Everyone please stop with the QB threads
by TMW on Jan 7, 2009 2:52 PM CST
27 comments
Do any of you pay attention to the way this team has run in the last 3 seasons? Childress and Spielman are of the mind that QB is a relatively less important position on the field compared to the lines on offense and defense. QB has never been a high priority since letting Culpepper go. This is a team that plans to win by running the ball 55-60% of the time and having the better defense on the field. That means as long as those two are running the show, forget about having a sexy quarterback that will cost cap space. Even if they get one, they'll only get to throw 40-45% of the downs. So just forget it.
Based on the last 3 seasons with respect to draft picks and usage of cap space, we've learned the front office prioritizes the following in order:
1. Offensive Line
1A. Defensive Line
3. Linebacker and Secondary
4. Running back
5. Wide Receiver/Tight End
6. Quarterback
7. Special Teams - You could even debate that given Longwell's contract, Special Teams should be 6.
If you want to speculate, look at the last 3 years. The Vikings are probably going to draft a QB in the 2nd or 3rd round if they don't think Booty will ever prosper in the NFL. Then Gus and Jackson will battle in training camp. This is not a team that has used cap space on a QB and I don't expect them to this offseason either. If you have your hopes up for anything more, you're in for a massive disappointment.
In the meantime, the more pressing question is who will be our Center and Right Tackle in 09 because I better not be seeing Ryan Cook at either position. Let's discuss that in this thread please.
This FanPost was created by a registered user of The Daily Norseman, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the staff of the site. However, since this is a community, that view is no less important.
0 recs |
27 comments
Email
Print
Comments
My kingdom for a Quarterback
I hope you’re wrong, I can’t take much more of that. Trent Dilfer would be an improvement.
Norm Green still sucks!
by diok9 on Jan 7, 2009 3:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
He is very right
and you might as well get used to it. No amount of belly aching from fans is going to change it either.
by vikingfuture8816 on Jan 7, 2009 3:12 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Childress...
Childress is a QB kind of guy. He helped a ton with McNabb in Philly and saw something in Tarvaris to take him a few years ago. Seeing those flashes of brilliance, I think we can all agree he’s got the gusto, just not the composure/consistency.
Childress is just smart enough to know that when you have an iffy QB situation and the best RB combo in the league, you use them.
At least, he did know that before the Philly game. Peterson hardly touched the field in the fourth quarter. Such a shame.
And you can try to get away from the QB talk as much as you want, but it’s not gonna happen. That is the main focal point of the fans right now because the fans realize that Minnesota was probably one QB away from the divisional round.
Also, if Birk is let go, Sullivan from Notre Dame will start in his place. Right tackle, for now anyway, is probably Hicks. I’d imagine the Vikes’ll draft someone for that position though, somewhere early in day two or late in day one.
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
by Manimal on Jan 7, 2009 3:12 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Did you read this article?
by TMW on Jan 7, 2009 3:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No, I had not.
Skimmed it quick, running out of time at the moment though. Will definitely read it better later.
So far, I’ve gathered that it just says they both run the West Coast offense, just differently. Reid passes first, Childress runs first.
I’m not trying to be preachy or anything, but didn’t that article reiterate pretty much what I said?
Again, I just skimmed it, so please tell me if I missed something.
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
by Manimal on Jan 7, 2009 3:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
RE:
It says Reid throws 55-60, Childress runs 55-60. Considering Spielman and ownership are on board with this philosophy, how do you possibly expect them to spend real money on a QB when he’s not going to be the focal point of the offense?
by TMW on Jan 7, 2009 3:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Ah, okay -
I think it’s safe to say that everyone – yes, even Childress – realizes the importance of a good quarterback. It’s obvious he does. If he didn’t, why would he have swallowed his pride and benched Jackson in favor of Frerotte?
Because he knows that you have to be able to pass.
Even if you’re running 60% of the time, you’re still passing that other 40%. You can’t simply ignore the fact that in today’s NFL, the passing game is an absolute must. The Vikings saw this first hand against the Eagles. If the QBs are switched, the game is entirely different.
The Steelers are a run first offense, but they signed Big Ben to a huge contract (not as much as before, but still). The Panthers are a run first offense, but Delhomme has been a good-great passer for them. The Giants are a run first offense, but Eli is a huge part of their offense.
If the ownership doesn’t realize this, and I’m sure Wilf does, then they’re simply blinded by something. Of all the people, Childress must know this. It comes down to personnel – if you have Adrian Peterson, you use him. It’s just his playcalling that requires improvement.
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
by Manimal on Jan 7, 2009 4:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
How'd that switch work out?
If he didn’t, why would he have swallowed his pride and benched Jackson in favor of Frerotte?
Because he knows that you have to be able to pass.
Gus is able to pass? Unless he’s throwing to Randy Moss, he had me fooled.
How can you say it’s obvious Childress cares about QBs when clearly the last 3 years have indicated that he thinks it’s a position for old guys to help him coach on the field or to speculate on an unknown commodity? If anything, the switch to Frerotte was just to get back to having a Brad Johnson again.
The Steelers are a run first offense, but they signed Big Ben to a huge contract (not as much as before, but still). The Panthers are a run first offense, but Delhomme has been a good-great passer for them. The Giants are a run first offense, but Eli is a huge part of their offense.
This has nothing to do with what we’re talking about. I know those guys are good in a run first system. I’m talking about why it’s pretty obvious the Vikings won’t invest real money or draft pick in the quarterback, right or wrong.
by TMW on Jan 7, 2009 4:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'll concede that point...
That Gus is not a great passer. But Childress knew enough to bench Tarvaris because he wasn’t getting it done as a passer. He didn’t bench him for his running skills. He knew that Jackson wasn’t throwing the ball well enough. He was stubborn enough the past three years, yes, you’re right, but his actions this year show me that he has, at least some degree, acknowledged there is a problem at the QB position.
Gus Frerotte is no scrambler. He is, as most have pointed out, a statue. Despite that, he was started in favor of the much more mobile, but much less accurate, Tarvaris Jackson. How does that not signal to you that Childress is showing that he’s trying to pass better? Not necessarily passing more, just more consistently.
And I bring up those other franchises because they have set the precedent for having a run first offense with a quality quarterback. The Vikings owners have to recognize that five of the six teams left are all based out of run first offenses, the only exception being the Cardinals. And even they ran in their first playoff game.
You could make the case the only reason the Vikings didn’t invest more in a QB was because Childress thought Tarvaris was going to turn the corner, as we all did. We also put a lot of money into guys like Berrian and Allen, so throwing more money around probably wasn’t a priority. I guess I’m trying to say that the situations coming out of this offseason are much different than last seasons. This season we know what we have, and we have a much better understanding of what Tarvaris Jackson is capable of.
I’m not disagreeing with what the Vikings have done in the past. It’s what the future holds that I’m talking about. I’m just hoping the organization is intelligent enough to see exactly where it’s at in terms of the proverbial “puzzle pieces.”
Visit:
http://www.vikingvigil.com
Skol Vikings!
Woot Woot!
by Manimal on Jan 7, 2009 4:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This is why chilly will alway be a loser
You need a quality qb, to be a good team. In 41 Super Bowl they only 4 team that win with less than average qb
by vikefansd on Jan 8, 2009 3:15 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We BUILT this team using your priority list...
…and now we have just about every major piece except for QB. So now since we’ve built up our offensive and defensive lines, our RBs, and our LBs/DBs, why not go after a QB? We’re deep at just about every major position except WR and QB.
by ericj69 on Jan 7, 2009 3:30 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Re:
We’re not deep on the offensive line. If Ryan Cook is subbing, we’re thin.
Jackson got smoked 2 weeks straight by 2 of the best pass rushes in the game. The Buddy Ryan rule of thumb for defenses is that if you pressure and hit the quarterback a lot, he’s eventually going to start turning the ball over. That was exactly what happened on Sunday.
You what’s an easier way of fixing that problem than drafting or signing an expensive quarterback who now has to learn the system and the playbook, needing a few weeks to get the hang of this team? Getting a new left tackle and moving McKinnie to the right side so he doesn’t constantly get killed by the best DE on the other team.
Spielman knows this. My money is on very little happening at the QB right or wrong. If anything, if Tebow falls to the 3rd round, they take him there because Childress likes mobile quarterbacks. I don’t see anything more exciting than that.
by TMW on Jan 7, 2009 3:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
…except, of course, that Tebow throws up ducks and no NFL offense has ever successfully been built around an option scheme!
by Anthony Carter on Jan 7, 2009 3:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I live in Chicago
I know that Florida QBs don’t work out in the NFL. I didn’t say that was a good idea either. That’s just about the most I can expect.
by TMW on Jan 7, 2009 4:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Tebow will not play quarterback in the NFL.
He’ll be a TE or FB.
by LoveHate on Jan 7, 2009 5:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
how can you think a running back is needed? honestly..
by Manoovi on Jan 7, 2009 5:33 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
IMO
400 carries a year a few too many for any RB. You wear them out. I would like to see a new FB/RB that could handle the short yardage/goal line situations. At the end of this past year the carries break down looked like this: Peterson – 363. Chester – 160. Other about 20. IMO it should look more like this: Peterson 320, Chester 210, Other – 50+. Anything to keep Peterson in top form for many years.
by vikingfuture8816 on Jan 7, 2009 6:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The Answer to the QB Question is Simple...
Joe “the Plummer Quarterback” Wurzelbacher! The man can do it all!
As soon as he returns from his conflict-zone reporting assignment, get him signed up!
by LoveHate on Jan 7, 2009 5:46 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
My 2 cents
A team HAS to have some sort of passing game to keep the D-backs honest. The Vikings passing game was not respected around the league, and with good reason.
The result: Eight men in the box and a frustrated AD. Sure, he had his bust out moments, but just imagine if our passing game could keep the opponent’s secondary guessing.
I’m sure they’ll go with what they’ve got, but if we get the same results next year, there BETTER be some heads rolling!!!!!!!!!
by stilpony on Jan 7, 2009 7:33 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Gus Gus
did not keep D’s honest. they still stacked 9 and 10 men in the box all game long. he still threw interceptions and an increadible pace. I don’t know if it is color blindess or what, and he when he wasn’t throwing to the other team he was getting sacked.
what our Offense needs desperatly is an audible. there are no audibles in our offense, and that not just the coaches not trusting T-Jack. Gus Gus never once called an audible. and that is not because he doesn’t know how, its because there are no audibles to call. that is all on the HC and the Offensive Coordinator.
Will the Real Thor Please Stand Up ... ?
by the Real Thor on Jan 8, 2009 8:17 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You're on to something.
The team lines up in double tight with Tahi and Peterson in the backfield and Berrian split out. You tell me one team that is going to respect a passing option with this personnel? It would be easy to defend in base Cover 1, 2 or 3. The defense is going to crowd the line of scrimmage and you can pass out of it if you like to see Tahi run a 2 yard flat route want to! What is the audible option here?
by LoveHate on Jan 8, 2009 9:36 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You do have a point on what the deciders seem to believe personnel-wise. Lines are important, I’ll have to agree, but there is no more important position than QB, even if you are a running team that wants to have the better defense.
There comes a time when running the ball up the middle gets you nowhere but Loserville. What happens when you’re down by two scores early in the game and your QB can’t be trusted to throw past the first down markers? You do what Childress does: soft forfeit, which is to say, you keep up with your asinine philosophy knowing good and well that the game is lost.
QUARTERBACK IS IMPORTANT! I don’t care what those personnel whizzes say.
by Bodysuit Man on Jan 8, 2009 2:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Re:
A team with strong lines and no quarterback is most likely going to go 8-8 or better (in our case 10-6, 8-8 last year). A team with a strong quarterback and sorry lines is probably looking at 6-10 maybe 8-8 if they’re lucky (see the Packers, Chiefs, Saints, Rams).
Why are quarterbacks infrequently drafted high these days even though only about 1/2 the teams in the NFL have stability at the position, probably less when injuries become a factor? Yes quarterback is important, but fans overrate its priority over the majority of GMs in the league. If you want to win consistently, you prioritize lines over playmakers. If you want to get over the hump, then you build the playmakers. Ultimately, I think personnel is going to recognize that the offensive line is a bigger problem than the quarterback position.
by TMW on Jan 8, 2009 4:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
The way to build a consistent winner is to focus on the O-line and D. However, If you want to win the superbowl you have to at least have a competent QB and Head Coach. Unfortunately the Vikes lack both.
by vikedawg on Jan 8, 2009 8:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
U got it dawg!
The Vikes have had strong lines. We have had good running teams. We have had good coaches. We have had good QB’s. It is rare to have them all in the same year. It has happened before, however the championship eluded us. Unfortunately, it does not appear likely that we will have them all together next season.
"Skol pa fiskande"
by NobleSavage on Jan 9, 2009 10:08 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
We're operating under the false assumption
that you can only do one or the other. Can’t we upgrade our Oline and get a better QB at the same time? There is the draft, free agency, and trades to acquire more than one or two players. The draft would be the best place to upgrade the Oline since teams rarely let a good lineman go in FA, and this draft is heavy with good olineman as well.
I wouldn’t put much stock in drafting a QB this year and have him start as a rookie, but you do have to start somewhere, sometime. And three years down the road, if Jackson is still the same guy, where do you turn if you have no developmental QBs. Any team as weak at the position as we are should be drafting one every year until we get it right.
So considering the relatively weak free agent crop at QB, a trade is probably all we could do. There are plenty of options there too, despite what people seem to think. A draft pick in hand is worth more than a QB on the bench if you have the depth at that position.
by Bodysuit Man on Jan 10, 2009 8:09 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
