2012 Offensive Line

by CCNorsemen on Dec 29, 2011 1:09 PM CST

After reading some of Frazier's comments about Steve Hutchinson, Anthony Herrera and Brandon Fusco, in his latest press conference, it got me thinking about the makeup of the offensive line for next year. Some of our starters definitely won't be around next year, but what of our backups? What about the 2012 draft and free agency? What follows is a write-up of the current OL starters, and then what I hope the OL will look like in 2012.

2011 Offensive Line

LT: Charlie Johnson. He was a cheaper LT than McKinnie, and has played like it. He's a tad shorter and smaller than a typical LT at the NFL level, at only 6-4, 305 lbs. Most NFL tackles are a minimum of 6-5, 310 and larger and posses long arms to redirect pass rushers. Johnson has struggled to contain pass rushers this season.
LG: Steve Hutchinson. He's a 7-time pro-bowl guard who just went on IR before the final game of the year. Frazier said he'll have to discuss his future in the NFL with his family, and he very well may retire after 11 seasons in the NFL.
C: John Sullivan. He made huge strides after a disappointing 2010, and earned a new contract.
RG: Anthony Herrera. He's battled back from a knee injury he suffered in 2010, but is on the wrong side of 30. He's been a career overachiever being signed as an undrafted free agent in 2004, and being a starter since only 2007.
RT: Phil Loadholt. He's a dominant force in the run game, but lacks in pass protection. After a promising rookie year, and a disappointing 2010 plagued with injuries, he failed to take the leap forward in 2011.

Backups:
DeMarcus Love - LT
Joe Berger - LG/C
Brandon Fusco - RG/C
Patrick Brown - RT

Projected 2012 Offensive Line

LT: Matt Kalil/Jonathan Martin. Depending on draft position, we're sure to draft one of these elite players to address the weakest link on the offensive line.
LG: Charlie Johnson. I think they give Charlie Johnson a look at LG, as he surely isn't the answer at LT. With Hutchinson going on IR, and Frazier saying, "I’m hoping that things will get better for him soon with the concussions for sure and that’s something I’m sure he and his family will discuss, what his future is and how much longer he wants to play professional football. He is still a guy who can play and be a positive addition to your football team but he’ll have some decisions he’ll have to make after this season is over." There's no guarantee that Hutch is back, and if he's not then Charlie Johnson projects better at the guard position due to his size, and has some experience playing guard for the Colts.
C: John Sullivan. He's our new long term starter at the center position and just earned a new deal.
RG: Brandon Fusco. He's shown flashes of potential in a backup role in his rookie season, and he can play center or guard. Maybe that makes him more valuable as a backup, but he's a mean guy in the trenches and would be a fierce addition to the O-line as a starter in 2012.
RT: Phil Loadholt. He'll be in a contract year in 2012, and if he can't make improvements in pass protection, I expect the Vikings to part ways with Loadholt after next year. He's a road grader in the run game, but he's a liability in the passing game, and at the NFL level, players need to be able to do both well.

Backups
LT: Late round draft choice (Jeff Adams or Bradley Sowell)
LG: Joe Berger
C: Joe Berger
RG: Mid-round draft choice (Peter Konz, Larry Warford)
RT: Mid-round draft choice (Tom Compton or Brandon Mosley)

A lot of this hinges on what Steve Hutchinson decides to do in the off-season, and what the team thinks of Anthony Herrera. I would love to see them go in a different direction at RG, and give a young guy with potential like Brandon Fusco a shot. For some reason I think they'll probably keep Herrera as the starter next year, but it's not what I hope they do. Give Fusco a full off-season and training camp, and see if he can plug in. If they are still sold on Herrera and if Hutch returns for a 12th season, they could very well only be replacing the LT position, and would keep a lot of the young guys on the roster as backups. It seems clear to me from watching the games, that we need to move in a new direction, and everyone except for Sullivan and possibly Loadholt should be put on notice.

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.

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Agree

I love the idea of putting Charlie Johnson at LG, he has the body and build for the position. I agree we maybe need to upgrade the RG position, but Fusco is going to have to mature if he wants to be a starter. Everytime he comes in the game he gets a personal foul. Being a fiery offensive lineman is great, but he has to control that. I like the rest of the offensive line you have projected. Don’t forget about Demarcus Love as a backup, the team really likes him and he seems to have some potential.

by DHVikes12 on Dec 29, 2011 9:10 PM CST reply actions

Love should compete with Loadholt in TC for RT

assuming we can draft an elite LT prospect (Reiff is also a possible option), CJohnson and Fusco/Berger at OG, Sully at C, the line should actually be a great improvement. (i’m honestly hoping Love will prove to be an outright steal as a late rd pick — he may be a downgrade from Loadholt in the running game, but if he can prove to be a big step up against the pass rush, i would take that swap in a heartbeat.)

"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."

Can I buy a vowel...?? +1, Kluwe.

by rj-b on Dec 29, 2011 10:34 PM CST up reply actions

I'm always confused when people put forward another year....

Of Charlie Johnson. Why do we need to keep him, move him to another line position and hope he is better? Are we stuck with a big contract or something? The guy has been horrible here, and was only sufficient when Manning (with his ultra fast release) was throwing the ball.

Before the season he was released by the Colts….think about that for a minute….released by the team who’s o-line rivals ours for “suckiness”.

No reason to keep him, and I have seen no indication that he possesses the skills to be a competant LG. The only proof of that is that everyone on the DN has jumped on board with Johnson to LG…..however this theory seems devoid of common sense. Look at the tape; he doesn’t have it.

Nope, keep Hutch at a reduced rate or find a competant guard or two; and change this line for the better. This is for the sake of our young, talented QB’s.

No more plug and play.

I will not be PONDERing anything, ever again....I'm so tired of this pun. Maybe we could use antonyms to be different, like: "FORGET about last season, as we COGITATE about winning in 2011!"...Whatever, SKOL VIKES!!!

by J.RO on Dec 30, 2011 9:38 AM CST reply actions

Just because he can't play LT does not mean he can't play LG.

You are right, the only reason he was sufficient at LT for the Colts was because of Manning’s release.

But most of his problems are related to his relative slowness and inability to handle speed-rushers, which he will face much less often at Guard. Not to mention when he played guard with the Colts he played better than he did when he was at LT for the Colts.

Now, we are not saying hand Charlie Johnson the job, only that he will likely perform better at the position and we should give him a chance to compete for the job.

by Bjorno on Dec 30, 2011 10:53 AM CST up reply actions

I understand the different blocking assignments for the offensive line...

…and I don’t think that Charlie Johnson possesses superior skills to play LG in comparision to Berger, Fusco, several FA’s, several draft picks, or even a 60 year old Hutch.

I was more interested in why we as fans think it is necessary to keep an underachieving lineman like Johnson around, when in a full re-build. Hope is a great thing, but I would have higher hopes with someone that has not already proven to be abysmal in the NFL.

This can probably be done for someone cheaper than Johnson as well. He may perform better at LG, but I think that slight improvement is negligable Vs. a new player….As a backup, I could see Johnson being alright; as long as his playing time is limited.

Maybe our love for Johnson stems from him being the 199th pick in the draft…..like Webb. :)

His replacement would probably be better, at a fraction of the cost ($2.95 million).

by J.RO on Dec 30, 2011 4:28 PM CST up reply actions

His replacement would probably be better, at a fraction of the cost ($2.95 million).

“Probably” is a strong word for this statement, I think “May be” is more appropriate. I am pretty sure you were one of the guys calling for Sullivan to get the axe as well.

The coaches have the entire off-season to take a good hard look at him for the LG position. They obviously will consider cost into the decision making, and make the appropriate choice.

by Bjorno on Dec 30, 2011 4:40 PM CST up reply actions

I don't recall ever saying Sully needed to go...

…and I will stick with probably.

League average is a stretch in my opinion (in relation to Johnson’s play). We can replace Johnson fairly easily at a much lower cost than $2.95 million. He’s a backup at best, and we have already paid his 3 million dollar bonus this year, so we don’t get nicked….if we release and sign Nicks (see what I did there).

I’m not sure why you thought I was one of the guys who called for Sully’s axe. I believe I said (before the season) that Sully was not one of our immediate problems.

by J.RO on Dec 31, 2011 12:24 AM CST up reply actions

I also don't think Loadholt should get the axe...

…just to be clear:

LT from the draft.
LG should be a cheaper Hutch if he doesn’t retire.
C should be good enough in Sully’s hands if he stays healthy.
RG with Fusco could be solid (I like his fire).
LT with Loadholt, as long as he has some competition.

A fourth used on a Guard could bring some talent into the mix as well. Obviosly I like the Carl Movistar idea otherwise; and that may be one of the better FA’s that would play in MN.

by J.RO on Dec 31, 2011 12:29 AM CST up reply actions

And to be clear...

I don’t think that we shouldn’t consider cutting Johnson, I just feel that he seems like a hard worker and should be given the chance.

by Bjorno on Jan 2, 2012 1:30 PM CST up reply actions

My ideal off season for the offensive line would be this ...

Sign Carl Nicks to a 9 mil plus per year contract (or whatever it takes). Release Hutch upon completion of this signing.
Draft Jonathan Martin in the first round.
Draft Kelechi Osemele in the second round.
Draft Marcus Zusevics in the 5th round

Starting line
LT – Jonathan Martin 6-6 305 (22 years old)
LG – Kelechi Osemele 6-6 347 (22 years old)
C – John Sullivan 6-4 305 (26 years old)
RG – Carl Nicks 6-5 343 (26 years old)
RT – Phil Lodholt 6-8 343 (25 years old)

backups …

Brandon Fusco 6-4 305 (23 years old)
DeMarcus Love 6-4 315 (23 years old)
Marcus Zusevics 6-5 305 (23 years old)
Charlie Johnson 6-4 305 (27 years old)
Patrick Brown 6-5 310 (24 years old)

I like a very young line that can grow with Ponder or Webb.

by MarkSP18 on Dec 30, 2011 10:23 AM CST reply actions

I could go with that then we draft a RT next year and let Loadholt go

I also like the idea Viking_#28 came up with in trading down from #3 to #5 and taking Martin/Rieff and then trading #22 and our 2nd round pick #35 to trade up to #10 and grab DeCastro ( this would be a trade with Cleveland to start with).

by nmvikesfan on Dec 30, 2011 6:14 PM CST up reply actions

Should have kept Love in as a backup...

Not sure how/why he fell off my radar for 2012, but I do think Love stays on as a backup. Patrick Brown might stay on as a backup as well, but I’m not holding my breath there.

Ponder. Peterson. Percy. Purple Perfection.

by CCNorsemen on Dec 30, 2011 6:36 PM CST up reply actions

Love

Read a statement today on why Love was on the 53 man roster but not activated all season. Main reason is they didn’t want someone to sign him off our PS and thay have been grooming him as several positions because of his versitility. they are waiting to see what they can do with him with a whole offseason and see where they are going to play him. Don’t be surprised if he’s our starting LG next year, I had read earlier in the year that our O-line Coach was having him study that position.

by nmvikesfan on Dec 31, 2011 1:08 AM CST up reply actions

In the 2nd round

Instead of drafting a player who is playing left tackle and switch him to guard, we grab a true guard who could be a starter for years.

Kevin Zeitler from Wisconsin is a beast. We grab him and we are set at one guard position for a while.

by why am i in omaha on Dec 30, 2011 11:31 PM CST up reply actions

yup!

Might even slide to the 3rd round.

by chatter on Jan 3, 2012 12:56 PM CST up reply actions

I like Zeitler too

but the Vikings like players that have the ability to play multiple spots on the line. You really need that too when you sometimes only suit 7 or 8 offensive linemen for a game.

Osemele is playing left tackle and is likely going to play guard in the NFL.

A player like Levy Adcock from Oklahoma State is another player who can play multiple spots.

DeMarcus Love and Brandon Fusco can play multiple spots.

I am trying to think like the team thinks.

But Zeitler would be nice.

by MarkSP18 on Jan 3, 2012 3:20 PM CST up reply actions

Well we already have Love

Bird in the hand and all that. I think we need to work with what we have before we start looking to get new people.

The Vikes aren't in a remodeling or reconstruction they are in a burn the place down and start praying they don't mimic the Lions rebuilding process.

by Grime on Jan 3, 2012 3:56 PM CST up reply actions

I only posted my dream scenario and it included Love.

I think that Love may end up the right tackle in my scenario above especially if Loadholt does not improve drastically next year in his pass blocking.

by MarkSP18 on Jan 3, 2012 4:26 PM CST up reply actions

Aye I got that

Just seemed weird that they talk a bunch about Love but then don’t play him at guard when he had ample opportunity.

The Vikes aren't in a remodeling or reconstruction they are in a burn the place down and start praying they don't mimic the Lions rebuilding process.

by Grime on Jan 4, 2012 12:05 PM CST up reply actions

He is in the same situation as Ponder and the other rookies

No normal off season thus stunting his development in his first year. Plus he was hurt at the Senior Bowl so maybe they were taking it easy with him?

I think the main thing is that they have been using him at tackle and not at guard in practices. Thus Fusco got the call when Berger went out.

by MarkSP18 on Jan 4, 2012 2:13 PM CST up reply actions

Yeah that's the point where I was looking at

People have talked about Love being guard but Fusco came in for Berger which makes me think Love is taking a back seat on that. I read about what the line coach was doing to develop them and it sounded pretty interesting. A lot of book work and fundamentals. Heck we’re going to be in need of two new guards next year and a LT. Here’s to praying this all works out.

The Vikes aren't in a remodeling or reconstruction they are in a burn the place down and start praying they don't mimic the Lions rebuilding process.

by Grime on Jan 4, 2012 2:44 PM CST up reply actions