Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: NFL Players Ready To Welcome Gay Teammate

Project 2012: Jared Allen

"...and then I'm gonna sack you, then you, and then you...you're cool, then I'm gonna sack you. I'm out."

The 2011 season mercifully came to an end almost a full week ago, which means we can officially focus all of our attention on looking towards next year. (Some of us were doing this by Week 10. Understandable.) Since the tied-for-franchise-worst 3-13 campaign has concluded, the Vikings have been busy. They already have a (kinda sorta) new GM. They are apparently looking into a new Defensive Coordinator. But if this team wants to get out of the doldrums of the standings, it will all come down to the players on the field.

One of the best players the Vikings currently have on the field is Jared Allen. This is an immutable law--the All-Pro defensive end is among the league's elite. Nobody doubts that.

As we embark on our first Project 2012 post that's actually in 2012, we're not bringing Allen's ability into question. However, we will ask a very difficult question--would trading Jared Allen help the Vikings become a better team faster than keeping him?

At first glance, I thought it was a dumb question. In my mind, anything short of a sequel to the Herschel Walker trade couldn't possibly give the Vikings enough in return. The guy missed the single-season sack record* by the slimmest of margins in a year where his secondary covered opposing receivers like they were in those Atlasphere balls from American Gladiators. His "motor" can't really be called a motor--that implies the opportunity of running out of gas. Allen never does. He's a vocal leader in the locker room and one of the two players on the team that are considered faces of the franchise. How could a few draft picks replace that?

While Allen is irreplaceable, we know how bad the 2011 Vikings were. Like "I might tell my kids about this season when they complain about losing a couple games in a row" bad. Like "If we replaced the entire secondary and offensive line I'd kind of miss exactly two players" bad. Like "We had two of the best players in the NFL and we still lost 13 games" bad. It's no stretch to assume that the 2012 Vikings will look very different from this year's version. Hell, most fans will be upset if there aren't tons of changes. And what better way to make changes than by getting a multitude of draft picks and/or players for one of the NFL's elite? We can all agree that Allen is awesome, but unfortunately he can't play cornerback, safety, wide receiver, or left tackle. (OK, after seeing him flawlessly handle long snapping duties this year he probably could play all those positions pretty well, but he couldn't play them all at the same time.)

One thing I will concede is that Allen's trade value will probably never be higher. He just turned the "spooooky" age of 30 and it will be tough to top what he did this year. He would command quite a ransom if teams knew that he was available. Especially teams with a lot of early draft picks that need an elite pass rusher to shore up their defense. (Psst: I'm talking about New England.) If someone came along and gave the Vikings a Godfather offer, they would have to at least strongly consider it, right?

I'll admit that it's hard to rationally discuss the possibility of one of my favorite players leaving. Jared Allen doesn't just dominate on the gridiron; he dominates life in general. From the funny quotes to his weekly radio spots to his community service to his Samson-like facial hair and mullet, there's always that fan sentiment to keep him no matter what. But in this case I think it makes total sense to keep Allen around for the next few years. As Chris pointed out earlier today, many elite defensive linemen have enjoyed success well into their 30's. I think the Vikings should build around The Mulleted One in the draft and free agency. With so much uncertainty heading into the 2012 season, it would be nice to be certain that #69 will still be flying off the edge and terrorizing quarterbacks.

But that's just me. Here's what the other DN writers had to say:

Star-divide

Chris: Personally, I don't see much of a point to trading Jared Allen. Yes, he's getting older, to be certain, but he's also coming off of what might be the best season for a pass rusher in the history of the league. Pass rushers can be effective for a long time in the National Football League...look no further than Chris Doleman, the man whose record Allen broke on Sunday. Doleman played until he was 38 years old. From the season where he turned 30 to the season that he turned 38, he averaged nearly 11 sacks a season, including a 15-sack season in his second-to-last year in the NFL at the age of 37. So, the "age" argument doesn't hold a lot of water with me. Jared Allen has the sort of work ethic that, I feel, is going to allow him to be good for a very long time.

The man is the best in the league at what he does...for crying out loud, the man got 22 sacks on a pass defense that allowed the second-highest opposing QB rating (107.6) not in the NFL this year, but in the history of the National Football League. Imagine what kind of terror the man would be if he had any support at all from the Vikings' secondary? That's exactly why you don't trade him...you are never, ever going to get anything close to equal value for a player of Allen's caliber. Sure, trading him away for draft picks sounds like a nice idea and all, but again, you're not going to get enough compensation to make it worthwhile.

To illustrate the risk of that, let's go back to the year Minnesota made the trade for Allen. The Vikings sent the Kansas City Chiefs a first-round pick and two third-round picks for a player in Allen that had proven himself on an NFL field. In that same draft, the Jacksonville Jaguars traded a first-round pick, two third-round picks, and a fourth-round pick to the Baltimore Ravens for the right to move up and select Derrick Harvey out of the University of Florida, who was supposed to do for their pass rush what Allen did for Minnesota's. Harvey lasted three seasons in Jacksonville, amassing all of eight sacks during that time, and got cut prior to the 2011 season.

Yes, the Vikings are rebuilding, and I understand that. However, "rebuilding" is not synonymous with "trade anybody that has any value for the rights to draft guys that might or might not work out." The Minnesota Vikings don't have a lot of sure things going into the 2012 NFL season, but Jared Allen is one of them and, barring a switch to a 3-4 defense, there is absolutely no sense in trading him away for any reason after he's just posted one of the greatest pass rushing seasons in NFL history. The suggestion of trading Jared Allen is every bit as ludicrous as a suggestion to trade Percy Harvin, and I'm pretty sure that no Viking fan would endorse that idea, either.

Ted: Wow. It's tough for me to separate the fan from the logic in looking at a trade, because well, it just is. Allen is one of those remarkable players that you love to watch play. It doesn't matter if the Vikings are up by 20 or down by 20, he's busting his ass on every play. In the brief time I got to watch the Vikes in Mankato, he was one of those guys that has an infectious personality, and really comes across as a great locker room guy and leader. So the fan in me has a kneejerk 'you can't trade him, what a stupid idea' reaction. But when I separate the emotion from it, I can understand the logic. He's approaching 30, he's at the height of his career, and you could argue you'll never get more value out of him by looking to trade him now.

But that ship sailed when the Vikings gave up a 1st and 2 thirds for him on draft day in 2008. He was in his mid 20's at the time, he had a team friendly contract (yes, it had to be renegotiated, but when he was acquired the contract wasn't an impediment and the Vikes were able to give him a new deal that was still team friendly) and was just beginning to tap into his immense talent, which he realized here in Minnesota. Now he's 30, has more good years behind him than in front of him, and no team is going to give up that much for him now, especially with the contract the Vikings gave him. That's not to say that Allen still isn't the premier defensive end in the NFL; on the contrary I think this year proved that he is more than ever. But just because he's a great player on a bad team, that doesn't mean we should trade away every single bit of talent on the roster just to amass draft picks.

I'm fully aware that the Vikings need a lot of help in several areas to get better, but I look at trading Allen as a a case of making the Vikings weaker without getting stronger. They still need playmakers to build around, and Allen can not only play, he can teach the infusion of young talent that this team how to be a true professional--how to study film, how to practice, how to prepare.

No, keep Allen and give him some help.

Mark: I think that Allen's value will never get higher considering he will be 30 to start next season. What is more important though is his contract which calls for $11,619,850 in 2012 and $14,280,612 in 2013. Also, since he received a $15.5 million signing bonus, there will be am extra cap hit of $2.583 mil or $3.1 mil depending on how many years they spread out the bonus. This is a huge number counting against the cap. It is one the team could absorb though if they release some players who are not worth what they are set to receive next year. I think trading Allen does have merit and is a serious discussion. Some fans seem to be emotionally attached to players and it makes the debate difficult. But with Everson Griffen looking pretty good whenever he gets the chance and the team needing to get him on the field, moving Allen for a first is a viable option. I do not think they will get much more than a first though. Maybe a conditional 4th in 2013 as well? I know they cannot replace his production but they are going to have to eventually anyway. Since we are rebuilding why not add another first rounder and roll with Griffen? That does not scare me at all. I also believe that if the Vikings switch to the 3-4 defense that Allen has already said he is not interested in that option. So they may have to trade him if they make that move. I think the switch is not a bad idea either especially when you look at all the 3-4 defensive players coming out of college lately. I think that is a trend that is not going to reverse. Just look at the rankings for DEs, DTs, and LBs and you will see plenty of top guys projected for the 3-4 defense as opposed to the 4-3 defense. I think the team does have players already that they can use in this defense. They have Kevin Williams and Christian Ballard who can play the 3-4 DE spots. They have Remi Ayodele who can play the NT spot but would need another. Maybe they sign Paul Soliai from the Dolphins. He is 6-4, 355 and only 28 years old. They can add a beast in the draft too and possibly let Ayodele go. They have Robison and Griffen who can possibly play the 3-4 OLB/DE spots. Maybe they also draft Donta Hightower too. They have Chad Greenway and Jasper Brinkley to play the inside LB spots and should resign Erin Henderson and let him play the inside spot and keep Brinkley as a backup. They can resign Letroy Guion to back up the DE spots and will need another if Reed is not an option.

If the Vikings keep Allen and stick with the 4-3 defense then they need to extend his contract a couple of years to lower that cap hit.

Kyle: First off, to piggy-back a bit off what Mark said, I think it's important to note that Kevin Williams has also spoken against a change to 3-4. That means our two key D-linemen don't want it, which further signals to me that it won't be happening, at least not in the next season or two. Frazier himself has also said he's not a big proponent of that change, so I do believe the whole '3-4' thing is somewhat immaterial in regards to discussing Jared Allen. Granted, if I'm wrong, then that does become the primary speaking point.

Now, assuming we stay at 4-3, I do agree that Jared Allen is a difficult guy to remove 'emotion' from when talking about his future. Full disclosure--Jackass 3 was on the other night and I got to watch Allen sack Jonny Knoxville again, so now I'm probably at a point where I can't divorce emotion from it. That said, and I've said this before, I don't think trading Jared Allen at this point in time is a good idea. Yes, his trade value has never been higher and probably never will be higher--I do think we could net a first rounder from some teams for him. Like I suggested with KWill, I think we could easily get a first rounder from New England for him, especially if that Achilles heel that is their defense costs them in the playoffs. However, I'm not willing to do that to our team. Right now Allen is about 50% of our defense. Without a secondary, we need a forceful pass rush, and Allen gives us that in spades. Of course, we're all hoping the secondary gets a major overall and upgrade this offseason, but there's no guarantees. If we take such a big piece out of our defense now, we put even MORE pressure on out offense, and I don't think that's such a good idea now, considering we're trying to develop two QBs, one who currently is in a state of semi-shell shock.

I can honestly say I think I am speaking without emotion when I say that trading him away is a bad idea. I could be convinced otherwise should someone prove to me we would get someone better in the trade, be it outright or through the traded pick, or at least someone as good but younger; of course, however, it goes without saying you can't prove that in terms of the draft, and I'm not sure who I see around the league that I would be willing to make that trade for, except someone perhaps like Larry Fitzgerald, or another player of such caliber that their team wouldn't ever trade them anyways.

So that's what we had to say about it--how about you? Let us know in the poll and comments below.

Poll
What do you think Jared Allen's future will be with the Vikings?
He'll still be here; you can't replace his type of talent.
799 votes
Trade him; his value will never be higher and this team has a ton of holes to fill.
159 votes

958 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 222 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Oh, God

Another ‘trade one of our established players and one of the best DE’s in the entire league’ post. A Herschel Walker-esque trade is not going to happen. And any veterans we get will not have the quality to justify trading Allen. Nor will getting several draft picks, since we all know what a crapshoot the draft is. If the Vikings do trade Allen, then our new GM will have proved himself totally unqualified for his promotion, and there would be such a hue and cry of rage from Viking fans that the Metrodome would collapse, Jericho-like, even without snow.

"Never approach a bull from the front, a horse from the rear, or a fool from any direction." - Old Cowboy proverb.

by TexVike55 on Jan 6, 2012 3:59 PM CST reply actions  

if i could Rec this on mobile, i would

"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."

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

by rj-b on Jan 6, 2012 6:19 PM CST via Android app up reply actions  

I'm guessing more like 8+ years of productivity left....

look at the chart on this post:

http://www.dailynorseman.com/2012/1/6/2687064/attempting-to-gauge-jared-allens-shot-at-the-nfls-all-time-sack-record

these are the top 4 pass rushing defensive linemen since the NFL actually began recording QB sacks….take a look at their numbers…

bruce smith averaged 11.5 until he was 29, but still 9.8 from 30-40, or ignoring his last season, 10.3….

reggie white averaged an insane 15.8 thru 29, and still a very very good 11.4 for the over 30 seasons he played, ignore the last one, 12.2

chris doleman averaged 9.1 through 29, and increased productivity to 10.7 for his over 30 season average

micheal strahan, averaged 7.8 through 30, and increased production to 11.4 average for his over 30 seasons….

IMHO there’s no reason to believe that JA, especially with his work ethic can’t average 10 sacks a season for the rest of his career. trading him would be even dumber than trading AP, because a DL’s productive life is much longer than a RB’s….

by michiganpat on Jan 9, 2012 8:26 AM CST up reply actions  

where will his production be at age 33?

The question isn’t whether or not he will be elite next year or even the year after. The question is where will his production level be when this team is poised to make a run 3-4 years from now? If it’s at 13 sacks a season, is that acceptable? If not we should be considering trading him now while his value is at it’s highest and accumulating young talent that will be peaking then.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 5:42 PM CST up reply actions  

Also

Hey are going to play the next two years.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:04 PM CST up reply actions  

because...

because the goal is to win a super bowl. We have too many holes to fill, we probably will not fill them in 2-3 years. So what Jared does over these next couple years is (aside from the entertainment value) meaningless. Three or four years from now we MIGHT be in a position to compete for a world championship. If we get a first rounder + for Jared now…we are one step closer to goal. That player we get will be over his rookie learning curve and hopefully stepping into his prime.

If you want to win a super bowl AND keep him then we have to be damn sure that Jared is going to be ELITE not just for the next couple years but for the 3-5 years. After that he’s done and AD’s window … done.

I think the play is to trade him. I hate to say.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:09 PM CST up reply actions  

Hard truth time

The goal is to make money. Winning happens to nicely coincide with that, but in general that means winning as much as possible as often as possible. Trying to engineer being bad for a long stretch and then making a run doesn’t do it.

An easier truth is that you don win super bowls by being bad for awhile and suddenly being better. If we are going to be competing for a championship in four years, we need playoff experience and we better have at least been in the pkaoffs in year three, if not year two.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:30 PM CST up reply actions  

In what world is 13 sacks a year not acceptable?

Besides that, looking at the chart many of the top tier pass rushers were effective, maybe not elite but effective, well into their 30s. DE is nothing like RB or WR in terms of physical punishment. Barring some freak injury or dirty play, DEs can play in top form for a long time. Hell, Bruce Smith played till he was 40.

by Amrius on Jan 6, 2012 6:12 PM CST up reply actions  

Chart in the thread Chris posted.

My apologies. Got the threads confused.

by Amrius on Jan 6, 2012 6:12 PM CST up reply actions  

It was Jared Allen day!

A guess would be that for a majority of the time the guys on the line are going at full bore speed (running wise) which might give them a longer shelf life than some of the other positions. The collisions (while heavy-duty) might be a tad less violent than those who are often going at full speed. Just a theory.

Build up your weaknesses until they become your strong points." --Knute Rockne

by abba7 on Jan 6, 2012 6:26 PM CST up reply actions  

I don't doubt he might be able to be "effective" 3-5 years from...

but I question if he will be impactful. And I definitely question whether he’ll be worth $12-15M/yr, which is what he’ll be making the next couple of years. If we can get a 1st and 2 3rds for him (or something close) I’d do it and save that money and spend it on other areas.

by DJSkillz on Jan 6, 2012 7:30 PM CST up reply actions  

Somewhere

Mark has addressed restructuring his contract or extending it. If he deep down wants to retire a Viking that could be done one would think.

Build up your weaknesses until they become your strong points." --Knute Rockne

by abba7 on Jan 6, 2012 7:32 PM CST up reply actions  

Good exercise !!!

It is always good to think What if. but in this case the answer is simple. NO DEAL
The only way to accept a trade like that is to give a superstar player and get two superstars players in return, drafting anybody always involve a risk, there is no way that we could have two superstars in a trade. Allen should stay.

by MexiVike on Jan 6, 2012 4:35 PM CST reply actions  

Excellent Point & rec'd

I became a Vikings fan watching the Purple People Eaters. Our helmets are freaking perfect for 4 down lineman blasting across the line in a wave of destruction. If we change to a 3-4, the helmets should have Hagar The Horrible decals instead.

There are several good 4-3 defenses around the league: New Orleans, Arizona, NY Giants, Philadephia, Detroit (sometimes) and the Bears. Could anyone picture Chicago running a 3-4? yeah, the 46 was cool, but I couldn’t see the Bears without a MLB.

by Caretaker QB on Jan 6, 2012 10:43 PM CST up reply actions  

yeah, we should always stick with what we always have done

makes perfect sense. we should never alter anything….any scheme, any type of play, and certainly not EVOLVE.

I’m not saying I would play a 3-4, just that your rational is of the nostalgic type and isn’t very rational or helpful at all.

by Chris3 on Jan 8, 2012 8:22 PM CST up reply actions  

agreed...

not to mention that because more teams are running the 3-4 more colleges and players are coming out that are “3-4” players each and every year. ie they’re easier to acquire/find/pay.

by DJSkillz on Jan 9, 2012 12:07 AM CST up reply actions  

Debate away but Vikings will stay 4-3

Also, NE traded an all pro DE for a first round pick (Seymour). Why would they undo that by offering a first round pick for Allen?

We should not rule out any trades but to trade Allen, I would want a lot more than a late first round pick and I agree that we are not likely to get a lot more than that but if someone offers, it’s worth thinking about. I’m all for purging the older players but Allen isn’t old, he’s in his prime.

by Vikefandc on Jan 6, 2012 5:21 PM CST via mobile reply actions  

Hell No To Trading #69

As bad as the last two seasons have been, Jared has been one of the few bright spots that have made us proud and kept the fans in the seats when all other hope has been lost. Get the guy some help in the defensive backfield and turn him loose to shatter the sack record in 2012.

by purplegrey on Jan 6, 2012 5:30 PM CST reply actions  

No doubt!

He’s liable to be a little PO’d about just missing it this year, and he’ll have extra incentive (not that he doesn’t go 110% anyway.)

Build up your weaknesses until they become your strong points." --Knute Rockne

by abba7 on Jan 6, 2012 5:33 PM CST up reply actions  

Then ? is where will his production be in 3-4 years?

The question isn’t whether or not he will be elite next year or even the year after. The question is where will his production level be when this team is poised to make a run 3-4 years from now? If it’s at 13 sacks a season, is that acceptable? If not we should be considering trading him now while his value is at it’s highest and accumulating young talent that will be peaking then.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 5:42 PM CST up reply actions  

Well...

Considering he played as a “one-man gang” this year, how much better could he be if he actually had some help on the line to take some of the double and triple teams off him? Try Griffen at the LDE and get a run stuffing tackle beside Kevin and I have no doubt Jared will prosper. The guy showed up in great shape this year and reaped the benefits. Since he’s competitive as hell, I believe he’ll work just as hard or harder to be better next year. His work ethic is contagious and will rub off on the younger players or free agents that may join the team. He may not have 20+ sacks a few years down the road, but he’ll still cause many a defensive coordintor to have to account for him in their plans. Not only is he a role model for the fans, but a positive force for his team as well. You don’t trade a guy like that.

by purplegrey on Jan 6, 2012 6:13 PM CST up reply actions  

The goal is a superbowl, not the NFL sack record. 3-4 years away at best imho

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:12 PM CST up reply actions  

We'll Just Have To Disagree

The way the league is set up now, a team can turn around quickly with a few tweaks here and there (see Lions). I don’t see 3-4 years etched in stone.

by purplegrey on Jan 6, 2012 6:19 PM CST up reply actions  

"A few tweaks"

meaning a QB and WRs/TEs. We already have Ponder/Webb, and between draft or FA, we’ll get a stud #1 WR to complement Percy and Rudolph.

by mg7505 on Jan 6, 2012 11:44 PM CST up reply actions  

Yah if

its only a hear and there hole to fill..and Detroits turn around has been waaaayyyy longer than 3-4 years they made huge mistakes pro longing it. We have way to much to fix for a fast turn around.

@}-----You've been Touched-----{@

by Velvetouch on Jan 7, 2012 1:48 AM CST up reply actions  

I was referring to the 0-16 season three years ago.

by purplegrey on Jan 7, 2012 10:26 AM CST up reply actions  

if we make it to the super bowl in 3-4 yrs

it will be because of a lot more than if we did/didn’t trade Jared Allen. In the end, even if his age is against him, you still need someone to train his replacement. You still need his leadership and motor. Why would you let a guy like that walk without anyone like him for your young guys to look up to? And aside from that…I can personally guarantee the number of blackouts this season would have been high had he not been on pace to break Strahans record.

by Chris3 on Jan 8, 2012 8:26 PM CST up reply actions  

His trade value from this year on will likely decline.

I love JA. He is one of the best Vikings of all time. His character, his attitude, his ferocity, and locker room presence are world class. I would love to see him retire a Viking. When it’s all said and done I think it’s a long shot they actually pull the trigger on this.

However…

I think you trade him if:

1. because you didn’t think this team can be competitive within 3 years or
2. because you are converting to 3-4, then now is the time.

Every year hereafter his value will decline.

I have been one who rejects the notion of trading AD. I think AD has 5-6 seasons of 1500+ yds in him and will still be very dangerous when we are ready to make a run in a couple/few years. Jared is three older than AD but still young enough. By the same token if it takes three years of drafting and free agency to fill these holes I think Jared would be 33. I think that is still young enough to contribute at a high level.

On the flip side of the coin I think Everson Griffen is a player, and I would like to see him get more opportunities. If not at DE (in the event we did trade JA) then at LB.

We need to get good before AD window closes. I don’t think any options should be off the table, emotions removed if it helps this team get better it has to be considered.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 5:35 PM CST reply actions  

I don't think they'll switch to a 3-4 defense.

The Vikings just interviewed Raheem Morris,,,,he’s a 4-3 Tampa-2 guy.

by chaosg on Jan 6, 2012 6:34 PM CST up reply actions  

I'd say trade him if the value is right, just like any other player...

If we can get something like a 1st and 2 3rds for him (like we gave up) I’d trade him. Much less than that and it gets dicey to me. But I think it’s possible we could get something like that for him.

I just think this team is at least 2-3 years away and by the time we reach that point JA will be starting his decline phase. So it almost doesn’t matter what he does for this team for the next 2-3 years. It’s a tough one for sure because of his marketability, but like any other player, if the price is right…

by DJSkillz on Jan 6, 2012 5:43 PM CST reply actions  

The more I think about it...

The greater the case for trading him (and I say that as a fan of his). The more I think about it the more the question becomes, how productive will he be in 3-4 years? I think you’re right, I think if we can get a 1st rounder + then we may need to seriously consider this play.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 5:46 PM CST up reply actions  

We will play

In the intervening years too. Discounting those as a throw away is not a sound way to analyze the question.

As with every possible trade the question is what you get in return, not an abtirarily ever long timeline after which you declare him to be too old.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:08 PM CST up reply actions  

I'm still not convinced we need to trade him

He will be a force for at least the next 5 years, barring freak injury or dirty play. We can definitely acquire the pieces to contend within that timeframe. What worries me the most is that we have little depth behind Allen, besides the still-unproven Everson Griffen – so trading him would likely replace one hole with another.

As bad as our defense was this year, it will be infinitely worse without him. Even if we trade him for picks, it would just put more pressure on our front office to make good decisions – a tall task for even the best GMs.

The only scenario in which they should even THINK about trading Allen is if a team offers multiple proven players in the secondary and/or OLine – those players don’t have to be very young, as long as they give us a dang good shot at contending within the next few years.

by mg7505 on Jan 6, 2012 11:51 PM CST up reply actions  

Trade Jared Allen??

The Vikings gave KC a first round pick and two thirds. How long did it take KC to recover from that loss?? Or have they recovered from that loss?? Only after a team loses a player of the caliber of a Jared Allen, do they realize how important they were. When Minnesota lost Randy Moss, they thought they could become a running team. The Vikings didn’t realize how much Randy meant to the run game. Teams moved their safties closer to the line of scrimmage. Losing Jared Allen will affect the defense. Opposing teams will game plan the Vikings differently.

by vking1 on Jan 6, 2012 5:48 PM CST via mobile reply actions  

right but

We got Jared for his BEST years. If you can trade him and get those picks back, then that’s a win.
I’m on the fence on this. It really comes down to, how productive is he going to be in 3 or 4 years at age 33? How much will his skills have declined? It’s a tough call.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 5:51 PM CST up reply actions  

"we got Jared for his BEST years"

+1. again, whatever Jared does over the next 2-3 years is relatively meaningless to me. it’s about what he does in 4-5 years.

by DJSkillz on Jan 6, 2012 5:58 PM CST up reply actions  

also

I’d say KC’s DL has been just fine without Jared Allen. Tamba Hali is a beast in his own right.

by DJSkillz on Jan 6, 2012 5:59 PM CST up reply actions  

I think that's absolutely the right take.

As heart breaking as it is…I love Jared…but I think you’re right. " whatever Jared does over the next 2-3 years is relatively meaningless to me. it’s about what he does in 4-5 years."

The play is to trade him.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:01 PM CST up reply actions  

yup. final answer.

I’m convinced. Trade him if you can get a 1st +

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:02 PM CST up reply actions  

Both of you are right on

If Vikings can get what they traded for him back, do the trade

Straight Cash Homey

by MOSScomeBACK2vikes on Jan 6, 2012 6:06 PM CST up reply actions  

it hurts but ya

It hurts to say, and I totally understand where people are coming from who hate this take but ya … the goal is a super bowl. I’m just not sure JA is elite by the time we are ready.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:10 PM CST up reply actions  

Let me get this straight

Youve given up on competing or three years, so we might as well trade him? and without any qualification about return value? Just trade him for whatever?

How about trying to win instead?

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:12 PM CST up reply actions  

…I said several times if you can get back a first rounder+

His trade value will never be higher than it is now, which is why this warrants investigation.

And yes I have written this team off for the next couple years. 3 years at a minimum imo

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:14 PM CST up reply actions  

You consulted your crystal ball?

If your going to reason from strong assumptions, you better be sure they are right. I don’t see any reason why we have to be so bad for three years that we should write them off. If we aren’t in the payoffs in two years, fans should be really pissed and there’s very little chance we will be in the Super Bowl in four.

And you only added a value statement after saying the same thing about six times without it.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:18 PM CST up reply actions  

playoffs in 2-3 years is even meaningless...

anything less than a superbowl is meaningless really.

and yes, we both said IF you get great value (a 1st and 2 3rds, or at least close) you trade him. less than that and no you don’t.

EVERY player is tradeable.

by DJSkillz on Jan 6, 2012 7:32 PM CST up reply actions  

Who said any player was untradabe?

But I love how you think sure bowls spring magically forth out of nothing.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 11:25 PM CST up reply actions  

No

It comes down to what can we get for him.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:09 PM CST up reply actions  

thats right too

I wouldn’t do it for anything less than a first rounder.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:11 PM CST up reply actions  

A first rounder isn't enough

It only gives you the chance to replace the hole you made with the trade.

Even using your timeline, which I think is excessively pessimistic, you will be very lucky to pick up a guy with that pick that will give you 13 sacks four years from now.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:14 PM CST up reply actions  

not exactly

you are getting a YOUNGER player.

Remember think 4 years from now.

A kid you draft with that pick fills another hole, and hopefully 4 years from now he is hitting his prime and is over the learning.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:15 PM CST up reply actions  

I don't think you are discounting for the uncertainty of the draft enough

13 sack players are rare. If you believe JA can do that in four years, then you really shouldn’t want to take your chances that you can make a pick that can match that production.

More likely your new guy is gone by the time the fourth year rolls around or he produces less.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:21 PM CST up reply actions  

I’m 36 years old. I remember Tommy Kramer. Since then I can count on one hand them games I haven’t watched. I don’t see this is negative time line. Given the number of holes we have to fill and the still uncertain fate of our QB position, I think anything less than 3 years is overly optimistic.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:19 PM CST up reply actions  

You ain't old, dude

And I remember Tommy Kramer too.

When was the last ime we had five nonplayoff years in a row?

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:23 PM CST up reply actions  

Well...

I AM old as hell and you’re right…I can’t recall us ever going five years without being in the playoffs except in the pre-Bud Grant days.

by purplegrey on Jan 6, 2012 6:27 PM CST up reply actions  

1982 thru 1987 (missing the playoffs)

is the worst I can find. 2004 thru 2008 is next worst I believe. Still that’s pretty darn good.

Build up your weaknesses until they become your strong points." --Knute Rockne

by abba7 on Jan 6, 2012 6:33 PM CST up reply actions  

Nope

1984 we won in the wild card round and lost The second round, no?

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:40 PM CST up reply actions  

Could be.

My research was hasty.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/min/playoffs.htm

Build up your weaknesses until they become your strong points." --Knute Rockne

by abba7 on Jan 6, 2012 6:41 PM CST up reply actions  

Huh

Thats weird. This shows 1984.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:44 PM CST up reply actions  

Hmm.

I remember kicking the crap out of the Saints in 1988, but 1984 – Doug Williams defeated us maybe – not sure.

Build up your weaknesses until they become your strong points." --Knute Rockne

by abba7 on Jan 6, 2012 6:51 PM CST up reply actions  

Oh God

I just looked it up and it was the infamous Steckel year….talk about bad memories….

by purplegrey on Jan 6, 2012 6:56 PM CST up reply actions  

(gag)

He was a horrible coach but I think he was a decent person.

Build up your weaknesses until they become your strong points." --Knute Rockne

by abba7 on Jan 6, 2012 6:57 PM CST up reply actions  

That goes right up there with….“but she’s a nice girl” LOL

by purplegrey on Jan 6, 2012 7:00 PM CST up reply actions  

ack

Off by a year. It was the 1982 season, playoffs in 1983.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 8:06 PM CST via iPhone app up reply actions  

It was the 1982 season

With the payoff games payed in 1983.

That ESPN chart had it off by a year (ie 83/84).

The 1984 regular season was the Stecel debacle.

by amiller92 on Jan 7, 2012 12:06 AM CST up reply actions  

aren't you sick of it?!

The point is…I’m not one to fool myself with overly optimistic hopes. The point is I think it is a very realistic take to think this team is not going to fill all these holes in two years.

The goal is a super bowl. Period. We have to do things that increase our chances. If you think Jared’s value in 3-4 years is greater than anyone we drafted now…then obviously you don’t trade him. But I think it’s debatable. I think Jared’s skills like every players will decline with age. I think in 3 or 4 years Jared will be good, but I’m not sold he will be elite anymore.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:36 PM CST up reply actions  

You fill some this year

And some next year. And you better either be in the playoffs or firing your staff.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:41 PM CST up reply actions  

why isn't good reason enough to keep him?

salary and lost value. by getting a 1st and 2 3rds for him you very well might be getting pieces (and cheap pieces) to help 3-4 years from now in a more meaningful way. and you’ve got an additional $10M or so ($12-15M minus those draft picks’ salaries) to play with for more help too.

by DJSkillz on Jan 6, 2012 7:35 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Ding Ding Ding....

We have a winner

Straight Cash Homey

by MOSScomeBACK2vikes on Jan 6, 2012 8:58 PM CST up reply actions  

Well sure

If they can get a new stadium for him it’s worth it.

But don’t introduce new “facts” and pretend your having the same conversation.

The point is value in return matters.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 11:27 PM CST up reply actions  

Todays NFL

The way the league is set up now, teams are turning around quickly where that wasn’t the case 10-15 years ago. Jolly Roger wanted parity and he damn sure has it. That’s why you’re seeing so many new teams in the playoffs each year.

by purplegrey on Jan 6, 2012 6:43 PM CST up reply actions  

dude I hope youre right

You’re right, NFL is ultra competitive and it’s anyone’s game but …The team winning championships are the Packers, Saints, Stellers, and Patriots. A handful of teams are a cut above the competition.

The Vikings in the 80’s and 90’s were competitive but only in 1998 and 2009 did I REALLY feel like we were in that next cut of teams.

Sure once in awhile a cinderella cracks into the top tier, but most often it’s just a handful of teams that REALLY legitimately have a chance. That 2009 team wasn’t just built over night. To put this thing together … I mean REALLY together … is not easy thing to do and it takes tough decisions. Trading JA is about the toughest.

I just don’t share your appraisal of the holes. There are some free agents out there for sure, but the Vikes need to hit on some top free agents, and probably more than one or two. It’s a tough take man…believe me…I love Jared…I really do. I don’t throw this take out there lightly. I think it’s the smart play though. You can agree to disagree and time will tell. I will cheering for us to win heck I wanted us to beat the Bears even though I knew it would cost us draft slots.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:55 PM CST up reply actions  

Hey

We’re all fans here and want what we think is best for the team. We just all have different ideas of how to go about doing it…

by purplegrey on Jan 6, 2012 6:58 PM CST up reply actions  

I want to think different

I get your take on Jared. I do. I love Jared, but it’s time (imo) to do something different. While there is no guarantee a first rounder we picked this year would be elite in 3-4 years, I think there is a good chance he maybe and for sure he will be younger. I have no idea how good Jared will be in 4 years but my fear is he will have wasted his best days on a losing, and then be half a step behind when we need him the most because he will have declined with age.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 7:07 PM CST up reply actions  

and I realize the Vikings will be worse in the short term for having traded him, but it doesn’t matter how great he plays the next 2-3 years because this team has too many other holes. 3-4 years from now we could be legitimately challenging, and so where will Jared’s skills be at that time?

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 5:53 PM CST reply actions  

no no no no NO

this is really easy to sum up:

if we trade every good player when they turn 30, or their contract is more than $10mil/yr, we will always be nothing more than a dog chasing its tail.

thank your lucky stars Jared is in purple. there are 31 other teams who wish they had that dynamic of a defensive player.

please put this discussion to friggin’ bed. yes, we need pieces to rebuild, but not like this.

"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."

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

by rj-b on Jan 6, 2012 6:19 PM CST via Android app reply actions  

I get it

I get your take, I really do. But you’re living in denial if you think his production is going to be this high in 3-4 years. It is exactly because other team wish they had this dynamic a player is why you trade him NOW … his trade value will never be higher !

Again, it is not about what he does these next couple years, but what he can do when this team is legitimately ready to compete.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:22 PM CST up reply actions  

It's about who you replace him with

Not whether he’s stays at this level for whatever arbitrary timeline you make up.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:24 PM CST up reply actions  

I think you are seriously kidding yourself if you think players don’t decline with age, and I think you are even more kidding yourself if you think this team will have filled all it’s holes within 2 years.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:26 PM CST up reply actions  

all Im doing is asking the question, where will his skills be when this team is LIKELY going to be poised to make a run, and I personally don’t see us being ready for AT LEAST 3 years. Trading him and acquiring young assets now will only help shorten that time line, because it does take time to build a winning team.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:27 PM CST up reply actions  

and of course what you get in return is critical. You need a player in return whose value will be higher that Jared’s in 3+ years. The likelihood of acquiring that level of player comes in the first round. My take is to trade him for a first rounder + and nothing less.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:33 PM CST up reply actions  

You get how we don't snap our finger and end up four years in the future, right?

Winning is usually built. We need to be better next year, better still the year after and damn well better be in the playoffs the year after.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:35 PM CST up reply actions  

Nice straw man

He had 22 sacks this year. I’m using YOUR projection of 13 sacks four years fom now.

Who arguing that players don’t decline with age?

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:33 PM CST up reply actions  

Im not arguing any sack totals. You stated :

“It’s about who you replace him with Not whether he’s stays at this level for whatever arbitrary timeline you make up”

I don’t know how many sacks he will have. I do know players decline with age. I think it’s a gamble to keep him on this team and not trade him while his value is the highest. I asked how many sacks does that equate to … 13? I don’t the number he needs to get to trump the value of a player we could draft now in exchange for Jared.

You trade him now if you think the player in return has greater value than Jared in 3 years and beyond. Not year, not the year, but when this team is actually poised to make a run in at least three years.

So what is that number? I’m not telling you it’s 13, I’m asking. Is 13 sacks > a YOUNG starting player in a position of need entering his prime ?

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:41 PM CST up reply actions  

He's burning a hole in your pocket?

You keep stressing that his value is highest now. That only matters if you think we are destined o trade him. It’s very unlikely that we are.

And I’m not debating the sack number. The whole point is avoiding a stupid argument about a wild guess. Call it 10,13, 15 it 17. Your odds of taking one pick this year and turning it into any of those levels of production four years from now are not good. especially not late in the first round.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:51 PM CST up reply actions  

you dont necessarily draft a DE with he pick you get for Jared. You have 3 years to fill that hole. You take the best player available at a positional need.

I agree it’s unlikely we trade him, he’s too great a fan favorite, and of the best football players we’ve ever had at DE – I get it. But the FACT is his value will never be higher. If you don’t trade him now then you never will because it would never make sense.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 7:01 PM CST up reply actions  

Dd I say you pick a de?

What des “level of production” mean to you? Stop changing your story.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 11:30 PM CST up reply actions  

you really haven't thought this through, have you??
you dont necessarily draft a DE with he pick you get for Jared. You have 3 years to fill that hole.

…and then wait another 3 or 4 additional years for that young DE to develop into a player who will likely be, at best, 3/4ths of the player Jared Allen is.
right, good call…

But the FACT is his value will never be higher.

that’s not a fact, let alone a fact so EMPHATICALLY presented. it’s unlikely his value will never be higher — but who is to say he can’t duplicate what he did this year, or do better?? who honestly expected after his first three seasons with the Vikes, where he totaled 14.5, 14.5, and 11 sacks respectively, he would get 22 sacks??

oh right, i forgot, players decline with age. DUHHH…

"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."

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

by rj-b on Jan 7, 2012 12:52 AM CST up reply actions  

Well they do

Maybe Allen will be the RARE player who does not. The majority of others do and we are witnessing on out team now.

To act as if it is not a regular occurrence is myopic.

Go down the list and there are very very few players that get better or even maintain their current level of play as they get older. Most of these are HOF type players.

I will agree that Allen is a player who I do not think will decline for at least two more years. Maybe three years from now he will start to taper off. But his trade value if still sky high right now that is for certain.

by MarkSP18 on Jan 7, 2012 7:25 AM CST up reply actions  

i'm really sick of hearing this, too:
his trade value will never be higher !

why didn’t we trade AP?? hell, it was evident we needed to rebuild going into this year, right?? please, i’m all ears.

this isn’t fantasy football, kiddies — the whole “sell high” thing doesn’t work the same way in real life when the player is legit, and he actually wants to contribute to your team.

you’re living in denial if you think his production is going to be this high in 3-4 years.

i’m not in denial, but you’re missing the point — you’re about as clueless as i am about how good JA will be in 5yrs. what we do know is, he is going to be elite for the next 3 seasons — in that time, we can become a contender again if we make smart moves in FA and the draft (for the record, we’d need to do exactly the same thing if we traded Jared).

all that is kind of irrelevant, though — the “odds” don’t always apply when talking about elite players. JA has many good years ahead of him.

it’s like, why didn’t the Patriots trade Tom Brady when he turned 30…?? better get the most for him before his stock plummets…!!

what a crock.

honest to God, i feel dumber having argued this long about this.

"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."

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

by rj-b on Jan 7, 2012 12:37 AM CST up reply actions  

Allen and Brady play different positions so they comparison is useless

The Vikings could have thought about trading AP before they gave him that big contract. That was the prime time to consider it. They would have received at least a couple of firsts easily. Not much more than that most likely though. I am not saying I would do it but with running backs, once they get close to 2000 carries, things start to change.

But the reason why the Vikings would have considered trading AP would have been about the money and money alone. Of course that could have backfired because AP fills up the seats. The point is it could have been done.

I think this is a very interesting debate and I do not fell “dumber” for discussing it with my fellow Vikings fans. After all it is just a discussion.

by MarkSP18 on Jan 7, 2012 7:32 AM CST up reply actions  

good grief, Mark -- you really need to learn how to read sarcasm

"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."

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

by rj-b on Jan 9, 2012 8:38 AM CST up reply actions  

yeah, he's going to fall off the face of the earth

just like bruce smith did, recording 14 sacks at age 34, a terrible 10 at age 37….

or reggie white and chris doleman, recording 16 and 15 sacks respectively, at age 37…

or kevin greene recording 14.5 at age 34, 15 sacks at age 36, and a paltry 12 at age 37…

by michiganpat on Jan 9, 2012 8:43 AM CST up reply actions  

This ^

kills me people seem tyo think when talking about trading a guy like Allen alls they add into the equasion is his stats. Man if thats all a guy brings then its a sad day…Allen is the face of the D just as strong as AP is the face of the O. And none of us know what he brings to those around him. You have to beable to count for that and you simply cant. Its guys like AP and Allen that are some glue to a good rebuild. Their value is no longer in return as it is in they are a corner stone of the newly built foundation that will eventualy lead to bigger and better. Some key pieces you keep when goping into a rebuild and sometimes it isnt just about production.
Seems some people think we need to toss out Ponder now and cut our losses then trade our best defensive player for some Pics. With this logic you trade AP then now while the gettin is good. Foundation cornerstone of the rebuild going forward is Ponder, AP, Harvin and Allen.
its those pieces you build around strong and deep.

@}-----You've been Touched-----{@

by Velvetouch on Jan 7, 2012 2:08 AM CST up reply actions  

I am not sure what that means

The “face” of the D. Really? I do not buy any of that stuff. They need players on D period. No one player is the “face”. For everything that Allen did we still went 3-13. That does not mean I am a proponent for trading him. It just means that despite his great season the team still lost. In other words, no one player makes a difference.

Allen obviously brings his knowledge, experience, and work ethic to other players around him. But making claims that he is the “face” of the D and he brings something that is invaluable to the other players on the “D” is something that no one can measure. I suppose if you had a defensive player saying how much Allen has helped them then you could say he is bringing something else to the table. I feel it probably does happen though.

But really, how much is that worth? Players are motivated to play well so that they can get a new contract or just keep their jobs. Coaches are there to inspire and coach as well.

No one or two players are invaluable on this team when you go 3-13.

No one wants to toss out Ponder but if the Vikings feel RG3 is the BPA at #3 and take him I would not be upset. It does not mean Ponder is out either. Yeah some will say that is a waste. But maybe the Vikings may not feel Webb is a viable backup if the starter goes down for multiple games? That is not tossing Ponder out. That is bringing in some competition. If he is better then he plays. Sounds fair to me. I do not believe they will pick RG3 but I would not be surprised. It is a good discussion.

by MarkSP18 on Jan 7, 2012 7:39 AM CST up reply actions  

It would mean we ave the equivalent of Matt Millen

At GM, who thinks you build a winning team by maximizing your talent at one position.

by amiller92 on Jan 7, 2012 10:10 AM CST up reply actions  

yah even at

3-13 one or two are invaluable as you need some good to build from..ahh face..thee stud on the defense that just set a new team record. But to each his own :)

@}-----You've been Touched-----{@

by Velvetouch on Jan 8, 2012 1:42 AM CST up reply actions  

Keep the studs we have.

And go get some more Via draft & FA.

by Lars in SLP on Jan 6, 2012 6:21 PM CST via mobile reply actions  

I hope you're right

as much as I think the play is to trade him, I don’t think the Vikings will do it because of all the people like you – he is too much a fan favorite. For all our sakes I hope Jared is the beast he is today in 3 or 4 years. If not … we will regret not acquiring a first round pick now.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:25 PM CST up reply actions  

I see no posts talking about the salary

This is key and one reason why I think they should keep him. I do acknowledge that his value will not be higher and I am realistic enough to know that the Vikings will not get back what they paid to get him but they could come close. I do think there are legitimate reasons for trying to get back extra picks now and freeing up that money to go after some other free agents.

The reason why I say they need to keep him though is that the Vikings need to spend 89% of the salary cap in cash starting in 2013. Now if they go out and sign some free agents then they could have some players making some good money in 2013. This is a key issue which all teams will have to deal with because many of the bench players are not worth a lot of money. Thus if you do not have about 10 players making over 3 mil per year then you are going to have to give some younger players raises before you would like.

The only way I trade him is if they are going to make the switch to a 3-4 and Allen is adamantly against the move. I do not see why he would resist especially when he can play the 3-4 OLB/DE position just like Demarcus Ware does and who by the way, managed 19.5 sacks this year. But if Allen does not like it then so be it.

I would try and sign Calais Campbell who is 25 years old to replace Allen if they make that move. I doubt Campbell will hit the market though. Arizona will franchise tag him most likely.

The 89% cap number in cash starting in 2013 is going to be very important. Very important indeed when you consider that only Harvin and Loadholt are due for significant deals in the next two years. Maybe by then Ponder will be playing well and they can give him a Kevin Kolb type deal? I hope that is the case.

by MarkSP18 on Jan 6, 2012 6:24 PM CST reply actions  

How much would it drop his cap

If they signed him to a new 6 or 7 year deal?

And I definitely would not mind Campbell a Viking. He has a lot of promise.

by Amrius on Jan 6, 2012 6:32 PM CST up reply actions  

I don't see money as an issue...

I see it as an issue the other way and a reason TO trade Allen. You should never worry about saving money. The Vikings (and I have full faith in Brez’ cap management) can find other ways to reach the cap minimum. Keeping a bloated salary (not now, but a bloated salary 2-3 years from now in Allen’s case) for cap reasons is never good IMO.

by DJSkillz on Jan 6, 2012 7:39 PM CST up reply actions  

You are right

but who you give big money to is very important going forward.

Allen only has two years left on his deal. So they can let him play it out and then he can leave. Many of the people wanting to keep him do not consider the salary he is set to make and how much it counts towards the cap. If the Vikings want to be big players in free agency (as you other post detailed) then they need all the money they can get. That does not mean trading Allen now. They can keep Allen. But they will not be able to add as many players as they possibly can. And they need to add some players and not just through the draft.

I do not know of other ways to reach the cap minimum yet. It will take some free agents because the current group of players does not have many players that will get a huge deal in the next two years besides Percy and Loadholt (perhaps).

by MarkSP18 on Jan 6, 2012 8:22 PM CST up reply actions  

off-topic, but...

Loadholt doesn’t even deserve a ‘perhaps’… everyone gave me hell last year for suggesting he’s a bust, and all i heard was, “give him one more year to prove himself”.

guess what i’m hearing now?? “oh, it’s the last year on his contract, we should see if he can prove he’s worth an extension.”

not a chance. you wanna talk about trading someone?? trade Loadholt for a mid-rd pick and we should consider ourselves lucky.

"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."

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

by rj-b on Jan 7, 2012 1:00 AM CST up reply actions  

He is not going anywhere this off season

They have too many other pieces to replace. profootballfocus has him as the best run blocking tackle in the league. Unfortunately he is the 7th worse pass blcoking tackle.

Only way they trade him is if they think Love can play right tackle next year and we did not even see him at all this year during the season. Maybe Patrick Brown can play that spot?

But if we are thinking about trading a player before it is too late then Loadholt is a guy they can think about moving since next year they will not be able to move him unless they do so before the trading deadline.

by MarkSP18 on Jan 7, 2012 7:49 AM CST up reply actions  

Not necessarily true

One man’s trash is another man’s treasure holds here. Just because we are sick of him does not mean he has no worth.

by Murgo on Jan 7, 2012 12:21 PM CST up reply actions  

Gotta Trade him

We are in full rebuilding mode, we can atleast get a mid round first pick, speilman is probally heading to a 3-4, we can actually fit most of those players in 3-4, Allen and Williams are the issue

by eltwentyone on Jan 6, 2012 6:33 PM CST reply actions  

He does that make s better?

We get a young but mst likely worse layer who may well wash out of the league before Allen retires.

Also, I will accept any wager that we are not going to 3-4.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:38 PM CST up reply actions  

In 4 years. A player we draft now will be entering his prime. Jared’s skills by then will have declined. The question is by how much will they have declined?

I think drafting a player in the first gives you an excellent chance to fill a position need for a long time.

Tell me…how many ELITE years does Jared have left?

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:43 PM CST up reply actions  

Given

The company he finds himself in, and his own personality and work ethic, i’d say quite a few.

by Amrius on Jan 6, 2012 6:53 PM CST up reply actions  

Only if you assume

THat every pick pans out. Newflash: that’s nowhere close to true.

As for how many elite years he has left, I don’t know. But almost certainly more than the guy you get with the pick, who most likely has a career total on zero elite years.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 6:53 PM CST up reply actions  

Im not even suggesting a 3-4

Im suggesting this team can’t fill all it’s holes in 3-4 years. By then Jareds skills will have declined. By how much, I do not know but I would argue that getting first rounder now will fill a hole for many years, and in 3-4 years when this team is ready to win a super bowl, that players value would exceed Jareds.

Again, it’s not about what JA does these next couple years, but what he can do in 3+
His value will never be higher. We will likely never get a firstrounder fr him if we do not do this now.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:46 PM CST up reply actions  

Ok, well how many years do you think Jared will play at an ELITE level?

And as to my projections on how long it will take to get this team back to Super Bowl contention…I’m sorry I cannot bend that at … this team was exposed, there are a lot of holes. Anything less than two years is extraordinarily optimistic.

(though I do appreciate your hope and optimism – I just think my projections are more realistic … you can of course agree to disagree – time will tell)

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:59 PM CST up reply actions  

4 or 5

(more or less)

Build up your weaknesses until they become your strong points." --Knute Rockne

by abba7 on Jan 6, 2012 7:02 PM CST up reply actions  

Bruce Smith averaged 7.6 sacks per year the last six years of his career. In 4 years Jared will be 34. Bruce played until he was 40. I’m saying when hits 33 (in three years) he will begin to decline just like Bruce Smith did…one of the greatest DE to ever play, a fan favorite, the heart and soul of the Bills defense. I will concede that JA will have good to great years over the next 2-3 seasons (just like Smith).

In the three years (roughly the same period of consideration for Jared in this discussion) prior to that Bruce Smith averaged 12.6.

So if Jared tracks like Smith he will average 12.6 sacks per season for the next three years, and then decline to 7.6 sacks per year.

Yes we can have the debate over who is better JA or Bruce Smith. The point being…Jared’s production will hold steady for the next three years and then decline (based on historical trends).

12.6 sacks per year is good, but irrelevant because the Vikings are not poised to compete over this duration.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 7:51 PM CST up reply actions  

Okay

Now project what your one late first rounder can be expected to do, and be sure to discount for the possibility he’s a total bust or gone after three years.

Oh, and nice juking the stats so the fourth year is more like his last year than the one before it. Because that’s how it usually goes.

And never mind that you’ve placed no value on veteran leadership, or on the whoe team earning to win in the interim.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 11:38 PM CST up reply actions  

I don't know

But I know that good teams are made up of good payers, marginal
Layers and a few elites. He’s in the day category fr now and shoud be at east good for your projected timeline.

But go ahead and change your story again. Maybe this time you trade anyone who hasn’t set a league record in the last 48 hours?

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 11:34 PM CST up reply actions  

Allens work ethic speaks Volumes!

Allen has a lot of passion in his trade.
He’s the type of player that will never settle for mediocrity, and that’s the type of players we want in the locker room.
Allen will demand a respectable salary, but he’s a fair minded guy. Work a deal that doesn’t break the bank, and retire him as a Viking :)

by chaosg on Jan 6, 2012 6:48 PM CST reply actions  

no doubt

Jared’s a beast. He has a motor second to none. He’s world class. How many years do you think he will be competing at an ELITE level, honestly?

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 6:57 PM CST up reply actions  

I would say 3yrs minimum....

As far as I know, Allen hasn’t had any major injuries in past that are suddenly going to catch up to him.
However I am a realist, and I know he’ll be fortunate to stay “ELITE” after the age of 35….
But him remaining in the top-10 isn’t out of the question :)

by chaosg on Jan 6, 2012 7:51 PM CST up reply actions  

He does not

have to be Elite..show me a link on a super bowl winning team that without such an such defensive end playing they would not have been in the super bowl. Allen is the type of player that more than likely barring injury will not all of a sudden fall off the map. He will do a gradual decline..good productive D lineman are considered productive with 8.5 to 10 sacs a year that is what makes him so off the chart. will he be what your Idea of Elite is? No because you dont want anything but what he does now which is called record setting. it doesnt happen every year. Will he be effective and still in 4 or 5 years yupp.

@}-----You've been Touched-----{@

by Velvetouch on Jan 7, 2012 2:22 AM CST up reply actions  

You can all agree to disagree

It’s your opinion – time will tell.

I don’t think the Vikes will do it.

I think the Vikes should do it. I think you are blinded by love for Jared, I understand that love. I just don’t think it’s the best football decision for the long term prosperity of this team. If they don’t trade him now then they never will nor should they because his value will not be this high.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 7:04 PM CST reply actions  

In A Year Or Two...

One of us will be saying, “Told Ya So”….

by purplegrey on Jan 6, 2012 7:08 PM CST up reply actions  

I hope that is everyone else saying “I told you so” to me because that means we will have drafted and acquired free agents enough to fill all our holes, Ponder/Webb will have taken the next step as QB, our new coaches and coordinators will have all worked out, and we will be raising a super bowl banner in our new stadium.

If it is me saying “I told you so” it will mean that Jared will have played his heart out for 2-3 years on losing or mediocre teams and will have lost a half step due to age when this team is finally ready to ready compete, and by then I will be only sad and frustrated that my beloved purple had once again come oh so close.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 7:15 PM CST up reply actions  

I am not blinded by anything

Judging by the physical demands of the DE position and how long his peers played for, Allen has at least 4 or 5 productive years left.

Bruce Smith played until he was 40 and had 7 10+ sack years from 30-40. Reggie White played from 30-38, missed 1 season and then came at 39 before he retired and 6 of those 9 seasons he was above 10 sacks. Chris Doleman played until he was 38 and had 5 10+ sack years after 30. Jared Allen is the same league as these guys, anyone discounting that just blind, and it’s not unreasonable to assume we’ll get similar production out of him in his football twilight years.

by Amrius on Jan 6, 2012 7:31 PM CST up reply actions  

productive does not equal elite...

and also does not justify his elite-level salary. that’s what’s being missed here.

by DJSkillz on Jan 6, 2012 7:41 PM CST up reply actions  

It's not

Hes only getting paid that for two more years.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 11:43 PM CST up reply actions  

ummm...

which is ANOTHER reason to trade him.

1) he’s only 2 years away from FA. you lose leverage each day that FA creeps closer.

2) you expect him to be elite for the next couple of years; you really think he’s going to get a massive pay cut if he has 2 more elite years for the next 2?

by DJSkillz on Jan 7, 2012 12:07 AM CST up reply actions  

The value gained from a first rounder this year who fills a positional need < ?? sacks?

22 sacks is ELITE. 10+ sacks … I’m not sure I would qualify that as ELITE. In fact Bruce Smith over the last six years of his career average 7.6 sacks per game. (10+7+10+5+9+5)/6 = 7.6.

I would take a first rounder today, age him 3-4 years and take him over 7.6 sacks per season ALL DAY.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 7:42 PM CST up reply actions  

Bruce Smith averaged 7.6 sacks per year the last six years of his career. In 4 years Jared will be 34. Bruce played until he was 40. I’m saying when hits 33 (in three years) he will begin to decline just like Bruce Smith did…one of the greatest DE to ever play, a fan favorite, the heart and soul of the Bills defense. I will concede that JA will have good to great years over the next 2-3 seasons (just like Smith).

In the three years (roughly the same period of consideration for Jared in this discussion) prior to that Bruce Smith averaged 12.6.

So if Jared tracks like Smith he will average 12.6 sacks per season for the next three years, and then decline to 7.6 sacks per year.

Yes we can have the debate over who is better JA or Bruce Smith. The point being…Jared’s production will hold steady for the next three years and then decline (based on historical trends).

12.6 sacks per year is good, but irrelevant because the Vikings are not poised to compete over this duration.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 7:52 PM CST up reply actions  

and 7.6 sacks per season has less value than a first drafted today and trained for three years to fill any number of positional needs.

If Allen tracks like Smith the next two to three years will be the best (avg 12.6) and then he is like Smith he will decline from age 34-40 averaging 7.6 sacks per year.

The value gained from a first rounder drafted today and trained for 3 years will exceed Jared in year 4…when we are actually ready to compete for a super bowl.

In fact if we trade Jared now we will no doubt be worse in the short term which means higher draft picks over this rebuilding period.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 7:59 PM CST up reply actions  

You are bad at math

No matter how many times you repeat yourself (whats with that, btw?). Smith averaged 12 sacks a year over your arbitrary 4 year window. Smith had 10 in the fourth year. Using his last few years to project the fourth one is either dishonest or not very smart.

Also, smith didn’t have 22 the year before those numbers either. You’ve failed to consider (among other things) that Allen may be better than Smith.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 11:49 PM CST up reply actions  

I don't particularly love him

But I do know that this isnt Madden or fantasy football, which seems to be lost on many around hear.

Also, I don’t know why you would lament never trading someone. It’s not like the league actually works that way. Very few vets get traded at all.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 11:41 PM CST up reply actions  

Good Academic Discussion But...

NO WAY! You can’t replace talent like that…sorry. Trading your BEST defensive player would be the absolute dumbest short-sided mistake, well maybe #2 behind the Walker deal, that this franchise would make. You need players like him around this team to rebuild it. His value as a football player is much more than what he brings to the games on Sundays.

"Skol Vikings! Let's win this game Skol Vikings!

by DaRange on Jan 6, 2012 7:10 PM CST reply actions  

He is our best player you’re right. He probably will be for the next couple years. And I hope this team fills all there holes and wins a super bowl before he loses a step. My fear is that Jared’s best days will be wasted on a mediocre team. I totally understand your take and your love for Jared. You’re right, his character is unique and one of a kind.

I think the Vikings will keep him. I think fans want to see him retire a Viking. I can’t imagine him in another jersey…however I think the love we have for him is blinding. I think we have to think long term, and I think the right football decision is to trade because there is a higher probability a first rounder drafted today will have greater value than Jared in 3 years and beyond, which is to say I think this team is years away from being legitimate contenders, and we have to do something different to break out mediocrity.

Warren Buffet is successful because he buys when everyone else is selling, and sells when everyone else is buying.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 7:22 PM CST up reply actions  

Can't Argue With That

Every point you make is great. Your logic is sound. But your analogy is off a little. It’s true investors like Warren Buffet buy when others sell and vice versa, but he won’t sell his core holdings when knows they’re the bread and butter of Berkshire. What he does is accumulates winners at bargain prices and what I say is we keep our winners…our core stable of best players and build around them with little bargains we can find through FA or in the later rounds of the draft. I think we need guys like Jared to build a team around. As a buy and hold investor, I’ll not sell Allen. No thanks!

"Skol Vikings! Let's win this game Skol Vikings!

by DaRange on Jan 6, 2012 8:55 PM CST up reply actions  

Warren Buffet wouldn't

And hasn’t sad that about himself.

Look your case is easy once you build in your exaggerations:

- the only gal is winning everything
- you need elite payers to win everything
- It will take for years to get a roster add up of only elite players
- nothing between then and now matters, and in fact it’s better to suck right up until you unleash the elites
- Allen will be 34 and no 34 year old lineman can be elite
- any first round pick we get will be elite in four years
- therefore a frost round puck is more valuable than JA

That’s lovely logic if all the assumptions are right. But each and every one of them is highly suspect.

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 11:56 PM CST up reply actions  

Allen has high mileage

he plays 99% of snaps on this team, we gotta trade him to rebuild, with a new gm hes gonna have his own vision, I dunno but Allen is our only tradeble asset, his value is high as ever, I say we trade him

by eltwentyone on Jan 6, 2012 7:12 PM CST reply actions  

Despite the difference in score against the Saints last month..

Jared Allen was the only guy on defense waving his hand every snap..prompting the crowd to make some noise..and the crowd responded to his waving the hand. No number of drafts can guarantee that. I would never trade him.

by izziefans on Jan 6, 2012 7:24 PM CST reply actions  

what if he was 75 years old and in a wheelchair?

Build up your weaknesses until they become your strong points." --Knute Rockne

by abba7 on Jan 6, 2012 7:26 PM CST up reply actions  

The correct response

would be that he would whip his dentures at Aaron Rodgers head! (your slipping)

Build up your weaknesses until they become your strong points." --Knute Rockne

by abba7 on Jan 6, 2012 9:30 PM CST up reply actions  

Bruce Smith averaged 7.6 sacks per year the last six years of his career. In 4 years Jared will be 34. Bruce played until he was 40. I’m saying when hits 33 (in three years) he will begin to decline just like Bruce Smith did…one of the greatest DE to ever play, a fan favorite, the heart and soul of the Bills defense. I will concede that JA will have good to great years over the next 2-3 seasons (just like Smith).

In the three years (roughly the same period of consideration for Jared in this discussion) prior to that Bruce Smith averaged 12.6.

So if Jared tracks like Smith he will average 12.6 sacks per season for the next three years, and then decline to 7.6 sacks per year.

Yes we can have the debate over who is better JA or Bruce Smith. The point being…Jared’s production will hold steady for the next three years and then decline (based on historical trends).

12.6 sacks per year is good, but irrelevant because the Vikings are not poised to compete over this duration.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 7:51 PM CST reply actions  

Holy crap

Niw that you said the exact same thing four times, you’ve convinced me! Way to go! I no longer remember math!

by amiller92 on Jan 6, 2012 11:58 PM CST up reply actions  

KEEP JARED ALLEN

So you would honestly prefer to trade Jared Allen for a draft pick , that is being selected by Spielman? The Vikings don’t just lose a great player, they also lose a lot of leadership. A lot of posters seem to think that trading Jared Allen will not only guarantee a great player in exchange , but will guarantee a Superbowl win.

by vking1 on Jan 6, 2012 8:04 PM CST via mobile reply actions  

Well,

Spielman goes by Erics poll. And so far our position is winning 264-43. – Your points are valid but why give up a known good commodity for an unknown one(s)? It’s seriously like playing the stock market!

Build up your weaknesses until they become your strong points." --Knute Rockne

by abba7 on Jan 6, 2012 8:13 PM CST up reply actions  

So your personally guaranteeing if we trade Allen we'll win the superbowl in 4 years?

If so, I have a feeling your words are writing a check your ass can’t cash.

by Amrius on Jan 6, 2012 8:14 PM CST up reply actions  

Based on Bruce Smiths career - valuation

1 keep Jared, 12.6 sacks per year for years 1-3, and then 7.6 per year for years 4-10

or

2 trade Jared for a 1st rd. Train that pick for years 1-3 and in year 4 his value > 7.6 sacks

That’s my take, that’s the bet I make. If I can get a first rounder for Jared now I do it all day with my eyes set on competing for a world championship in four years, knowing that my team will be worse in years 1-3 having lost Allen, meaning higher draft picks.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 8:05 PM CST reply actions  

You're contradicting yourself

Earlier you said that we don’t need to draft JA’s replacement this year and use the gained picks in other areas, but in this post you’re implying that we do draft JA’s replacement this year and in 4 years his production will be equal or greater than JA’s would be if we kept him.

Which is it? You can’t have it both ways.

by Amrius on Jan 6, 2012 8:17 PM CST up reply actions  

Pure Speculation

A person can make all kinds of calculations, but in the end all it is, is pure speculation. You could trade Jared Allen and get stuck with the next Tyrell Johnson. We know what we have with Jared.

by vking1 on Jan 6, 2012 8:20 PM CST via mobile reply actions  

You can't replace his talent AND character

They both go together. People are always replaceable but the character puts a unique signature on the Viking’s chemistry.

Both Ponder and Webb have a talent and character combination that are huge pluses.
So does Adrian.

I rest my case.

by VikesFanSince1967 on Jan 6, 2012 8:32 PM CST reply actions  

character doesn't win games...

talent does. i could care less about character in a football sense. it’s nice and all, and as a tiebreaker, sure, i want the good guy. but more than anything i want my team to win. character doesn’t do that. IMO.

by DJSkillz on Jan 6, 2012 8:42 PM CST up reply actions  

I want my team to win

So do I, and that’s why a team doesn’t throw away one of its best players for draft picks— especially when Spielman is making the picks.

by vking1 on Jan 6, 2012 8:47 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

good drafter, huh?????

trading draft picks, high ones, for aj feeley, yeah very good….

by los vikingos on Jan 7, 2012 7:05 AM CST via iPhone app up reply actions  

agree to disagree...

I’ve liked his Vikings drafts quite a bit overall.

by DJSkillz on Jan 7, 2012 9:15 AM CST up reply actions  

Draft of 2011

and especially in 2012 will tell us Spielman’s aptitude at drafting. As DJSkillz, I too think his drafts have been pretty decent. The coaching up of the players has been atrocious.

by Murgo on Jan 7, 2012 12:23 PM CST up reply actions  

Keeps 'em out of jail.

Real disappointed in Chris Cook. I hope (and my opinion of this has taken a 360 through certain peoples comments) but I hope this guy can overcome his issues and deal with life, uh, betterly.

Build up your weaknesses until they become your strong points." --Knute Rockne

by abba7 on Jan 6, 2012 8:53 PM CST up reply actions  

Character is an X factor

Can you imagine a plain vanilla Jared after a sack and showing no emotion?
Jared has been one of the highlights of the 2011 season. After every sack, we all looked forward to the emotion he shared with the team and fans. Your beloved Vikings team did not win much this year, and I wouldn’t follow it if it wasnt for the great character + talent combo it has.
Take a hard look at Philly this year. Didnt they have the talent to run the table this year? Everyone was so in awe of their draft and players signed that a SuperBowl was almost a done deal before Week 1 was played. Fast forward to end of season. Their talent did jack squat. Talent + Character go hand in hand in defining the team chemistry and intangibles of momentum. I like to see both. I’ll concede there’s good character and bad ones, so I favor the positive side like Adrian, Harvin, Webb, Ponder, and Jared has shown. I think you get the idea.

Vikings in 2012 will be a Wonder-ful year. Seriously!!
I also love the game of golf. My favorite golf GPS app is OptimalClub.
It is hands down the BEST golf aid you'll ever have for club distances
under current elevation and weather conditions. Stop guessing & score low!

by VikesFanSince1967 on Jan 6, 2012 9:17 PM CST up reply actions  

disagree completely...

Philly didn’t “not win” because of character. They didn’t win because of a whole lot of lack of talent at key positions (like LB, OL, DL) and poor coaching (I like Castillo, but he should not have been their DC).

Also, I work in sports. So I never buy the character stuff anyway. The vast majority of professional athletes are not exactly “good guys”. I wouldn’t trust almost any of them with my mom/sister/girlfriend/wife.

by DJSkillz on Jan 6, 2012 9:31 PM CST up reply actions  

would you say TO has good character?

he works harder than maybe any player in the NFL.

the two are totally different things.

by DJSkillz on Jan 7, 2012 1:40 AM CST up reply actions  

The NFL seems

to think its important:
the NFL, NFLPA and all NFL teams recognize August as "USA Football Month." As the leader in youth football development, USA Football teaches the game’s fundamentals and further instills the sport’s character-building values within the youth football community.

@}-----You've been Touched-----{@

by Velvetouch on Jan 8, 2012 1:56 AM CST up reply actions  

of course it's important...

in life and in general.

but it’s not real important to being a great player. IMO. again, the vast majority of pro athletes are not “good character” guys. the vast majority are relative scum, actually.

by DJSkillz on Jan 9, 2012 12:09 AM CST up reply actions  

2005 Draft

Look at the 2005 NFL Draft. The Vikings had two first round picks. They were used on WR Troy Williamson and DL Erasmus James. The Vikings second round pick was Marcus Johnson. There is no guarantee that a draft pick will pan out. We do know that Jared Allen is an elite player and a positive influence on the field. It seems that you wish to toss that away on some weak speculation on when you think Jared’s skills will erode.

by vking1 on Jan 6, 2012 8:45 PM CST via mobile reply actions  

weak specualtion?

You mean using historical reference by comparing him to other great NFL defensive ends? Chris Doleman was slightly better averaging 10.3 sacks over the last six years of his career.

You’d rather ignore historical reference and hope that Jared defies the aging process and performs better than any other aging defensive end in history. Honestly it’s a gamble either way. I don’t see us competing for a world title in the next 2-3 years which I think will be Jared’s best days.

Let him go somewhere he can win and let us add youth and hopefully fill a position need for a decade while we stll have Adrian and Percy.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 8:55 PM CST up reply actions  

peace

and you can’t compare every first round pick to Troy Williamson…that’s like me saying XYZ DE got injured therefore Jared will surely get injured. Yes some first round picks bust, but the probability of filling a position long term is better in the first round which is why the picks are more coveted, I think you can at concede that. And yes it is possible Jared will be elite for the next decade but my chips are down….and it doesn’t matter what I think nor can I add anything else to this discussion.

by aceinthecorner on Jan 6, 2012 8:58 PM CST up reply actions  

Let's talk probabilities

My guess is that there a very good chance, let’s say 80%, that Allen averages 13 or more sacks per year over the next five years. I’d put the chances of turning a late first round pick into that level of production over five years as 50% or less (that’s top ten or so at the position in the league production).

Which part do you disagree with?

by amiller92 on Jan 7, 2012 12:12 AM CST up reply actions  

that's a flawed argument...

who cares if he averages 18 sacks/yr over the next 3. it’s those last 2 years that matter for this team.

by DJSkillz on Jan 7, 2012 1:41 AM CST up reply actions  

Minor tweak

But still using years 8-10 to reduction year four. Still silly.

by amiller92 on Jan 7, 2012 12:01 AM CST up reply actions  

excellent excellent point, and that shit is what we got for trading moss....

how much better did trading moss make us? (insert crickets noise)

by los vikingos on Jan 7, 2012 7:07 AM CST via iPhone app up reply actions  

what did trading kg get the twolves.....crickets

what did trading shaq get the magic…crickets
YOU NEVER trade your best player in his prime (unless if you dont care about winning and are cool with being 0-16 next year)

by los vikingos on Jan 7, 2012 11:39 AM CST via iPhone app up reply actions  

1) he's not our best player

2) he’s going to start the downswing from his prime.

3) we’re not “close”. this is a rebuilding job.

by DJSkillz on Jan 7, 2012 4:23 PM CST up reply actions  

Im waiting for someone to suggest we trade All Day

That will really get the discussion going

Straight Cash Homey

by MOSScomeBACK2vikes on Jan 6, 2012 9:04 PM CST reply actions  

Ha thats already been done several times

"Never take your eyes off of your opponent…even when you bow."

by Vikant on Jan 6, 2012 9:24 PM CST up reply actions  

I actually would...

but I think AD will be elite for 6 years or so still. AND he’s much more vital than a DE, IMO.

For the record, it doesn’t show up on the stat sheet and it’s not as “sexy” but I believe that Kevin Williams is a more impactful player (when healthy) than Jared Allen. And obviously I do love Jared Allen.

by DJSkillz on Jan 6, 2012 9:33 PM CST up reply actions  

So...

You think that AP will still be productive after 6 years at the most physically punishing position in the league but don’t think Allen will be at DE? That makes next to no sense.

by Amrius on Jan 7, 2012 2:00 AM CST up reply actions  

age...

AD is a few years younger than Allen and much more “elite”. I think AD may go down as the greatest back in the history of this league.

by DJSkillz on Jan 7, 2012 9:16 AM CST up reply actions  

YOUR OUT OF YOUR FRICKEN MIND TO THINK OF TRADING HIM

Jared is a cornerstone that you need to build around give him a secondary and and another DE at the other side that can do at least a average job and some ILB that can plug the middle Jared will manage 8,9,10 sacks a year for the next 7 years or more if you compare him to what Doleman did Jared is even more athletic and in better shape and has yet to have any injury that has slowed him down for very long, the best way to replace him will be to have a good prospect work behind him so he can learn the Jared magic, and the last thing you do to this defense is take away its biggest motivator and locker room leader !! let him him play untill he cant and then get him to stay on as a coach , there is is not enough draft picks or trades to replace what he brings to this team for the the next 5 ,7, years or more

by THORS BLOOD THIRSTY HAMMER on Jan 7, 2012 11:20 AM CST reply actions  

According to Pelissero and Zulgad

Spielman is pretty gungho on the 3-4 and they would not be surprised if he is going to shop around Allen. They say he has been given a lot of control of the organization despite what is said out in public. Such as, he has the final say of the coaching as well and not the only the players etc.

by Murgo on Jan 7, 2012 12:28 PM CST reply actions  

If he does it

The chance f him being gone in two years go p substantially.

It could work, but it’s a big risk.

by amiller92 on Jan 7, 2012 1:49 PM CST up reply actions  

"Spielman is pretty gungho on the 3-4"

…link??

"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."

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

by rj-b on Jan 9, 2012 8:42 AM CST up reply actions  

Roster is stocked at rush DE

and thin at DT and linebacker.

3-4 requires 3 DTs, 4 LBs and 0 rush ends.

Yeah, makes perfect sense to switch.

by amiller92 on Jan 9, 2012 9:15 AM CST reply actions  

Trading JA for a draft pick?

You want to trade JA for a 1st rounder, you say? Before you do that, let’s look at what the Vikings accomplished with their 1st round DL in the past…… raise your hand if any of these guys belong in the same zip code as JA:

1995 Derrick Alexander (drafted at #11 ahead of Hugh Douglas and Warren Sapp)
1999 Dimitrius Underwood (A can’t miss, right? Perhaps the most infamous Vikes’ draft bust of all time)
2005 Erasmus James

I don’t even mention Kenechi Udeze in 2004, as his health issues were unknown to anyone and it seems that he could’ve been a force on our DL if not for his unforeseeable cancer issues.

It’s not like the Vikings haven’t drafted DL in recent history, it’s their poor choices or bad karma or whatever you want to call it. So to project the future value of a drafted DL as being more valuable than the future potential of a JA, most smart football people will hold onto JA.

When you talk about the future potential of a first-rounder, you have to look at the crapshoot that the draft often is.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;ylt=Ao9F6QFxajEb.fHMGSsh6ZDubYF?slug=dw-wetzel_new_orleans_saints_roster_rejects_011012

Look at this article wherein the Saints are pretty honest about how difficult it is to judge a prospect’s future success, and how many of their stars and solid contributors were undrafted and overlooked by other teams. Even guys like Sean Payton admit that sometimes they screw up the evaluation process. Do you really want to give up JA and roll the dice?

by Tim Clark on Jan 11, 2012 10:40 PM CST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

DN strives to be the best blog about the Minnesota Vikings on the internet, doing so with a unique blend of insight and analysis, as well as (hopefully) wit and humor. We hope you enjoy the site, and make it your home for Minnesota Vikings info!

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
You Can Breathe Slightly Easier
Small
Vikings Roster Analysis: Secondary
Russian_arms_control_small
Season in Review: Chris Cook's Best and Worst performances in 2011
Biggun_small
1st New Vikes Stadium Image

Recent FanPosts

Jg_small
UBVs Special| Trivia! Can you name the Minnesota Vikings Starting QBs?
Small
Roster Analysis: Quarterbacks
Biggun_small
SUCK IT MARTY! - Stadium Passes MPLS 7-6
Imagescaj02y87_small
We get NO RESPECT!
Small
Supplemental Draft and our Safety Situation
Small
Vikings Roster Analysis: Receivers and Tight ends
Grover_small
Purple Kool Aid - Oh Ya!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Photo_10_small
Percy Harvin and the 2012-13 Passing Game

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Triangle Of Authority

Dailynorseman_small Christopher Gates

Ted_logo_small Ted Glover

Victory__small Eric J. Thompson

Assistant Coaches

Minnesota-vikings-logo_small MarkSP18

Wiggy_7_small Skol Girl

Headshot_small KJSegall