Thread: Vikings rumored to make offer for Kolb

Originally Posted by "mountainviking" #1092401

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1092386

Originally Posted by "mountainviking" #1092339

Sportsnation is reporting that Frazier says he'd rather draft a franchise QB than trade for Kolb...and now they just said "Vikings not interested." But, thats not how I read the quotes earlier...?

I wonder if he didn't get himself into some hot water with the league? In fact, he can't say anything about vets right now, especially ones on current rosters as it constitutes tampering.

As I've said in a couple of posts, I've kindof changed my mind on this matter since listening to a discussion on the radio yesterday.

Basically it was Kirwan and Tim talking to a Vikings caller about the composition of this team and the state of the Owners concern over the stadium issue.

Basically said that this team was just getting to the point were it was good across the board with starters, some very nice backups that will emerge as future starters. Bringing in a QB to mature with a team that is already matured, wouldn't make sense.

That is, unless you were going to start over and start to rebuild for the 2014 season.

In short, what we do with our first pick, trade for Kolb means we keep on keepin on, draft a rookie (QB or otherwise) means we are going to start over.

If we go with the later and draft a rookie QB, guys like Rice, Greenway, AD, Ray etc, will be allowed to leave even though it will appear we are trying to sign them as the contracts will be low ball efforts that any other team can outbid us on.

In short, I am now on the side of the fence that we are going to mortgage the bank for Kolb. That means our 1rst and 4th this year and a 2nd (conditional) next year.

If you really believe we are a QB away from being competitive again this year, and to keep up with the class of QB's in our division, Kolb has to be the answer.

That would also mean that we should see (as soon as we can) a move for Kolb, Rice, AD, Chad, Hussain etc resigned.

So you're calling smokescreen on all this "draft a QB and develop him on field" talk?

Well maybe not a smoke screen. Lets say they are laying the ground work for the possibility that we aren't able to get Kolb. They might have another young vet targeted that we aren't thinking about.....AT this point I haven't looked at backups for teams that might be willing to part with them.

In the end, if they can't land the Vet they are after, you have to make sure the fans aren't to pissed about it.

An early 1st, 4th, and a 2nd next year!? OUCH!! inch:

That also sets us back OL depth, Safety upgrade, young starting DT, an outside WR who actually gets open etc etc etc. I hope not. If we're missing Rice and Harvin part time, and Sully, Hutch, Herrera's injuries linger, not even Peyton Manning would find success with our team!! :huh:

OL Depth - You know who Patrick Brown is? T under contract. How about DeGeare, Welch and Seth Olsen. All signed and sealed before the CBA issue happened. Do we think they are instant starters? maybe DeGeare at G, have to see what happens at T. Maybe, just maybe, they can get Cook to stay. Most don't like him, but he sure did a good job at 4 of the 5 positions last year.

S. Gotta resign Hussain. Why let him go just when he finally started to show he was NFL ready. Sanford is still under contract and should be better this year and like him or not, M-will is still under contract.

Besides, increase the play by the front 4 and all of our DB's will look alot better than they did in years past. By the way, the loss of our starters at CB kindof messed with the S's a bit last year as well IMHO.

Young Starting DT. Should have addressed that 2 years ago, if not last year. Luckily, this year, we should have our pick of one in the second (Paea/Taylor/Wilkerson). Will they be as good as Phat Pat. Nope, they will be rookies and make rookie mistakes, but they, as you guys so easily say about our DL, will have alot of good depth around them, couple that with Guion stepping up late last year, and I don't think our DL will be any worse off than it was last year.

Outside WR. He got open before. Why didn't he get open in 2009 or 2010? Maybe the issue isn't that we need a deep guy outside as much as we don't throw deep anymore based on the scheme?

Long story short, BB is under contract. You don't need to burn a pick there if you don't want to. Besides, a vet outside like BB will be more productive for the young QB than a young guy out there who might make bad site reads/adjustments.

We probably will add a reciever, but my guess it will be a possesion (Rice) kindof guy and not an outside burner that alot of you still pine for on here especially if we are to have a young QB under center. Most of his passing will be the short to intermediate stuff anyways if we don't run it all the time.

Long story short, you give up two picks (this year) and one pick (next year) and finally get a Franchise QB which we all know are hard to come by and then work to fix the rest of it with wht you have left (ala the Bores and Cutler).

Are Vikings good enough to start a rookie QB?


Kindof dovetails into the discussion so I didn't think it deserved its own thread.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1092412

Originally Posted by "mountainviking" #1092401

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1092386

Originally Posted by "mountainviking" #1092339

Sportsnation is reporting that Frazier says he'd rather draft a franchise QB than trade for Kolb...and now they just said "Vikings not interested." But, thats not how I read the quotes earlier...?

I wonder if he didn't get himself into some hot water with the league? In fact, he can't say anything about vets right now, especially ones on current rosters as it constitutes tampering.

As I've said in a couple of posts, I've kindof changed my mind on this matter since listening to a discussion on the radio yesterday.

Basically it was Kirwan and Tim talking to a Vikings caller about the composition of this team and the state of the Owners concern over the stadium issue.

Basically said that this team was just getting to the point were it was good across the board with starters, some very nice backups that will emerge as future starters. Bringing in a QB to mature with a team that is already matured, wouldn't make sense.

That is, unless you were going to start over and start to rebuild for the 2014 season.

In short, what we do with our first pick, trade for Kolb means we keep on keepin on, draft a rookie (QB or otherwise) means we are going to start over.

If we go with the later and draft a rookie QB, guys like Rice, Greenway, AD, Ray etc, will be allowed to leave even though it will appear we are trying to sign them as the contracts will be low ball efforts that any other team can outbid us on.

In short, I am now on the side of the fence that we are going to mortgage the bank for Kolb. That means our 1rst and 4th this year and a 2nd (conditional) next year.

If you really believe we are a QB away from being competitive again this year, and to keep up with the class of QB's in our division, Kolb has to be the answer.

That would also mean that we should see (as soon as we can) a move for Kolb, Rice, AD, Chad, Hussain etc resigned.

So you're calling smokescreen on all this "draft a QB and develop him on field" talk?

Well maybe not a smoke screen. Lets say they are laying the ground work for the possibility that we aren't able to get Kolb. They might have another young vet targeted that we aren't thinking about.....AT this point I haven't looked at backups for teams that might be willing to part with them.

In the end, if they can't land the Vet they are after, you have to make sure the fans aren't to pissed about it.

An early 1st, 4th, and a 2nd next year!? OUCH!! inch:

That also sets us back OL depth, Safety upgrade, young starting DT, an outside WR who actually gets open etc etc etc. I hope not. If we're missing Rice and Harvin part time, and Sully, Hutch, Herrera's injuries linger, not even Peyton Manning would find success with our team!! :huh:

OL Depth - You know who Patrick Brown is? T under contract. How about DeGeare, Welch and Seth Olsen. All signed and sealed before the CBA issue happened. Do we think they are instant starters? maybe DeGeare at G, have to see what happens at T. Maybe, just maybe, they can get Cook to stay. Most don't like him, but he sure did a good job at 4 of the 5 positions last year.

S. Gotta resign Hussain. Why let him go just when he finally started to show he was NFL ready. Sanford is still under contract and should be better this year and like him or not, M-will is still under contract.

Besides, increase the play by the front 4 and all of our DB's will look alot better than they did in years past. By the way, the loss of our starters at CB kindof messed with the S's a bit last year as well IMHO.

Young Starting DT. Should have addressed that 2 years ago, if not last year. Luckily, this year, we should have our pick of one in the second (Paea/Taylor/Wilkerson). Will they be as good as Phat Pat. Nope, they will be rookies and make rookie mistakes, but they, as you guys so easily say about our DL, will have alot of good depth around them, couple that with Guion stepping up late last year, and I don't think our DL will be any worse off than it was last year.

Outside WR. He got open before. Why didn't he get open in 2009 or 2010? Maybe the issue isn't that we need a deep guy outside as much as we don't throw deep anymore based on the scheme?

Long story short, BB is under contract. You don't need to burn a pick there if you don't want to. Besides, a vet outside like BB will be more productive for the young QB than a young guy out there who might make bad site reads/adjustments.

We probably will add a reciever, but my guess it will be a possesion (Rice) kindof guy and not an outside burner that alot of you still pine for on here especially if we are to have a young QB under center. Most of his passing will be the short to intermediate stuff anyways if we don't run it all the time.

Long story short, you give up two picks (this year) and one pick (next year) and finally get a Franchise QB which we all know are hard to come by and then work to fix the rest of it with wht you have left (ala the Bores and Cutler).

Marr,
I disagree about front four play making our Dbs look better. The season our Defense lead the league in sacks, our Defense has approx 13 ints and was almost dead last for . We are simply bad in the defensive backfield.


Also, I hope we don't trade anything higher than a 2nd for Kolb. It will take more to get him but I don't want him for that price. Remember Reid's pass happy system has given us absurd stats from Garcia and Co. before.

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1092431

Marr,
I disagree about front four play making our Dbs look better. The season our Defense lead the league in sacks, our Defense has approx 13 ints and was almost dead last for . We are simply bad in the defensive backfield.


Also, I hope we don't trade anything higher than a 2nd for Kolb. It will take more to get him but I don't want him for that price. Remember Reid's pass happy system has given us absurd stats from Garcia and Co. before.

Couple of thoughts.......Good to see you posting by the by.....

1. I don't think the Iggles are as pass happy as some think. According the NFL.com they had 428 rushing plays and 561 passing plays. For coach Reid that a pretty even spread my friend.

Warren Sapp and company were talking about Kolb and what system he fits best, even with the anticipated changes in blocking schemes, the Vikings were the best fit for him of all the teams that need a QB.

In short, both Kolb and the Vikings would have very little growing pains when it comes to learning each other.

2. You, above all others on here, should know that the backend of the cover 2 is only as good as the front 4. Our continued degradation in the ability to stop the run (make a team one dimensional) along with lack of pressure (causes bad throws) were a significant contributor to our backends production.

Truth of the matter is, considering all the backups we had throughout the year, our backend played more consistently than the front end did.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1092449

1. I don't think the Iggles are as pass happy as some think. According the NFL.com they had 428 rushing plays and 561 passing plays. For coach Reid that a pretty even spread my friend.

Of course having a glorified RB as your QB tends to skew things towards the run my friend.

Warren Sapp and company were talking about Kolb and what system he fits best, even with the anticipated changes in blocking schemes, the Vikings were the best fit for him of all the teams that need a QB.

Was that based on what system they think we will run or the fact that our QB's have sucked for a long time and they feel he is very suckworthy? ( I crack myself up)

In short, both Kolb and the Vikings would have very little growing pains when it comes to learning each other.

Simple minds think alike?

2. You, above all others on here, should know that the backend of the cover 2 is only as good as the front 4. Our continued degradation in the ability to stop the run (make a team one dimensional) along with lack of pressure (causes bad throws) were a significant contributor to our backends production.

Yes. Get RE out of there and the unit will work very well. They were handcuffed with him in there.

Truth of the matter is, considering all the backups we had throughout the year, our backend played more consistently than the front end did.

Now you are talking out of your backend.:woohoo: The secondary sucked and there is no way you can spin that and get away with it. Heck, even your defenses of chiller and TJ were closer to reality. :laugh:

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1092452

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1092449

1. I don't think the Iggles are as pass happy as some think. According the NFL.com they had 428 rushing plays and 561 passing plays. For coach Reid that a pretty even spread my friend.

Of course having a glorified RB as your QB tends to skew things towards the run my friend.

He actually ran it about 20 times less this year than what he did for the two highest years when he was a falcon.

Warren Sapp and company were talking about Kolb and what system he fits best, even with the anticipated changes in blocking schemes, the Vikings were the best fit for him of all the teams that need a QB.

Was that based on what system they think we will run or the fact that our QB's have sucked for a long time and they feel he is very suckworthy? ( I crack myself up)

That is pretty funny. It was actually based on the assumption (I read into what they were talking about) that the scheme wouldn't change that much for one player.

After the article I posted yesterday, I don't think anyone knows what scheme we are gonna run cause the staff sure the hell doesn't have a clue.

2. You, above all others on here, should know that the backend of the cover 2 is only as good as the front 4. Our continued degradation in the ability to stop the run (make a team one dimensional) along with lack of pressure (causes bad throws) were a significant contributor to our backends production.

Yes. Get RE out of there and the unit will work very well. They were handcuffed with him in there.

You do realize that the backend of the Cover 2 requires that the front 4 get pressure on the QB. If you realize that, then I wonder if you also realize were RE stands with respect to league ranking in pressures since he started playing at LDE.

On a side note, if the two DT's would collapse the pocket, our DE's sack totals would go through the roof.

Truth of the matter is, considering all the backups we had throughout the year, our backend played more consistently than the front end did.

Now you are talking out of your backend.:woohoo: The secondary sucked and there is no way you can spin that and get away with it. Heck, even your defenses of chiller and TJ were closer to reality. :laugh:

You are probably correct if you are comparing our backend to a team that plays press coverage and looks to intercept the ball. Problem is, the cover 2 focuses on keeping the players in front of you, allowing them to catch the ball and then limiting the YAC by making the tackle right away.

Again, your perspective depends on what you think our backend should be doing.