Jump to content

2021 Free Agency Thread NFL/MIN


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, swede700 said:

That's a fair argument to make, especially considering the Chiefs run far more 3-WR sets than the Vikings do...but I just think it's going to be harder to crack that lineup, because the 4th WR in the Chiefs set would get about as many snaps as the 3rd WR would get in the Vikings' lineup and I just think it's easier to crack the Vikings' 3rd WR spot. It's a tough decision either way.   

Absolutely agreed. As a free agent WR, which team represents the convergence between "best" QB situation with the "worst" WR depth chart?

Edited by sinceAtikevike
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/18/2021 at 7:25 AM, TENINCH said:

Shame Shame!!

Sorry.  It's spelt "Cris", right?  I've been seeing the common spelling for 72 years since I've been able to read, so it's not surprising.  Hey, I'm so old I even forgot my OWN name once.  And I sometimes have to refer to my own sister's kids as "your son" and "your daughter", and I often forget what month it is, or what year it is, or why I just walked into a room.  At least, I remember The Vikings' teams from the 1960s and 1970s a lot better than their current roster!  So I'm not going to apologise for forgetting that Carter has an unusual spelling of his first name!

Edited by Robb_K
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/18/2021 at 7:31 AM, SteelKing728 said:

Hmm...well that last name for Evin sure is interesting.

Back to 23&Me I go!

"czyk" is the Polish suffix for "son of".  So, I'm guessing that Ksiezarczyk was derived from what originally meant "Son of The Emperor" or "Son of The Czar, Tsar, or Kaiser".  Maybe his family is descended from The Polish nobility?

Edited by Robb_K
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Robb_K said:

"czyk" is the Polish suffix for "son of".  So, I'm guessing that Ksiezarczyk was derived from what originally meant "Son of The Emperor" or "Son of The Czar or Tsar".  Maybe his family is descended from The Polish nobility?

I was more interested in the "Ksie" part since its similar to my last name, and my last name origins are Polish. There was a Jewish part as well but that goes back quite a few generations.

I have to do more research haha

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Robb_K said:

"czyk" is the Polish suffix for "son of".  So, I'm guessing that Ksiezarczyk was derived from what originally meant "Son of The Emperor" or "Son of The Czar or Tsar".  Maybe his family is descended from The Polish nobility?

It's like when I look through my Family Tree and see a bunch of Karlsdotter or Rasmussen.  🤣

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SteelKing728 said:

I was more interested in the "Ksie" part since its similar to my last name, and my last name origins are Polish. There was a Jewish part as well but that goes back quite a few generations.

I have to do more research haha

 

7 hours ago, SteelKing728 said:

I was more interested in the "Ksie" part since its similar to my last name, and my last name origins are Polish. There was a Jewish part as well but that goes back quite a few generations.

I have to do more research haha

I guessed that the "Ksiezar" portion was a corruption of the German word, "Kaiser", as much of Poland was ruled over by The Kaiser of Prussia, The Tsar(Caesar, Czar, or Kaiser) of Russia, and the Archduke of Austria, who was also The Holy Roman Emperor (and thus, was considered The Kaiser of The entire German Nations, which included Prussia, the rest of Germany, Austria, and much of the Prussian and Austrian territory in Czechoslovakia and Poland).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, swede700 said:

It's like when I look through my Family Tree and see a bunch of Karlsdotter or Rasmussen.  🤣

Ha! Ha!  Probably 95% of the people with any Icelandic ancestry, at all, have some Karlsdotters in their family tree!  🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/18/2021 at 7:40 AM, TENINCH said:

Yeah I just had to give him a hard time. I think Cris is a silly way to spell his name. 😁

Personally, I think "Cris" is a far better way to spell the shortening of Christopher, and using silent letters to keep 1000 year old spellings, when specific languages were very different-sounding, makes no sense.  Does the spelling of the word, "enough" make sense?  Why don't the government official spelling authorities in the English speaking countries change their official word spellings to the way people speak, at least every 100 years or so.  I'm only in my 70s, but the English language (in Canada, USA, and Britain) has changed very much from when I was a child until it has become almost unrecognisable.  In The Netherlands and Denmark (2 of the three countries where I reside), we made widespread changes in official word spellings to match the way we speak, during the late 1940s (when I was a child).  In Germany, I seem to remember during the mid 1950s or so, they officially changed some word spellings (but not so comprehensive as the Dutch and Danish overhauls.  But it's a LOT more practical to spell phonetically, than to spell words that try to use current letters to represent sounds that haven't existed in the language in question for over 1000 years.  A Dutchman could understand those Old English words much better than an English speaker.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

We, in America, like to change the words and spelling of words, just to rebel against the tyranny of those Brits.  Go to bleep, Queen Liz!  Take your defence,  I like curvy things, so I'm making the C a S instead.    😅

Edited by swede700
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SemperFeist said:

This would be a solid addition. Hope it happens. 

That feels like a problem to have three going to be FA CBs on the roster since nobody likely is signing multi year deals at this point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, solidvikingfan said:

That feels like a problem to have three going to be FA CBs on the roster since nobody likely is signing multi year deals at this point.

It doesn’t really change anything. Before Hughes was traded he was expected to be solid depth, entering the final year of his contract. If they sign Breeland to a one year deal, it puts the team in the same situation. Except with Breeland, the team would likely be getting an upgrade as he’s is a known commodity, and solid veteran. Whereas Hughes was still potential that the team was waiting/hoping on. 

Edited by SemperFeist
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/20/2021 at 9:19 AM, swede700 said:

It's like when I look through my Family Tree and see a bunch of Karlsdotter or Rasmussen.  🤣

With family names like that its no wonder you're a Vikings fan! Haha

I don't want to hijack the thread though so I apologize for getting us off track.

I really want Larry Fitzgerald to be a Viking.

Breeland was a former Packer lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, SteelKing728 said:

With family names like that its no wonder you're a Vikings fan! Haha

I don't want to hijack the thread though so I apologize for getting us off track.

I really want Larry Fitzgerald to be a Viking.

Breeland was a former Packer lol

It was just destined.  

To me, Fitzgerald would be a bonus, Breeland is more of a need, since they are going to need some more veteran depth at CB...yes, he was a Packer, but it was only for a year and only for 7 games...it hardly counts.

  • Like 1
Link to post
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...