Thread: Today’s topic: Offensive line

"kevoncox" wrote:

"jkjuggalo" wrote:

"kevoncox" wrote:

"UffDaVikes" wrote:

Bolstering the offensive line should be the Vikings’ next order of business.

No, it should be their first order of business. You always build the line first, then the skill positions if you want to be successful

A good line with no skill plays nets you no wins as well. You build skills first. An OL can come in and play within a year. t typically takes skill players 2-3 years to reach their prime.

Of course you have to have both to be competitive, but without some studs in the trenches, a team would not be able to do anything on offense or defense.
That is why we just spent over 70 million on a DE.
Since you admitted that an Olineman can come in and play within a year, are you ready to concede that BMac should be traded for some picks now?

Why would we trade our 2nd Best Line Man?
Honestly, here are reason's we won't trade/ cut Mac...

His contract is too heavy for us to get rid of. He signed an extension in 2006 for 7 years. His contract was stacked with 17 million in guaranteed money. If we find the average, we are looking at 5 million already being given to him. That leave apprx 12 million still owed. If we cut him or trade him...we are still responsible for this....No we will not move him.

Can't the team that you are trading with take responsibility for that guaranteed money as part of the deal?
Is that against the rules?

I know that you can take cap penalties for trading players, but I didn't know that we would be responsible for all the guaranteed money if you trade them.

"kevoncox" wrote:

"jkjuggalo" wrote:

"kevoncox" wrote:

"UffDaVikes" wrote:

Bolstering the offensive line should be the Vikings’ next order of business.

No, it should be their first order of business. You always build the line first, then the skill positions if you want to be successful

A good line with no skill plays nets you no wins as well. You build skills first. An OL can come in and play within a year. t typically takes skill players 2-3 years to reach their prime.

Of course you have to have both to be competitive, but without some studs in the trenches, a team would not be able to do anything on offense or defense.
That is why we just spent over 70 million on a DE.
Since you admitted that an Olineman can come in and play within a year, are you ready to concede that BMac should be traded for some picks now?

Why would we trade our 2nd Best Line Man?
Honestly, here are reason's we won't trade/ cut Mac...

His contract is too heavy for us to get rid of. He signed an extension in 2006 for 7 years. His contract was stacked with 17 million in guaranteed money. If we find the average, we are looking at 5 million already being given to him. That leave apprx 12 million still owed. If we cut him or trade him...we are still responsible for this....No we will not move him.

What makes you so sure that there wasn't a stipulation in his contract that says"If you are ever suspended or miss games because of an off the field incident your contract can be declared null and void"?

"Chazz" wrote:

"kevoncox" wrote:

"jkjuggalo" wrote:

"kevoncox" wrote:

"UffDaVikes" wrote:

Bolstering the offensive line should be the Vikings’ next order of business.

No, it should be their first order of business. You always build the line first, then the skill positions if you want to be successful

A good line with no skill plays nets you no wins as well. You build skills first. An OL can come in and play within a year. t typically takes skill players 2-3 years to reach their prime.

Of course you have to have both to be competitive, but without some studs in the trenches, a team would not be able to do anything on offense or defense.
That is why we just spent over 70 million on a DE.
Since you admitted that an Olineman can come in and play within a year, are you ready to concede that BMac should be traded for some picks now?

Why would we trade our 2nd Best Line Man?
Honestly, here are reason's we won't trade/ cut Mac...

His contract is too heavy for us to get rid of. He signed an extension in 2006 for 7 years. His contract was stacked with 17 million in guaranteed money. If we find the average, we are looking at 5 million already being given to him. That leave apprx 12 million still owed. If we cut him or trade him...we are still responsible for this....No we will not move him.

What makes you so sure that there wasn't a stipulation in his contract that says"If you are ever suspended or miss games because of an off the field incident your contract can be declared null and void"?

Said contracts are typically made known to the media. I.e....Allen's guareenteed money is only for injuries....If he is cut due to suspension...we do not owe him anything for 2009 and 2010. I'm sure the media would have been all over Mac's contract. Mac will be with us, which isn't a bad thing. What would have happened if the Cheifs quit on Allen after the 1 or 2nd DUI? The gave him another chance and he still screwed up for the 3rd time in 4 years. I say give Mac another chance to right his ship. This maybe what he needed to straighten up and WE STILL HAVEN'T HEARD HIS SIDE OF THE STORY.

I think we should get a couple tackles in the draft, We defiantly need to keep Mckinnie because he is still a great LT and protecting the QB's backside is a very important role.
We dont know what his suspension is so we cant say we need to replace him yet.
Im not sold on Cook as our right tackle either.
getting a tackle that could play both sides would be ideal because he could play on the left side if Mckinnie is suspended and then move over to the right side if Cook plays poorly.

"P.P.E." wrote:

I think we should get a couple tackles in the draft, We defiantly need to keep Mckinnie because he is still a great LT and protecting the QB's backside is a very important role.
We dont know what his suspension is so we cant say we need to replace him yet.
Im not sold on Cook as our right tackle either.
getting a tackle that could play both sides would be ideal because he could play on the left side if Mckinnie is suspended and then move over to the right side if Cook plays poorly.

A back up LT isn't a bad idea.

"P.P.E." wrote:

I think we should get a couple tackles in the draft, We defiantly need to keep Mckinnie because he is still a great LT and protecting the QB's backside is a very important role.
We dont know what his suspension is so we cant say we need to replace him yet.
Im not sold on Cook as our right tackle either.
getting a tackle that could play both sides would be ideal because he could play on the left side if Mckinnie is suspended and then move over to the right side if Cook plays poorly.

I didn't see much protection of our QB's blind sides in the last 2 years. That is the point.
Is he a great run blocker? I think so. Did he do a good job of pass blocking in the old scheme? I think so. Has he made a good transition to the new blocking scheme? No, not really.

"UffDaVikes" wrote:

"P.P.E." wrote:

I think we should get a couple tackles in the draft, We defiantly need to keep Mckinnie because he is still a great LT and protecting the QB's backside is a very important role.
We dont know what his suspension is so we cant say we need to replace him yet.
Im not sold on Cook as our right tackle either.
getting a tackle that could play both sides would be ideal because he could play on the left side if Mckinnie is suspended and then move over to the right side if Cook plays poorly.

I didn't see much protection of our QB's blind sides in the last 2 years. That is the point.
Is he a great run blocker? I think so. Did he do a good job of pass blocking in the old scheme? I think so. Has he made a good transition to the new blocking scheme? No, not really.

I think he has. However, no one gives him/the oline credit for keeping the multitude of blitzes off our QB. Our Qb play was terrible late lastyear. Bears games, Skins game, 49ers game. The fronts that we faced, i don't think any other team faced las year. The pressure that Mac and these guys faced were compounded by the bad throws, slow reads, and bad descisions of a young Qb. You can't have your O-Line block 8 defenders all day. I think we are fooling ourselves on how rare a domiant Lt is in this league and we should be thankful for what we have. We won't upgrade a sup par QB but we want our LT to not just be great but be the best.

"kevoncox" wrote:

"UffDaVikes" wrote:

"P.P.E." wrote:

I think we should get a couple tackles in the draft, We defiantly need to keep Mckinnie because he is still a great LT and protecting the QB's backside is a very important role.
We dont know what his suspension is so we cant say we need to replace him yet.
Im not sold on Cook as our right tackle either.
getting a tackle that could play both sides would be ideal because he could play on the left side if Mckinnie is suspended and then move over to the right side if Cook plays poorly.

I didn't see much protection of our QB's blind sides in the last 2 years. That is the point.
Is he a great run blocker? I think so. Did he do a good job of pass blocking in the old scheme? I think so. Has he made a good transition to the new blocking scheme? No, not really.

I think he has. However, no one gives him/the oline credit for keeping the multitude of blitzes off our QB. Our Qb play was terrible late lastyear. Bears games, Skins game, 49ers game. The fronts that we faced, i don't think any other team faced las year. The pressure that Mac and these guys faced were compounded by the bad throws, slow reads, and bad descisions of a young Qb. You can't have your O-Line block 8 defenders all day. I think we are fooling ourselves on how rare a domiant Lt is in this league and we should be thankful for what we have. We won't upgrade a sup par QB but we want our LT to not just be great but be the best.

one of the few passes i agree with you 100%.
Its hard to protect your qb when you have 2 different guys coming right at you.
Add to the fact that TJ takes a while to make his reads, AD and Shank are poor in pass blocking, and you can't really expect too much more out of our Line.
We've got Youth and inexperience on the right side as well.

"i_bleed_purple" wrote:

"kevoncox" wrote:

"UffDaVikes" wrote:

"P.P.E." wrote:

I think we should get a couple tackles in the draft, We defiantly need to keep Mckinnie because he is still a great LT and protecting the QB's backside is a very important role.
We dont know what his suspension is so we cant say we need to replace him yet.
Im not sold on Cook as our right tackle either.
getting a tackle that could play both sides would be ideal because he could play on the left side if Mckinnie is suspended and then move over to the right side if Cook plays poorly.

I didn't see much protection of our QB's blind sides in the last 2 years. That is the point.
Is he a great run blocker? I think so. Did he do a good job of pass blocking in the old scheme? I think so. Has he made a good transition to the new blocking scheme? No, not really.

I think he has. However, no one gives him/the oline credit for keeping the multitude of blitzes off our QB. Our Qb play was terrible late lastyear. Bears games, Skins game, 49ers game. The fronts that we faced, i don't think any other team faced las year. The pressure that Mac and these guys faced were compounded by the bad throws, slow reads, and bad descisions of a young Qb. You can't have your O-Line block 8 defenders all day. I think we are fooling ourselves on how rare a domiant Lt is in this league and we should be thankful for what we have. We won't upgrade a sup par QB but we want our LT to not just be great but be the best.

one of the few passes i agree with you 100%.
Its hard to protect your qb when you have 2 different guys coming right at you.
Add to the fact that TJ takes a while to make his reads, AD and Shank are poor in pass blocking, and you can't really expect too much more out of our Line.
We've got Youth and inexperience on the right side as well.

I think Mac is essentially only good for run blocking. It is hard to see him moving quickly back to push off a defender that s bull rushing him. Often times the RB had to make a last ditch effort to block the DE making his way towards w/e qb we had in at the time.

But more over. I think an issue we are all ignoring is our situation at center. Matt Berk is the only one left from the 1998 season. Which means he has been play 10 plus years. (I want to say 12 total?) Is it time to pick a young C and have him trained for 1 or two more years. Or try to make a big time Hutch like deal? We have the opportunity with in the next two years to properly plan for when Berk leaves us. Instead of ending up in a situation like we have on the right side of the line, where everything is in the air.. We can plan and be prepared for the future. I love Berk, but we need to plan for when he's gone. And that's been my biggest concern for the O-Line. Remember back two years ago when he was injured. We need a quality center to anchor down the O-line.

"Potus2028" wrote:

"i_bleed_purple" wrote:

"kevoncox" wrote:

"UffDaVikes" wrote:

"P.P.E." wrote:

I think we should get a couple tackles in the draft, We defiantly need to keep Mckinnie because he is still a great LT and protecting the QB's backside is a very important role.
We dont know what his suspension is so we cant say we need to replace him yet.
Im not sold on Cook as our right tackle either.
getting a tackle that could play both sides would be ideal because he could play on the left side if Mckinnie is suspended and then move over to the right side if Cook plays poorly.

I didn't see much protection of our QB's blind sides in the last 2 years. That is the point.
Is he a great run blocker? I think so. Did he do a good job of pass blocking in the old scheme? I think so. Has he made a good transition to the new blocking scheme? No, not really.

I think he has. However, no one gives him/the oline credit for keeping the multitude of blitzes off our QB. Our Qb play was terrible late lastyear. Bears games, Skins game, 49ers game. The fronts that we faced, i don't think any other team faced las year. The pressure that Mac and these guys faced were compounded by the bad throws, slow reads, and bad descisions of a young Qb. You can't have your O-Line block 8 defenders all day. I think we are fooling ourselves on how rare a domiant Lt is in this league and we should be thankful for what we have. We won't upgrade a sup par QB but we want our LT to not just be great but be the best.

one of the few passes i agree with you 100%.
Its hard to protect your qb when you have 2 different guys coming right at you.
Add to the fact that TJ takes a while to make his reads, AD and Shank are poor in pass blocking, and you can't really expect too much more out of our Line.
We've got Youth and inexperience on the right side as well.

I think Mac is essentially only good for run blocking. It is hard to see him moving quickly back to push off a defender that s bull rushing him. Often times the RB had to make a last ditch effort to block the DE making his way towards w/e qb we had in at the time.

But more over. I think an issue we are all ignoring is our situation at center. Matt Berk is the only one left from the 1998 season. Which means he has been play 10 plus years. (I want to say 12 total?) Is it time to pick a young C and have him trained for 1 or two more years. Or try to make a big time Hutch like deal? We have the opportunity with in the next two years to properly plan for when Berk leaves us. Instead of ending up in a situation like we have on the right side of the line, where everything is in the air.. We can plan and be prepared for the future. I love Berk, but we need to plan for when he's gone. And that's been my biggest concern for the O-Line. Remember back two years ago when he was injured. We need a quality center to anchor down the O-line.

I think personally we'll draft a guy or get an undrafted FA to replace him.
Look at the history of FA centres.
ALl the ones who have lasted, are little known late to undrafted players, who were smart about the game.
I don't see us making a blockbuster trade/signing for a Centre anytime soon.
Quite Frankly, I don't think we can afford it.