Jump to content

Valhalla Villager: News, Rumors and Gossip


Heimdallr

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, Heavydan85 said:

I guess i just never saw a realistic oline option in free agency (maybe paradis) at least not as a starter.  I maybe saw some backups and we can still get that type. 

Personally i am fine teams knowing we need an oline or two in the draft. I went into the offseason assuming the goal to be keep most of our keu players minus richardson or barr.  And sign near min. deals on a few place holders that hopefully turn into key backups.  I fully expected oline to wait til the draft to be "fixed"

Not signing Barr and getting saffold for example, would have still left a hole in the oline, but realistically also one at lb, still 2 holes. Still needing 2 hits in the draft. 

This is the plan i expected and wanted, with how many oline i like in this draft and how few i disliked in free agency.  

I guess the notion of being able to hit on two sure fire starting rookie guards in one draft makes me more than a little concerned.  I'm not saying that it couldn't happen, rather, it's highly unlikely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, swede700 said:

Agreed.  I'm fine with them just giving him the opportunity to be the primary backup.  If Cousins gets injured, they're probably screwed even if they brought in a "veteran" backup, with who's left in the marketplace. 

Sam Bradford?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said:

I guess the notion of being able to hit on two sure fire starting rookie guards in one draft makes me more than a little concerned.  I'm not saying that it couldn't happen, rather, it's highly unlikely.

I agree, but the only way to really have made that not an issue would be to trade Waynes and assume that Hughes can start. Basically with the cap space, we were always going to need two rookies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PrplChilPill said:

The failure was in previous years. 

I can understand that point of view.  It is more the "we should ruin a strength to maybe make a weakness slightly less of a weakness" opinions.  

If we hit on even one more oline recently we'd be going in with a need for 1 and most would say that is reasonable. So i get it.  We havent so going into this offseason i have thought the vikings would always take 2 oline by the 4th and maybe a 3rd late rounder.  Is it a perfect strategy? No but this is what the cap does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Gnat said:

I agree, but the only way to really have made that not an issue would be to trade Waynes and assume that Hughes can start. Basically with the cap space, we were always going to need two rookies.

I would rather be counting on Hughes to start or Eric Wilson to start than relaying on Danny Isidora and a tackle to fill the two starting guard positions. The Rick didn't have a guard available that he wanted instead. That is very poor planning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, swede700 said:

 

Interesting. I knew that it was common for these conversions to take place and agreed to do them up to yearly, but I didn't know it was actually baked into the contracts putting players in breach that refuse. Generally, it is good for players anyway so I always assumed they just agreed because it was good for them.  Now we know they are often times also contractually obligated. That is good info.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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...