All Things 2024 Minnesota Vikings Off-Season Thread

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
35,595
Reaction score
9,779
Points
113
The great thing about Wilson’s contract, is that it’s structured as a payback (IIRC).
Meaning that if a new team signs him for $5M after he is cut, that $5M is paid to the Broncos, as they have to pay him the $39M regardless.

Theoretically, he could sign for the league minimum - this info is via Dan Graziano on ESPN. They floated ATL, Pitt & Seattle as possible landing spots for him.
Hope it’s ATL, then.

Just to F with the losers here hoping that Cousins goes there :ROFLMAO:
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
35,595
Reaction score
9,779
Points
113
The entire "look at his playoff record" argument is pretty shaky. QBs do not win or lose games on their own. Period.

And anyone who is still insisting that Cousins is simply a bad QB are so obviously wrong that it isn't worth arguing with them.

And his salary is middle of the pack for NFL QBs. He is not overpaid, according to the market.

But...

... the people who argue for letting Cousins walk have some valid points:

— The Vikings need cap room to fill in some holes on their roster.

— And Cousins is, what 35 years old, almost 36? And he's undeniably coming off his one significant injury in his career.

Then again, does it make sense to tie up a comparatively huge chunk of cap space on a new contract for Jefferson if he's going to have a rookie QB throwing to him?

There are some hard questions here, and they have no easy answers.
Great post.

Some folks here desperately want to pretend there is an easy answer to this.

But these folks have notoriously wrong takes on a lot of stuff, so …
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
35,595
Reaction score
9,779
Points
113
I would feel a lot better about starting a rookie QB if the running game was at least respectable.
Our OL is fine.

Running game was going better with Akers in the mix, damn shame on his injury and typical for how unlucky last season went.

Mattison alone ain’t it, unfortunately.

Like Chandler but he clearly isn’t ready to be a feature back and I assume it’s because his blocking isn’t up to par.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
39,735
Reaction score
20,197
Points
113
That’s the wording you used, and it was false
No I never said any ol QB on a rookie contract would do. I agreed with someone else that finding an elite QB on a rookie contract is the best formula for success. Once that same elite QB gets the big contract, winning becomes much harder.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
39,735
Reaction score
20,197
Points
113
They need help at RB, that's for sure. Surprisingly enough, some of the analysis I've seen/read said the run blocking actually wasn't that bad, and TE Josh Oliver was actually really good; the Vikings just had RBs that routinely missed holes, didn't break tackles, couldn't make plays. There will be decent ones available in FA once again, they need to take a good look
I'm hopeful Chandler will be better with more experience. But it probably wouldn't be a bad idea to draft another one in like the 4th-5th rounds.
 


MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
35,595
Reaction score
9,779
Points
113
I agreed that finding an elite QB on a rookie contract is the best formula for success.
You literally did not say that in the post. I can only go by the words you use. I absolutely will not attempt to read minds.

Now that you’ve clarified you mean elite QB on rookie contract: OK.

Once that same elite QB gets the big contract, winning becomes much harder.
Hmm.

Examples?

Elite QB on rookie contract that they made it to a Super Bowl with, then signed him to a big contract, and never made it back to the Super Bowl?


On the other hand, we know that teams have signed star FA QB’s and made it to the Super Bowl. Broncos with Manning, for example. Jets were penciled in this until the injury.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
39,735
Reaction score
20,197
Points
113
You literally did not say that in the post. I can only go by the words you use. I absolutely will not attempt to read minds.

Now that you’ve clarified you mean elite QB on rookie contract: OK.


Hmm.

Examples?

Elite QB on rookie contract that they made it to a Super Bowl with, then signed him to a big contract, and never made it back to the Super Bowl?


On the other hand, we know that teams have signed star FA QB’s and made it to the Super Bowl. Broncos with Manning, for example. Jets were penciled in this until the injury.
I said this several pages ago. If you're going to jump into a conversation, at least understand the conversation first. It's your responsibility to understand what's being talked about, not mine.

"It's such an advantage to have a guy like Purdy making less than $1M while playing like an elite player."

As for examples, this is more of an issue recently than say 10-20 years ago. Recently, QB salaries have taken up a greater percentage of team salary.
 

Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
8,102
Reaction score
5,837
Points
113
You literally did not say that in the post. I can only go by the words you use. I absolutely will not attempt to read minds.

Now that you’ve clarified you mean elite QB on rookie contract: OK.


Hmm.

Examples?

Elite QB on rookie contract that they made it to a Super Bowl with, then signed him to a big contract, and never made it back to the Super Bowl?



On the other hand, we know that teams have signed star FA QB’s and made it to the Super Bowl. Broncos with Manning, for example. Jets were penciled in this until the injury.
Seattle never made it back to the Super Bowl after Russell Wilson's Rookie Contract. Actually they never made it back to the NFC Championship.

Carolina made to the SB in Cam Newton's last year of his Rookie Contract, never made it back.
 

short ornery norwegian

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 9, 2011
Messages
19,213
Reaction score
12,796
Points
113
ESPN.com has a big article attempting to predict upcoming NFL QB moves.

from Kevin Seifert -

The Vikings' decision: Cousins' deal doesn't void until after the deadline for franchise tags, so this would be an extension. He has repeatedly said he wants to end his career in Minnesota, and as he departed the locker room for the offseason, Cousins left the clear impression that he hoped the Vikings' offer would reflect a similar wish.

"It's not about the dollars," he said, "but it is about what the dollars represent."

In other words, Cousins -- who threw 18 touchdown passes in eight games this season -- isn't likely to be seeking a record-breaking deal in terms of average annual salary, but he does want the Vikings to back up whatever commitment they make with guaranteed money. Drafting at No. 11, Minnesota isn't likely to select one of the top-tier quarterbacks in the class, so it makes sense to bring back Cousins. So in this case, let's re-sign him to a two-year, $85 million fully guaranteed extension. That gives the Vikings two years -- until Cousins is 38 years old -- to draft and develop his successor.


Other predictions:
Justin Fields to the Raiders
Baker Mayfield stays with Buccaneers
Russell Wilson to the Falcons
Gardner Minshew to Denver
Jacoby Brissett to Patriots

and some draft predictions:
Penix to NY Giants at #39
JJ McCarthy to Vikings at #42
 



forever a gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
2,994
Reaction score
2,787
Points
113
Our OL is fine.

Running game was going better with Akers in the mix, damn shame on his injury and typical for how unlucky last season went.

Mattison alone ain’t it, unfortunately.

Like Chandler but he clearly isn’t ready to be a feature back and I assume it’s because his blocking isn’t up to par.
Here is the list of teams with the fewest sacks allowed this year (least sacks allowed is at bottom of list). Highlighted are playoff teams. "X's" indicate AFC/NFC Championship game teams. Vikes had 11th most sacks allowed. I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

They're paying Oliver and Ham a ton of money to block. Yet their running game was terrible. Pass protection was below average. At a minimum, there needs to be an upgrade at RB. Guard and Center also should be improved.

Captu88re.JPG
 


Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
8,102
Reaction score
5,837
Points
113
They’re going to give a King’s ransom to go from 12 to 11?
Nowhere is it being suggested they Broncos would trade with the Vikings in the article posted, much less pay a "King's ransom" to move up 1 spot. Obviously, they would want to trade for a spot higher than where the Vikings currently sit.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
39,735
Reaction score
20,197
Points
113
Here is the list of teams with the fewest sacks allowed this year (least sacks allowed is at bottom of list). Highlighted are playoff teams. "X's" indicate AFC/NFC Championship game teams. Vikes had 11th most sacks allowed. I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

They're paying Oliver and Ham a ton of money to block. Yet their running game was terrible. Pass protection was below average. At a minimum, there needs to be an upgrade at RB. Guard and Center also should be improved.

View attachment 29862
I take sacks allowed with a grain of salt. KC, for instance, runs a lot of quick hitting screens and throws near the LOS. Mahomes air yards per attempt is extremely low. The Vikings run a lot of longer developing pass plays that make it harder to block.

The Lions are a different story. They have a great OL and it shows with the lack of sacks.

I think the OL for the Vikings is okay. Not a strength but not a big weakness either. Having a more mobile QB would probably make them look better.
 



Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
8,102
Reaction score
5,837
Points
113
Here is the list of teams with the fewest sacks allowed this year (least sacks allowed is at bottom of list). Highlighted are playoff teams. "X's" indicate AFC/NFC Championship game teams. Vikes had 11th most sacks allowed. I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

They're paying Oliver and Ham a ton of money to block. Yet their running game was terrible. Pass protection was below average. At a minimum, there needs to be an upgrade at RB. Guard and Center also should be improved.

View attachment 29862
I agree with sentiments of your post, but you have an X by Buffalo who was not in the AFC Championship, instead of Baltimore.
 

forever a gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
2,994
Reaction score
2,787
Points
113
I agree with sentiments of your post, but you have an X by Buffalo who was not in the AFC Championship, instead of Baltimore.
Good catch. I already forgot about the pouty Jackson and Flowers performance(s).
 

forever a gopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
2,994
Reaction score
2,787
Points
113
I take sacks allowed with a grain of salt. KC, for instance, runs a lot of quick hitting screens and throws near the LOS. Mahomes air yards per attempt is extremely low. The Vikings run a lot of longer developing pass plays that make it harder to block.

The Lions are a different story. They have a great OL and it shows with the lack of sacks.

I think the OL for the Vikings is okay. Not a strength but not a big weakness either. Having a more mobile QB would probably make them look better.
Totally agree. Like many things (defensive points allowed, yards allowed, etc.) when looked at individually only tell one part of the story. The correlation between sacks allowed and successful teams this year is very interesting, however. As you mention, they are doing it in different ways to accomplish the same goal.

KOC's play design has resulted in some pretty good mid-to-deep play action pass success for Cousins (resulting in high passing yard stats). However, it has also resulted in quite a few sacks allowed, which kill drives and lower their overall points per game (and thus wins). I am generally a KOC fan, but between him and Kwesi and Co. have not put Cousins in the best spot to win the most games. Either the OL needs to get better to allow them to keep running those deep plays, or KOC needs to modify his play schemes to have more quick/underneath passes.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
79,325
Reaction score
35,653
Points
113
They’re going to give a King’s ransom to go from 12 to 11?
No. Where in the world do you get that from? They will be looking to jump ahead of the Vikings, likely driving up the cost of moving up the board.
 


MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
35,595
Reaction score
9,779
Points
113
ESPN.com has a big article attempting to predict upcoming NFL QB moves.

from Kevin Seifert -

The Vikings' decision: Cousins' deal doesn't void until after the deadline for franchise tags, so this would be an extension. He has repeatedly said he wants to end his career in Minnesota, and as he departed the locker room for the offseason, Cousins left the clear impression that he hoped the Vikings' offer would reflect a similar wish.

"It's not about the dollars," he said, "but it is about what the dollars represent."

In other words, Cousins -- who threw 18 touchdown passes in eight games this season -- isn't likely to be seeking a record-breaking deal in terms of average annual salary, but he does want the Vikings to back up whatever commitment they make with guaranteed money. Drafting at No. 11, Minnesota isn't likely to select one of the top-tier quarterbacks in the class, so it makes sense to bring back Cousins. So in this case, let's re-sign him to a two-year, $85 million fully guaranteed extension. That gives the Vikings two years -- until Cousins is 38 years old -- to draft and develop his successor.
:love::love::love::love::love::love::love:

howeda just S a brick. Hahaha

Oh wait, let me guess: “Well $90M was just wayyyyyy too much, but OK fine $85M is significantly less so that’s doable!!” :ROFLMAO:
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
35,595
Reaction score
9,779
Points
113
Penix at #11. Or if you can get him farther back and pick up a couple more picks, great.

Learns two years behind Cousins. Starter in 26.

Done.


Next, let’s see how good we can get this team around Cousins in 24 and 25.

There’s just no damn reason we can’t do what the Lions did this year or the Rams did in 21. Cousins is easily as good as Stafford and Goff.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
35,595
Reaction score
9,779
Points
113
Here is the list of teams with the fewest sacks allowed this year (least sacks allowed is at bottom of list). Highlighted are playoff teams. "X's" indicate AFC/NFC Championship game teams. Vikes had 11th most sacks allowed. I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

They're paying Oliver and Ham a ton of money to block. Yet their running game was terrible. Pass protection was below average. At a minimum, there needs to be an upgrade at RB. Guard and Center also should be improved.

View attachment 29862
As was talked about later in the thread, it’s too interdependent on the RB and the QB and play calling to look at in a vacuum. Sacks can be from long developing plays and an immobile QB, and bad running can be from a RB who doesn’t hit holes, doesn’t break tackles, etc.

We obviously know that you can’t have a good running game without good run blocking and can’t have a good passing game without good pass blocking.


Bradbury was named Pro Bowl alternate. He’s fine. Also think Guards played reasonably well, but there is where you could look at drafting or bringing in a guy.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
35,595
Reaction score
9,779
Points
113
Seattle never made it back to the Super Bowl after Russell Wilson's Rookie Contract. Actually they never made it back to the NFC Championship.

Carolina made to the SB in Cam Newton's last year of his Rookie Contract, never made it back.
OK, good examples. Thanks.

Arguments could be made that these indeed prove that Wilson and Newton aren’t actually elite QB’s in the first place.

But that’s not the discussion. Indeed, if you made it to the Super Bowl with a QB still on rookie contract, then by definition that QB was good enough to get you to the SB. Has to at least be that good though, not just any rookie contract QB as GiL’s post said.


Now, certainly, there are also examples of the converse: team drafts QB, does not go to the SB with him on his rookie contract, signs him, and then goes to SB with him.

Obvious example everyone here knows is Rodgers.
 
Last edited:

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
35,595
Reaction score
9,779
Points
113
I said this several pages ago.
The words of any post you make are entirely your own fault, if you forget to include a key word.

Recently, QB salaries have taken up a greater percentage of team salary.
So?

Every team starts from the same cap and must decide which formula they want to go with.

There are many successful formulas.

Not at all limited to two, as you want it to be.
 

kg21

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 25, 2021
Messages
18,160
Reaction score
8,907
Points
113
I take sacks allowed with a grain of salt. KC, for instance, runs a lot of quick hitting screens and throws near the LOS. Mahomes air yards per attempt is extremely low. The Vikings run a lot of longer developing pass plays that make it harder to block.

The Lions are a different story. They have a great OL and it shows with the lack of sacks.

I think the OL for the Vikings is okay. Not a strength but not a big weakness either. Having a more mobile QB would probably make them look better.
Ok, it's ok.

That doesn't cut it with an immobile qb.

We couldn't run the ball this year despite signing the best blocking TE in the league. We allowed a lot of pressure up the middle. This offensive line needs help.

How can the o'line only be ok when as MLPS will tell you.....there are pro-bowlers all over the place.
 

GophersInIowa

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
39,735
Reaction score
20,197
Points
113
The words of any post you make are entirely your own fault, if you forget to include a key word.


So?

Every team starts from the same cap and must decide which formula they want to go with.

There are many successful formulas.

Not at all limited to two, as you want it to be.
giphy.gif
 

Ope3

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
8,102
Reaction score
5,837
Points
113
OK, good examples. Thanks.

Arguments could be made that these indeed prove that Wilson and Newton aren’t actually elite QB’s in the first place.

But that’s not the discussion. Indeed, if you made it to the Super Bowl with a QB still on rookie contract, then by definition that QB was good enough to get you to the SB. Has to at least be that good though, not just any rookie contract QB as GiL’s post said.


Now, certainly, there are also examples of the converse: team drafts QB, does not go to the SB with him on his rookie contract, signs him, and then goes to SB with him.

Obvious example everyone here knows is Rodgers.

The Rodgers example is not a good one for 2 main reasons in my opinion:

- Rodgers sat on the bench for his first 3 years of 5 in his Rookie Deal. He signed an extension in the middle of his 4th year, 1st as starter. While that did change his base salary, he was still being paid "only" $6.5M in 2010 (6th season and SB win) as he did not have a track record to command over $10M, yet. 2013 was when #12 started making crazy dough, but they never went to a SB after 2010.

- The whole salary structure was revamped in 2011, since then each pick gets essentially what they are slotted to make. 1st round picks are under team control for 4 years with a 5th year option. Based on that, I don't know that using anyone drafted before 2010 is really comparable.

Now after those 5 years are up, the QB Salary Cap is exponentially different than when under their rookie contracts expire.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
79,325
Reaction score
35,653
Points
113
:love::love::love::love::love::love::love:

howeda just S a brick. Hahaha

Oh wait, let me guess: “Well $90M was just wayyyyyy too much, but OK fine $85M is significantly less so that’s doable!!” :ROFLMAO:
If they sign him at that rate it's a very dumb move. I don't think they will, but it would hardly be shocking. The Wilf's have a hard time accepting anything approaching a rebuild.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
35,595
Reaction score
9,779
Points
113
Broncos signed Manning when he was 36 in 2012. Two Super Bowls, won one.

I don’t know what the money is or how it compares, especially in the different times with different caps.

Cousins injury is irrelevant. Won’t affect throwing ability at all, he was already a statue.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
35,595
Reaction score
9,779
Points
113
The Wilf's have a hard time accepting anything approaching a rebuild.
As is correct. Why should they lose a bunch of money in a rebuild year that has no guarantee of even working.

When it’s your money, you can do as many wild shot in the dark rebuilds as you like.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
35,595
Reaction score
9,779
Points
113
The Rodgers example is not a good one for 2 main reasons in my opinion:

- Rodgers sat on the bench for his first 3 years of 5 in his Rookie Deal. He signed an extension in the middle of his 4th year, 1st as starter. While that did change his base salary, he was still being paid "only" $6.5M in 2010 (6th season and SB win) as he did not have a track record to command over $10M, yet. 2013 was when #12 started making crazy dough, but they never went to a SB after 2010.

- The whole salary structure was revamped in 2011, since then each pick gets essentially what they are slotted to make. 1st round picks are under team control for 4 years with a 5th year option. Based on that, I don't know that using anyone drafted before 2010 is really comparable.

Now after those 5 years are up, the QB Salary Cap is exponentially different than when under their rookie contracts expire.
OK.

Well maybe there isn’t an example that fits such a strict definition, for drafted 2011 and later.


But it doesn’t have to be the same team that drafts the QB then signs him, to work for the overall point.

Example: Jimmy G. 2x Super Bowl champion


You can sign a FA QB, thus much more money than a rookie contract, and not even an MVP type guy, and it still be a successful, correct Super Bowl formula.
 




Top Bottom