05-03-2013, 12:15 PM #101
i've been reading up on a few things about our 5th round Punter/Kicker pick.
I'm sure there is some weight to the off the field things, but I wouldn't say this was as much a personal assault on Kluwe as people mention, but more of a we need more stability in a position. They weighed their options, and picked up someone that will cost a lot less, open some space up cap wise, and has from what i've been reading more upside then our current punter. Also.. we weren't the only team to pick up a P or K in that round..
1. Left footed, there really is a difference in the action of the ball from the spin and direction. This might cause some.. special team snafou's until people get used to it, or each team will bring in a left footed kicker to practice before playing us.
2. The kid can handle kickoffs.. and do it with success! he's proven he can get touchbacks, and lets say (knock on wood) that something happens to walsh.. you think Kluwe can get touchbacks?
3. one of the points i've really noticed now that Dad brought it up to me is this kid has handled FG holding, and done so with a solid consistency. This is one of the things that worried me if we show Kluwe the door. he's also done this with solid performance.
4. I seems to remember after one game Pfeifert came out and mentioned an issue with the days punting because they had asked Kluwe to be more directional in the punts, and he was kinda having a hard time adjusting to it. This kid actually has been doing just that and with success.
now.. i'm not on the staff, i'm not a coach.. so i can't say that this is any way fact, but it seems to me that all in all, this kid has more upside then our current punter, and all in all.. doesn't that make the team better? Seems to me this was a good pick up, would he been there later? maybe.. but.. if we can upgrade the roster.. should we risk it?
I've always like Kluwe, i think he's a good punter and i'm sure we'll get some trade value out of him, if not he'll be picked up by someone if we do let him go.
"We tried to stick with it, but there was a point where we were beating our head against a wall," Seattle Coach Mora talking about running at the Williams Wall
05-03-2013, 12:58 PM #102
I think maybe some of ya'all, Kevon, are missing the big picture, as in there's more to the story on every one of these picks than what lies at the surface...
Floyd improves our rotation immediately, but more importantly, also fills a future need, as it is very unlikely we keep KWill and Allen next year when their contracts run out. My guess, barring some major injuries or drastic change in play, is that we go younger and more affordable, ie, we're likely to keep E-Griff and Robison while letting KW and JA test the market, and maybe we can afford to match with one of them, but most likely not both.
Rhodes might be the gem of this draft. Big, fast, physical paired with Cook gives us two guys who can cover a big WR outside. And, he hits hard vs. the run game too. We're probably going to be a bit softer in the middle without Winfield, but we do have some young talent to develop there. The biggest thing here, is that we play more nickel than base 4-3 anyway, so Rhodes is a bigger need than Te'o at MLB, and improving our pass D is more needed than improving our Run D. I see Rhodes as a better pick than every MLB in this draft.
I don't like what the Patsies did in rounds 2-4 because we're stuck comparing our one blue chip prospect to their 2 WRs, 1 early OLB, and a CB...and they have too good of a draft record. But, the thing is, CP does everything Harvin does and well, and at 3" taller and another 30 lbs of muscle, filling a major offseason loss to more than one position: KR, PR, WR & RB! And, as much as I wanted a Swope, Stills, Boyce added to the roster in mid rounds, we do run a lot more 2 TE sets than 3 WO, so I can see that the position is devalued a bit in our offense.
We needed a LB and we brought in two from "Linebacker U." We're very likely to see Erin move inside and Hodges start at the Will, but, as mentioned, we're going to see 3 CBs on the field more than 3 LBs anyway and Hodges is just as fast as Te'o. Not bad. Mauti is like Childs, a gamble. If he gets healthy, he could very well be an immediate 7th round starter, but, unfortunately, that's not very likely with his injury history.
Blaming the Punter pick on Kluwe's comments is blind-sighted. His best net average of his career was only good for 17th in the league, and when it comes to accuracy and pinning a team deep, he was 31st last season. I see Locke as an important improvement to our under rated Special Teams that are even more important on our grind it out, clock eating, field position ball team than most.
The two big OL guys are both versatile players who might improve our run blocking in the middle and our other 7th rounders are all good gambles on guys who could be steals that late, or just be hurt. Not bad, not bad at all.
In short, we filled all our major needs and added competition at other spots, and the three biggest ones with top-notch, blue-chip prospects. We also provided proof that we aim to remain a top defensive team that is focused on feeding Peterson the ball and giving him every oppurtunity for legendary success. YES!! SKOL VIKINGS!! GREAT DRAFT!!Control the line, control the time, and give your D a chance to shine!!
"Balance it on end and thats the third side of the coin!!" -wookiefoot
05-03-2013, 03:22 PM #103Rookie
- Join Date
- Feb 2013
Great post Mountainviking, agree with everything you said. I think people are going to be very happy with our pass defense this year with the corner duo we have if they both can stay on the field.
05-03-2013, 04:27 PM #104
05-03-2013, 06:12 PM #105Rookie
- Join Date
- Feb 2013
05-04-2013, 10:16 AM #106
05-04-2013, 07:59 PM #109
To be frank! You take what the defense gives you and by thinking we have enough wrs because we have Greg ( who has been hurt), Simpson (who has been hurt and non productive) Childs (who is hurt) Wright ( who has shown potential to be an average wr (i.e 800 yards a season) and Patterson (who most are saying is a weapon not a WR..not sure i agree with that..) Our corp is looking shakey to start. If one of those guys go down...we are screwed and the season is lost.
Remember it took Adrian Peterson best season ever to barely make the playoffs.
Yeah, well in 1998 we were throwing the ball like no other team in the history of the NFL tyo that point and we didn't put a trophy in the case. And we also had Robert Smith and could certainly run the ball with him. But we also had no secondary and a defense that was a shell of itself compared to what it was when Denny Green took over. A few years later Culpepper threw for 4700 yards and 39 TD's and we didn't put a trophy in the case.
If you are going to sit there and focus on the WR position and piss and moan about it without recognizing they are making the whole roster more balanced than it has been since the early 90's then knock yourself out. But the fact of the matter is we have enough talent at the wr position to get the job done, especially with the talent we have at TE and RB to balance it out. And isn't that what you want? Balance? We have a really good FA that we brought in, a second year guy we are developing, a deep threat that had injury problems last year that is healthy this year and a first round field stretcher. Then we have an up and coming TE, a pro bowl FB and a future HOF RB.
That is plenty of firepower to get the job done and the fact that we are upgrading talent on defense at the same time is only going to help things.