and they have two legit tight ends, two legit running backs and multiple receivers who can play even with OBJ out.  And arguably the best pass rusher in the NFL on D which helps but that offense is about as rock solid as you can get and as talented as you can get.  Personnel is a huge reason for their success.  Give the Vikings that OL and see how they do even with a suspect defense they still would have been awesome.  

But yeah Stefanski obviously should not be fired and not sure who is saying that.  

Not sure the Vikings are "satisfied" to make the playoffs only.  What are they supposed to do, fire every coach or GM every year they do not win a Super bowl?  That is not exactly how you conduct business.  Keeping Zimmer is smart because he deserves at least one more year, not like there are a ton of great candidates out there anyway.  

[Guest]

13 hours ago, Ozzy said:

Not sure the Vikings are "satisfied" to make the playoffs only.  What are they supposed to do, fire every coach or GM every year they do not win a Super bowl?  That is not exactly how you conduct business.  Keeping Zimmer is smart because he deserves at least one more year, not like there are a ton of great candidates out there anyway.  

Where do you see ANY urgency in the Vikings organization?  Where are the bold moves...not necessarily regarding the roster...but changing up schemes on offense and defense?  All/any changes I've noticed have been so subtle as to be negligible.  The Vikings, in my opinion, are a risk averse organization.  I interpret that to mean that they are satisfied with the status quo. 

[SemperFeist]

Why does this team need to change its schemes to signify any type of urgency? 

The Vikings defense has been one of the best in the league for the past 5 years prior to 2020. They had a good deal of turnover and some significant injuries that led to a bad year defensively, but there’s no reason to suggest that changing the scheme would make anything better. 

As for the offense, the team had one of its best years in franchise history. They run a scheme that is the hot commodity in the league right now. Their ratio of run to pass may not be to some people’s liking, but with the players currently on the roster it’s working. And working well. 

I’m curious to know what kind of bold move you’re suggesting? 

[RpMc]

I agree with a lot of you posted @SemperFeist - this year will be the telling year.  Michael Pierce back in the fold, Danielle Hunter hopefully back, Anthony Barr and Eric Kendricks returning from injury, Jeff Gladney and Cam Dantzler with a year under their belt, and likely some more defensive talent added via the draft.

This year is the make or break year for Zimmer as the defensive mastermind.  He should have a few more bullets in the chamber (obviously injuries can happen whenever/wherever, but losing Pierce/Hunter before the season even began hurt a great deal).

If we have a similar defensive year to what we saw during the first and last third of the season, changes will be made.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, SemperFeist said:

 

I’m curious to know what kind of bold move you’re suggesting? 

One would be to adjust scheme or change scheme according to the talent on the roster.  Zimmer is one of those coaches that tries to mold players to his scheme rather than adjusting his scheme to player talents.  Another would be how could the coaching staff embrace unpredictability as a weapon.  The Zimmer defense and the Kubiak offense are predictable.  Andy Reid and Bill Belichick have both been successful in keeping their opponents guessing.