04-21-2012, 08:44 AM #31
Did any of the top LT's in the game right now personally account for that type of increase in plays per drive? considering the records of those teams I find it highly unlikely but feel free to post proof.
04-21-2012, 10:08 AM #35
04-21-2012, 11:10 AM #36
What makes me relatively happy at least is the fact that it's almost impossible for the Rickster to screw up the first and second pick. Well....maybe not the second but for sure the first. We have a ton of holes in the dam, and only so many corks. We have to fix the 'gushers' first and then worry about the others.
Gushers in my mind are the .4 seconds Ponder has to throw the ball, and basically one slot receiver to throw to on offense. I know are secondary is and should be considered a gusher, but I honestly believe with FA signings and getting "the strangler" back, we will be better than most think in the secondary. I'm not saying that means much, but we should be quite a bit better than last year as it stands right now.
In this division, if you aren't scoring a lot of points than you are never going to keep up and that's a fact. We need offense bad. That being said, I would like to see 1. Kalil 2. WRI bet you could use a cool one huh Clark...Now you're talkin Eddie...
04-22-2012, 01:28 AM #37
- Join Date
- Jan 2010
- Blog Entries
Cleveland's and Miami's offenses suck because their QBs are garbage, not because they have LTs. We have our QB, now we need an OL for him. Look at Carr. No OL --> always sacked --> Bust. If we had an average or above average OL as a unit then I would understand the desire to go WR or CB, but we don't . Our OL is garbage and it's going to get Ponder murdered.I am NOT here to provide good football insight or rational observations. I am an emotional 19 year old Viking fan and I expect you to adjust your expectations from my posts.
04-22-2012, 04:33 AM #38
Kindof like the Chicken or the Egg discussion. Good WR's get open quicker, QB can throw to them quicker, don't need a great OL.
Good OL allows the QB more time to find crappy WR's as they try to get open and can protect him long enough until the crappy WR's get open.
Truth of the matter is, both answers are correct. What one has to "Ponder" is, what do the Vikings staff think is correct? In this instance my belief is that they are going to take the T. They've then fixed/plugged/addressed 3 of 5 positions on the OL.
RG The Swartz be with you
LG CJ (moves in from LT)
Add in 2 or 3 WR's from this class and Ponder should have some targets at WR. Problem that worries me is the signing of Carlson and Hardy still make me want to believe Ole Musgrove is going to employ alot of multi TE sets.
Not alot of work for a WR when they run out a 2-3 or a 1-3 set.
LT KalilMany many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.
04-22-2012, 06:23 AM #39Ex-Viking Gary Zimmerman talks about Matt Kalil
So, basically, what Zim is saying is, as long as you stay away from 7 step drops, any ole LT will do, as long as you have the WR's who can get open on the 3 and 5 step routes.
Hmmmmmmm, sounds like one of the eggs has moved in front of the chicken.Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.
04-22-2012, 08:11 AM #40Hall of Famer
- Join Date
- Dec 1969
AFAIK, both Kalil and Claiborne are considered "elite" prospects. I would be happy with either one. If we take Claiborne, I could see taking Mississippi LT Bobby Massie with our 2nd round pick.
If the defense can get off the field more/sooner, and yield less points, the Vikings offense may not be forced to score tons of points to win. I think either player is a move in the right direction.SKOL VIKINGS!