Old Guy Posted August 11 Author Share Posted August 11 (edited) QB: Love - Pratt RB: Jacobs - Dillon - Wilson - (Lloyd to IR makes sense at this point will need a 4th RB at some point in the season) TE: Musgrave - Kraft - Sims - Davis WR: Watson - Doubs - Reed - Wicks - Heath - Dubose (hardest cut is WR 7/Melton) OL: Walker - Jenkins - Myers - Morgan - Tom - Rhyan - Monk - Glover - Want a vet here. Nobody on roster seems worthy. Offense: 24 DE: Smith - Gary - Enagbare - LVN - Cox (5th DE spot is still wide open) DT: Clarke - Wyatt - Slaton - Brooks - Wooden (this one seems pretty easy) LB: Walker - McDuffie - Cooper - Hopper - Wilson CB: Alexander - Stokes - Valentine - Nixon - Rochelle - King (could keep Ballentine here as 7 but would only keep 4 safeties then. I don't see that happening. S: McKinney - Williams - Bullard - Oladapo - AJJ Defense: 26 Specials: K: Carlson P: Whelan LS: Orzech Specials: 3 Edited August 12 by Old Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 Quote Post-Week 1 Prediction QB: Love / Clifford / (Pratt - PS) [2/2] RB: Jacobs / Dillon / Wilson / (Lloyd - IR) [3/5] TE: Musgrave / Kraft / Sims / Davis [4/9] WR: Watson / Doubs / Reed / Wicks / Melton / DuBose [6/15] OL: Walker / Jenkins / Myers / Morgan / Tom / Rhyan / Monk / Dillard [8/23] DL: Clark / Slaton / Wyatt / Wooden / Brooks [5/28] EDGE: Gary / Smith / LVN / Enagbare / Cox [5/33] LB: Walker / McDuffie / Wilson / Cooper / Welch / Hopper [6/39] CB: Alexander / Stokes / Valentine / Nixon / Rochelle / King [6/45] S: McKinney / Bullard / Williams / Olapdo / AJJ [5/50] K: Carlson P: Whalen LS: Orzech [53/53] That still leaves 1 empty roster spot. One will almost certainly go to a 9th OL. That could free up a 7th spot for a WR by either moving off of Tyler Davis or Welch. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted August 11 Author Share Posted August 11 (edited) 25 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Post-Week 1 Prediction QB: Love / Clifford / (Pratt - PS) [2/2] RB: Jacobs / Dillon / Wilson / (Lloyd - IR) [3/5] TE: Musgrave / Kraft / Sims / Davis [4/9] WR: Watson / Doubs / Reed / Wicks / Melton / DuBose [6/15] OL: Walker / Jenkins / Myers / Morgan / Tom / Rhyan / Monk / Dillard [8/23] DL: Clark / Slaton / Wyatt / Wooden / Brooks [5/28] EDGE: Gary / Smith / LVN / Enagbare / Cox [5/33] LB: Walker / McDuffie / Wilson / Cooper / Welch / Hopper [6/39] CB: Alexander / Stokes / Valentine / Nixon / Rochelle / King [6/45] S: McKinney / Bullard / Williams / Olapdo / AJJ [5/50] K: Carlson P: Whalen LS: Orzech [53/53] That still leaves 1 empty roster spot. One will almost certainly go to a 9th OL. That could free up a 7th spot for a WR by either moving off of Tyler Davis or Welch. What leaves one empty roster spot? You have 53. If you go to a 9th offensive lineman that gets you to 54. Edited August 11 by Old Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uffdaswede Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 (edited) 1 hour ago, Old Guy said: What leaves one empty roster spot? You have 53. If you go to a 9th offensive lineman that gets you to 54. I figure this is the sort of stuff you hear in the Vikings front office. Run the numbers again. Edited August 11 by Uffdaswede Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R T Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 Must remember that multiplication and division must come before any addition or subtraction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted August 11 Share Posted August 11 1 hour ago, Old Guy said: What leaves one empty roster spot? You have 53. If you go to a 9th offensive lineman that gets you to 54. You're right. This lack of sleep with a newborn has made my brain fried. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted August 11 Author Share Posted August 11 1 minute ago, CWood21 said: You're right. This lack of sleep with a newborn has made my brain fried. Congrats on the newborn. Hope everybody is healthy and doing well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 Yeah, congratulations, that's awesome! Number one, or higher? Very awesome to see a new person born and grow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 I have no idea what Gute will end up doing. Really appreciate the roster projections and discussion. thanks, guys. Two naive thoughts: OL: Do we really need 9, given the names at the back? Have seen a lot of projections with 9 OL, including names from the Monk, Glover, Jennings, Dillard type pool of guys. I understand there have been years when we've kept 10; that injuries are prolific for OL; and that you want depth, etc. But, given the actual guys that we're looking at, do we really need to keep 9? 8th and 9th guys never play till multiple injuries (perish the though); and never do ST. So those are strictly injury-contingency and development for future years. Or am I wrong there, do 8th or 9th guys get game-active for Field-Goal kicking, or something? 2nd, are any of these 8th/9th guys at any risk of pluck? Like Tenuta, Tellford, Jones, is anybody hungering to claim guys like that who aren't that young and upside-ish anyway? Dillard? Injured Glover and Jennings? I assume Monk sticks, because 5th rounders always do. But yeah, it seems to me we could easily go with 8, risk nobody to pluck, and save a spot for somebody at a different position with upside and/or ST. ST: From the discussions, I know this will sound dumb and naive, but I don't really want to sacrifice some upside young player who might become a functional or excellent snaps player down the road, for ST-only guys. Draft and acquire smart young talent, and train guys who are athletic and instinctive enough to have snaps upside to play ST. The new kickoff rules make it all new for everybody anyway. I also think there is space to compromise ST a little. Do we need to cut a handful of smart, promising upside guys who might become really significant snaps players in time, so that we can kickoff-average to the 29.2 yard-line versus just end-zoning it and letting them start at the 30? The slim advantage of dedicating loads of personnel resources and gobs of practice time may not justify the cost? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zycho32 Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 14 minutes ago, craig said: I have no idea what Gute will end up doing. Really appreciate the roster projections and discussion. thanks, guys. Two naive thoughts: OL: Do we really need 9, given the names at the back? Have seen a lot of projections with 9 OL, including names from the Monk, Glover, Jennings, Dillard type pool of guys. I understand there have been years when we've kept 10; that injuries are prolific for OL; and that you want depth, etc. But, given the actual guys that we're looking at, do we really need to keep 9? 8th and 9th guys never play till multiple injuries (perish the though); and never do ST. So those are strictly injury-contingency and development for future years. Or am I wrong there, do 8th or 9th guys get game-active for Field-Goal kicking, or something? 2nd, are any of these 8th/9th guys at any risk of pluck? Like Tenuta, Tellford, Jones, is anybody hungering to claim guys like that who aren't that young and upside-ish anyway? Dillard? Injured Glover and Jennings? I assume Monk sticks, because 5th rounders always do. But yeah, it seems to me we could easily go with 8, risk nobody to pluck, and save a spot for somebody at a different position with upside and/or ST. ST: From the discussions, I know this will sound dumb and naive, but I don't really want to sacrifice some upside young player who might become a functional or excellent snaps player down the road, for ST-only guys. Draft and acquire smart young talent, and train guys who are athletic and instinctive enough to have snaps upside to play ST. The new kickoff rules make it all new for everybody anyway. I also think there is space to compromise ST a little. Do we need to cut a handful of smart, promising upside guys who might become really significant snaps players in time, so that we can kickoff-average to the 29.2 yard-line versus just end-zoning it and letting them start at the 30? The slim advantage of dedicating loads of personnel resources and gobs of practice time may not justify the cost? 1. On the placekicking units, in general there are four OL flanking the Long Snapper, while the two 'wing' players on either side of those five tend to be some combination of TE/LB/DE/FB. We've seen hilarious instances where a big boy(Tyler Lancaster, as an example) was put onto a wing position, but in general, it's the 'medium' sized guys that deal with the extreme edge rushes. You could technically play four backups in those 'OL' spots, but that leads itself towards personal preference. An OL that actually merits ST notice is usually an especially tall and long-limbed man that can actually block placekicks on defense(Yosh Nijman did such a thing for us last year, and we certainly have enough tall boys that might merit it). 2. It's a little funny to say this after years and years of utterly lackluster performance on both sides of the ST Units. But, taking the matter seriously, the inclusion of pure 'ST'sters tends to result from a lack of bottom-half depth, which, to be fair, we've grappled with during the Twilight Rodgers years. Once you boost the overall depth of your 53(or really just your 46), such guys tend to fall by the wayside unless they are exceptionally good in their role. To that end, you probably will see the reduction on such players from our units this season. Davis is the surest mainstay of this group if only because of the H-Back role. Zayne will probably be scratched. Wilson might cling to the tail end of the 53(the D sure aligned more or less the same as the 2-4 Barry used, meaning PT for ILB might be scarce beyond three guys). Gunners still hold value on Punting units, so the likes of a Rochon and Ballentine still have a fighting chance. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Zycho32 said: 1. On the placekicking units, in general there are four OL flanking the Long Snapper, while the two 'wing' players on either side of those five tend to be some combination of TE/LB/DE/FB. We've seen hilarious instances where a big boy(Tyler Lancaster, as an example) was put onto a wing position, but in general, it's the 'medium' sized guys that deal with the extreme edge rushes. You could technically play four backups in those 'OL' spots, but that leads itself towards personal preference. An OL that actually merits ST notice is usually an especially tall and long-limbed man that can actually block placekicks on defense(Yosh Nijman did such a thing for us last year, and we certainly have enough tall boys that might merit it). .... Thanks, Zycho. Four Q: In practice, does playing place-kick OL need tons of practice? Like, could a starter like Walker or Morgan play it? Or if you use 4 guys from your top 7 or 8, would that be problematic? How does ST practice jive with offense and defense practice? ST always involves at least some guys who aren't ST-only guys. Does ST practice after O and D practices are over, or how does that work? How many OL are usually on game-day? 7? 8? Does that perhaps necessitate that one of the four OL needs to be a starting OL who actually plays snaps, too? Or do they just game-day 9 OL so that the four backups can do the place-kicking? If you have an OL who won't be game-day anyway, is there any reason to keep him on the 53 unless he's a promising developmental guy who you fear getting poached? Edited August 12 by craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Guy Posted August 12 Author Share Posted August 12 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Zycho32 said: 1. On the placekicking units, in general there are four OL flanking the Long Snapper, while the two 'wing' players on either side of those five tend to be some combination of TE/LB/DE/FB. This is a great point with one caveat. We only dress 8 offensive lineman on gameday. I think Craig's point is pretty good. Currently, do we really have 9 guys that deserve to be on the roster? I'd say, no! Could we sneak a couple of the young guys onto the practice squad? I don't know the answer to this but would surmise that answer is a yes. There are two positions we still need on this team if we are thinking Super Bowl IMO, for whatever that is worth. We need a vet back-up QB and a vet utility offensive lineman who is at least decent. My Connor Williams dream went to Seattle. I don't know who else is out there. Sign up Tannehill, if we can get him cheap. Cut Clifford and put Pratt on the practice squad. Edited August 12 by Old Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zycho32 Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 11 minutes ago, craig said: Thanks, Zycho. Four Q: In practice, does playing place-kick OL need tons of practice? Like, could a starter like Walker or Morgan play it? Or if you use 4 guys from your top 7 or 8, would that be problematic? How does ST practice jive with offense and defense practice? ST always involves at least some guys who aren't ST-only guys. Does ST practice after O and D practices are over, or how does that work? How many OL are usually on game-day? 7? 8? Does that perhaps necessitate that one of the four OL needs to be a starting OL who actually plays snaps, too? Or do they just game-day 9 OL so that the four backups can do the place-kicking? If you have an OL who won't be game-day anyway, is there any reason to keep him on the 53 unless he's a promising developmental guy who you fear getting poached? 1. 4 starting OL tend to be the default, with only the center being excluded. It's essentially one extra snap of PT in a drive(defending a placekick has the same default philosophy with the starting D, unless you have some real specialists you can sub in for that unit). 2. I'm honestly not privy to what exactly transpires for ST practice, as I have really only seen actual practices twice in my lifetime. 3. This is kinda rendered moot by four starters being the default in question 1, but as far as deviations from said default go, you'd have to factor in things such as the age and wear of the starters in question- a fifteen-year veteran tackle, for instance, would be someone you'd probably think about spelling from placekicking duty, and likewise for someone just coming back from an injury. If you have to have nine active OL, then you probably have an extremely old and/or hurt unit overall... or your bottom rung on that totem pole has an indispensable talent you can use on ST(ie. those kick blockers). 4. The only other qualifying factor I can think of(and I say 'qualifying' loosely because I'm not sure it's even possible) would be a clear-cut starter that's come back form an injury but for some reason or another you can't put on some kind of PUP list. Apart from that, it would just be developmental guys that you're sure will be picked up at some point. Was Caleb Jones one such individual this past season or so? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 (edited) Thanks. If the 4 starters are doing it anyway, then zero st impact on 8th/9th ol spots for roster Edited August 12 by craig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted August 12 Share Posted August 12 19 hours ago, CWood21 said: Post-Week 1 Prediction QB: Love / Clifford / (Pratt - PS) [2/2] RB: Jacobs / Dillon / Wilson / (Lloyd - IR) [3/5] TE: Musgrave / Kraft / Sims / Davis [4/9] WR: Watson / Doubs / Reed / Wicks / Melton / DuBose [6/15] OL: Walker / Jenkins / Myers / Morgan / Tom / Rhyan / Monk / Dillard [8/23] DL: Clark / Slaton / Wyatt / Wooden / Brooks [5/28] EDGE: Gary / Smith / LVN / Enagbare / Cox [5/33] LB: Walker / McDuffie / Wilson / Cooper / Welch / Hopper [6/39] CB: Alexander / Stokes / Valentine / Nixon / Rochelle / King [6/45] S: McKinney / Bullard / Williams / Olapdo / AJJ [5/50] K: Carlson P: Whalen LS: Orzech [53/53] That still leaves 1 empty roster spot. One will almost certainly go to a 9th OL. That could free up a 7th spot for a WR by either moving off of Tyler Davis or Welch. Personally, I'm not keeping Welch as ST/LB 6 over Corey Ballentine, who gives me a lot more on defense, as well as being a ST player. Ballentine is arguably our No. 4 cover CB on the team, and is ahead of King right now (and probably Rochell) so if King makes it as CB 7, I'd bounce Welch to the PS. 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.