Making A Plan

by amiller92 on Jan 7, 2012 3:34 PM CST

It seems to me that a lot of the disagreement around here on questions like whether to trade Jared Allen turn on a lack of agreement about the team's prospects and future. Some see nothing good happening for a number of years, and thus think anyone who's not a young player has little future value. Others disagree.

So I thought, let's try and work up a plan. I'm sure once I write it, you will all instantly agree, because that's just how sports blogs and the internet work. It's a consensus building exercise, and all it's missing is a few trust falls.

Anyway, moving on. Every organization needs goals and plan to achieve those goal. My sketch of goals, strategy and benchmarks after the jump.

So, goals. I think we can all agree that the ultimate goal is to win a Super Bowl as soon as possible. That's great and all, but Super Bowl teams don't just spring up out of the ashes left after a dumpster fire, so I think we need some intermediate steps to be able to get there. I think those intermediate goals have to be informed about what's possible and when (leading to a bit of a chicken and egg situation), but here's what I think is reasonable and the Wilf's should expect.

1. From here, year-over-year improvement each year

2. Return to the playoffs after the 2013 season

3. Compete for division championship no later than the 2014 season

4. Win at least one playoff game before the 2015 post-season

With that, let's look at the minimum that the Wilf's should expect each year:

2012 Off Season

Required personnel moves:

1. LT: 1st or 2nd round

2. CB: 1st or 2nd round

3. S: rounds 2-4

4. #1 WR: most likely FA, or rounds 2-4.

5. DT: mid-round or FA

6. Define the guard positions: Johnson, Fusco, Love, Berger or FA.

Assumptions: Steve Hutchinson and Visanthe Shianco will not be back. Antoine Winfield and Chris Cook will be. There will be no major trades (i.e., trades involving Jared Allen). Adrian Peterson returns before mid-season. Toby Gerhart is ready by the beginning of the regular season (probably sooner).

Benchmark: These moves, which are easily doable, coupled with some continued development from Ponder and Webb, should produce a team that is capable of 6-8 wins. Any result that fails to meet those expectations will result in major changes in coaching staff and/or front office.

2013 Off Season

Personnel moves: It's harder to be specific the expected moves farther out in the future, but agenda items includes a re-assessment of the quarterback position, the addition of another corner back (as Winfield is likely not returning at this stage), another safety, re-assessment of Phil Loadholt and perhaps addressing RT high in the draft, re-assessment of the guard positions, upgrade at MLB (on the bubble for the 2012 plan), evaluate whether upgrades are needed at OLB.

Assumptions: Obviously, if we missed the 2012 goals, things will look a lot different. But assuming that isn't the case, the real question mark here is how the quarterback position will develop. But it should not be difficult to address RT and LB as needed.

Benchmark: 8-11 wins and a playoff appearance.

So, people, where as I wrong?

This FanPost was created by a registered user of The Daily Norseman, and does not necessarily reflect the views of the staff of the site. However, since this is a community, that view is no less important.

Tweet Comment 47 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Back everything up a year and I think this would be very reasonable plan then. Remember, the Vikings are in the same division as the Packers and Lions. The Packers are only going to get better which is almost scary. Same with the Lions.

by Timothy Bryce on Jan 7, 2012 6:16 PM CST reply actions

eh...

Packers will be blown to hell after NDamakung Suh ends Rodgers career sometime in 2012.

by DJSkillz on Jan 7, 2012 6:20 PM CST up reply actions

IDK about the Packers only getting better

They probably have already hit their ceiling this season. They will be good for years to come no doubt, but getting better I don’t think they will.

As a reference I was thinking of the Bulls when you said this, being that I’m a Bulls fan. The Bulls had the number 1 regular season record last year. However, we hit our ceiling in the regular season, and the Heat rose their ceiling come playoff time to overcome us. It will take more then you have now to get better.

☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/debates and dedicated DN reader.

by UnBannedVikingholic on Jan 9, 2012 12:22 PM CST up reply actions

Sir, with all do respect, the Green Bay Packers are the third youngest team in the league and they will only continue to get younger, bigger, stronger, and faster.

by Timothy Bryce on Jan 9, 2012 4:18 PM CST up reply actions

Please explain to me how can the Packers get better?

They really don’t have any glaring defenicies on the offensive side of the ball. And they’ve been in the 3-4 defense, what 3 years now? And they still aren’t dominant or even close. I didn’t say the Packers won’t be good, because they will. But I just find it harder to see them getting better then 15-1. The Packers are young, but the real “Leaders” other then Rodgers, are up there in age. (Donald and Charles).

☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/debates and dedicated DN reader.

by UnBannedVikingholic on Jan 9, 2012 9:07 PM CST up reply actions

Driver has basically been demoted to the 5th receiver. Woodson is going to be a little more difficult but they can take care of that with a first round draft choice or the continued emergence of Sam Shields.

by Timothy Bryce on Jan 10, 2012 1:26 PM CST up reply actions

Leadership is just as important as having talent though.

☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/debates and dedicated DN reader.

by UnBannedVikingholic on Jan 10, 2012 1:58 PM CST up reply actions

Not really

I’ll take the talent. They have both. Coaches don’t let the players get out of line in the big cheese.

by chatter on Jan 13, 2012 8:12 AM CST up reply actions

And that's assuming that

Sam Shields will play at the level that Woodson have. And that’s still not explaining to me how that makes the Packers better.

☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/debates and dedicated DN reader.

by UnBannedVikingholic on Jan 10, 2012 1:59 PM CST up reply actions

As the younger players get more experienced, they will need the experience of Driver and Woodson less and less. Shields is 24 years old in just his second season. He is former UDFA who had a ton of physical ability but needed someone to teach him the technical aspects of playing cornerback and he found that with the Packers. He made a case for NFL defensive rookie of the year last season and he is only getting better and better,

As far as how that makes the Packers better. This team is so young and so talented that they are not going to magically start getting worse, they are only going to get better. The Packers have not been dominant of defense? Last year they had perhaps the best defense in the NFL. Yes they are having some issues this season, but what the"experts" are failing to realize is two things. Number one, they let Cullen Jenkins walk. I still dont think they should have resigned him, but the lack of a pass rush opposite of Clay Matthews is hurting them. Ted Thompson knows this and the pass rush is top priority next April. Number two, two words. Nick Collins. I have lost count of how many times Charlie Peprah has been way out of position since taking over for Collins in week two. Remember Ponder’s first pass downfield to Jenkins in the Dome against the Packers? The man who was chasing Jenkins down the sideline was Peprah. If that would have been Collins and not Peprah, Collins would have sniffed that out right off the bat and and cut that play off at the pass before it had a chance to develop. I know that the Packers motto is to overcome injury and it is. But the Collins injury STUNG. Just give it time.

by Timothy Bryce on Jan 10, 2012 4:07 PM CST up reply actions

I just don't see them getting better then 15-1 sorry.

But I do see them being good for a long time because of how young they are.

☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/debates and dedicated DN reader.

by UnBannedVikingholic on Jan 10, 2012 4:50 PM CST up reply actions

So your looking at it from a win loss record? Okay. That makes sense, although there are many who are starting to believe that perfection is inevitable for them.

by Timothy Bryce on Jan 10, 2012 5:17 PM CST up reply actions

You're looking at this all wrong IMO.

You have to look at a record as a direct result of the strength of your opponents played at the time you play them. Injuries to your team, temporarily, can detract from your talent and wins. In theory, the Packers could finish 12-4 next year and have a more talented and productive team(in the playoffs) than this year. It’s all about superbowls and division championships. I’ll take a 9-7 team(due to strength of schedule) that gets “lucky” and wins a superbowl over a 14-2 team like san diego was for a few years but never went anywhere in the playoffs.

by chatter on Jan 13, 2012 8:18 AM CST up reply actions

+1

by chatter on Jan 13, 2012 8:09 AM CST up reply actions

I think in general this is good...

though I think it will take at least 3 years. But I’d also add to the list of needs:

LB
Another CB
Another OL besides LT as well.

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

I think we are both thinking along the same lines.

by Timothy Bryce on Jan 7, 2012 7:21 PM CST up reply actions

1 more good LB (i'd target one of those and a CB in the 2nd rd of the draft)

would help our coverage a lot.

I could go to battle with a LB group of new guy/Greenway/Erin Henderson, with Brinkley (and Griffen) as backups.

by DJSkillz on Jan 7, 2012 8:21 PM CST up reply actions

I have seen more than one mock

having us draft Mark Barron, Safety, Alabama in the second round. The #35 overall pick. I am okay with that. (amiller92:That would fill your #3 criteria for the 2012 off season moves.)

I would watch him Monday night in the BCS game, but I was going to boycott that game based on a division runner up getting a pass to the national championship game. :-) The NDSU Bison got no stinkin’ free passes to their championship game.

Decisions, decisions.

Your fantasy football expert since Jerry Rice's rookie year.

by Odin on Jan 7, 2012 9:18 PM CST up reply actions

Alabama is the best team in the country...

and those are clearly the best 2 teams. Head and shoulders above everyone else. Alabama, statistically, has the best defense in the history of college football. I have no problem with it whatsoever.

As for Barron, I’d be fine with it. My only concern is that I think at the NFL level he’ll be more of a hard hitter than a coverage guy. But we shall see. I’m still hoping we can get the following in the draft:

1) Kalil at LT; ideally in a 1-pick tradedown acquiring a high 2nd rder.
2) Best CB available
2) Best LB available
3) Best WR, S, or other OL available
3) (comp pick) ditto
4) ditto
4) (comp pick) best RB, DT, or DE available

FA:
Nicks at LG
Young WR coming off his rookie deal (Laurent Robinson is my #1 candidate)
Young S
Young CB
Young TE (let Shiancoe go) to pair with Rudolph. Carlson would be my choice here.

That team would be much deeper than this one and have significant chance for improvement.

by DJSkillz on Jan 7, 2012 9:51 PM CST up reply actions

Alabama may well be the best team in the country.

My problem is they had an easier path to THE GAME than LSU. They played nobody the week that LSU played in their conference championship game. If LSU had lost in an upset, we may well have had a national championship game with no conference champions. All with no playoffs.

My problem is not with Alabama, LSU or the SEC. It is with the BCS.

Sorry. I now return you to the intent of this thread. An off-season plan for the Vikes.

I heard Vincent Jackson of SD will not be franchised by San Diego. Although he fits our WR needs perfectly, I doubt he is worth the $ he will command in an open market. For the price of Jackson we could probably sign 3 players to fill our many weaknesses. One of them a #1 WR like you mentioned.

Your fantasy football expert since Jerry Rice's rookie year.

by Odin on Jan 7, 2012 10:13 PM CST up reply actions

I also read today Garcon (sp?) will test FA

by nmvikesfan on Jan 7, 2012 10:26 PM CST up reply actions

Garçon? Garcón? Gárçoñ?

All I know is that it means ‘boy,’ or maybe ‘horse’ (or is that Gaston?).

by mg7505 on Jan 8, 2012 1:51 AM CST up reply actions

Pierre Garcon = Peter Waiter

Straight Cash Homey

by MOSScomeBACK2vikes on Jan 8, 2012 6:51 AM CST up reply actions

i hear ya...

and i’m certainly not defending the BCS in general. there needs to be a playoff system; an 8-team playoff would be easy and would still utilize the bowls. and the stupid “academics” arguments need to stop. we’re talking about effective something like 200 athletes (4 teams, if that). and we never hear that stupid argument re: baseball or basketball players, who miss FAR more time than football guys.

agree on jackson. jackson’s also getting older. he just turned 29 and is 1 strike away from being suspended for a year as well. he’s likely seen his best years already. i like the process of finding young guys off their first contracts. which is why i’d advocate laurent robinson and meachem.

garcon would be okay, though i fear he may be slightly overrated/overpaid based on playing with peyton.

by DJSkillz on Jan 7, 2012 10:32 PM CST up reply actions

That is an optimistic look, for sure.

If Vikes could pull all that off, acquiring Robinson, Nicks, Carlson via free agency. I hope they get 2 impact o-linemen in the draft. Zietler(g) and Kalil(T) would be great. Nicks(G) via free agency would be a bonus. Could start also, giving us a chance to open up some good lanes again. I hope they draft a quality free safety and slide winfield to strong safety in cover 2 bump looks and on first downs to support the run defense. He can play nickelback on 3rd down and this should limit his overall snaps in an effort to keep his aging body from injury. We will need him next year. I think he gives minnesota 1-2 extra wins when he is on the field for the whole year.

by chatter on Jan 13, 2012 8:30 AM CST up reply actions

The point is

That there is only so much you can do in one off seaon, and the are second order needs that are more likely to be addressed next year.

Although if the opportunity arises, you do that ths year too.

by amiller92 on Jan 8, 2012 9:54 AM CST up reply actions

I was just thinking that today

You can’t get it all in one offseason, we can only draft so many guys and if we’re drafting 7 or 8 starters then it just shows how far we need to go. I would look for 3-4 starters and then solid depth with our 7th round picks draft some guys we can develop towards the future. I would like to find a MLB to run our defense this year and of course a CB and S, with our first pick being LT no bones about it, Kalil or Martin. We have to make sure that this is a foundation building draft, with 2-3 of them retiring as Vikings.

by nmvikesfan on Jan 7, 2012 10:22 PM CST reply actions

+1

thought with 7 top 141 picks and potentially $40M in cap space (depending on what veterans we cut) we should be able to fill more than 3-4 starter holes IMO. i know it seems like a lot, but with those resources, i honestly could see something like 7-8 new starters next year.

by DJSkillz on Jan 7, 2012 10:33 PM CST up reply actions

another way to look at it...

Offense: Ponder, Peterson, WR, WR, Harvin, Rudolph, LT, LG, Sullivan, Johnson, Loadholt
Defense: Allen, KW, Guion, Robison, Greenway, LB, Erin, S, Raymond, CB, Winfield/Cook

From the above I count 7 that could easily be replaced with better production, and that’s even counting on guys like Guion (who knows), Erin (FA), Raymond (who knows), Winfield/Cook (who knows), AND essentially keeping Johnson on the line.

by DJSkillz on Jan 7, 2012 10:37 PM CST up reply actions

Is it unreasonable to think

that we could be the Houston Texans 2.0, at least on defense? To paraphrase the stats from today’s game, Houston was arguably the worst defense in the league last year, and now they’re in the conversation for the best. They hired a new DC and infused talent on the D-Line and secondary through the draft + FA. By the way, their defense still does not have a player of Jared Allen’s caliber, or maybe even Kevin Williams’. So the precedent is there for us to have a huge turnaround on defense … right?

Also, Houston avoided signing Nnamdi Asomugha – instead, they got 2 or 3 starters for that money. I don’t know if any big-name corners/safeties are hitting FA this year, but let’s hope the Vikings are that smart.

by mg7505 on Jan 8, 2012 2:02 AM CST reply actions

Brian Cushing and Mario Williams are really good players

Not Jared Allen level, yet, but definately at or above the current level of KWill. They also have promising rookie JJ Watt, who for their scheme, is very versatile and disruptive. Jonathan Joseph was an excellent FA acquisition as well.

To replicate their success, we would have to make a great hire at DC (Spagnulo?), draft well (at least one breakthrough starter at either linebacker or DB), and add another couple of starters in free agency. We need an upgrade at DT, MLB, WLB, SS, FS and one corner (assuming Chris Cook is back next season). That’s 6 new starters needed, minimum, and a great DC.

"At this point, what we got to lose, right? So we might as well throw caution to the wind and hit people in the face."
--Vikings DE Jared Allen

by NMVike on Jan 9, 2012 2:59 PM CST up reply actions

but we need those anyway

by DJSkillz on Jan 9, 2012 8:09 PM CST up reply actions

Yes, but what are the chances that all of it gets done in one off-season?

Point is that Houston was better suited to make the jump from worst to first than the vikes are right now. Houston is obviously more desireable than Minny for FA’s and coaches as well.

"At this point, what we got to lose, right? So we might as well throw caution to the wind and hit people in the face."
--Vikings DE Jared Allen

by NMVike on Jan 10, 2012 10:08 AM CST up reply actions

um, why?

I mean, free agents and coaches care primarily about the money and the opportunity, but after that they want franchises with a winning history.

On what relevant measures do you think Houston is more attractive? Weather?

I’m not sure I want any free agent or coach who would give that significant consideration.

by amiller92 on Jan 10, 2012 11:06 AM CST up reply actions

New stadium, bigger market

They have been on the verge of the playoffs for a few years. They have some dynamic players on the team in Mario Williams, Andre Johnson, Arian Foster, Brian Cushing, Jonathan Joseph, Demeco Ryans, and some promising young players in Brooks Reed, JJ Watt and Ben Tate.

The reality is that the Vikings have been snubbed by “big name” free agents for years. Sometimes it worked out for the best, but a snub is a snub. This past season alone at least 2 practice squad players turned down contracts to be on the Vikings active roster to remain on the PS of their current teams.

"At this point, what we got to lose, right? So we might as well throw caution to the wind and hit people in the face."
--Vikings DE Jared Allen

by NMVike on Jan 10, 2012 11:58 AM CST up reply actions

I agree that Houston is more desirable...

though usually money talks. But what does it matter if we can’t go from worst to 1st in one year? That’s a bit of a high standard/strawman. The goal should be getting better. We need to get better on defense (and offense). Switching to the 3-4 AND getting a few new players is a good way to do that IMO.

by DJSkillz on Jan 10, 2012 9:35 PM CST up reply actions

I'm not the one who suggested we go from worst to first

mg7505 did. I was just explaining that Houston was in a better situation to make such a quick turnaround than the Vikes currently are. Plus what lies between the lines is Houston’s offense. They do their part in keeping the D off the field.

"At this point, what we got to lose, right? So we might as well throw caution to the wind and hit people in the face."
--Vikings DE Jared Allen

by NMVike on Jan 11, 2012 10:06 AM CST up reply actions

Why does switching to 3-4 make us better?

Right now, our roster is long at rush end and weak at linebacker and defensive tackle.

3-4 is a system that needs three defensive tackles and four linebackers. Even if you assume that one or more of our rush ends might be able to switch to linebacker, that makes no sense.

by amiller92 on Jan 11, 2012 2:23 PM CST up reply actions

because those lb's are asked to do different things...

such as cover less ground than a traditional LB. griffen/robison/allen/brinkley/greenway/henderson all make for good 3-4 lb’s. guion, kw, ballard all make for good 3-4 DE’s. we do need an upgrade at DT in that system (a real NT) but those are easily found. the secondary sucks in either system obviously.

by DJSkillz on Jan 12, 2012 1:23 AM CST up reply actions

Sometimes I think

You believe that no 3-4 backer has to cover. ThenI think that can’t be right and instead you think Griffen/Robinson is sure to be good in coverage and playing the run in space. Then I think, he can’t expect them to be better than Greenway and Henderson.

And then I have no idea why you would want to switch.

by amiller92 on Jan 13, 2012 5:56 PM CST up reply actions

+10

Exactly. Perfectly said. I am so sick of all this 3-4 talk. The Vikes are not built for it. If they can acquire more talent in the secondary that will allow more bump and run (tighter and disrupt timing routes) coverage on throwing downs, the vikes 4-3 rush will be even more impactful. How can anyone argue with JA’s success this year. He is Proof that the 4-3 can be effective.

by chatter on Jan 13, 2012 8:39 AM CST up reply actions

yes it is

We won’t have a quality secondary. Or a tackling machine middle linebacker unless greenway slides to MLB (i think he’s better suited to OLB) and someone covers OLB in a productive way.

by chatter on Jan 13, 2012 8:49 AM CST up reply actions

I stopped...

…trying to make up mocks because everything hinges on what St Lou is gonna do. They could draft…Claiborne, Kalil or Blackmon…or trade down. And then it depends who they trade to and what they want…say that Wash, Sea, KC etc trade up and take Griffin. The next hot commodity is Richardson, who Cleaveland may really want(but so does TB) we wouldn’t get both firstsfrom Cleveland in this scenario BUT we may be able to trade down with one of them and then get an extra 2nd or 3rd or whatever. The possibilities are almost endless. Lets say that St L keeps the pick and drafts whoever… we still could trade down a couple spots and still get who we want and have more picks. So no matter what, we may be able to trade for more picks and get our 2nd option(other than Kalil) Oh geez…my head is starting to hurt again. And then there are the potential supplemental picks.
First 4 picks 2 OL and 2 DB, unless that guy who unexplainably drops is available(a la Randy Moss) After that fill needs with the best available for specific positions.
I like DTs Jean-Baptiste and Kitchen late rounders. 6th round…fastest WR/RB left on the board.
Get a FA WR…a vet who runs solid routes and can catch(Bowe) would be better for our young QBs. Lastly…what about Loadholt moving to Guard?? He seems like an interior guy to me.

by bigjohn53 on Jan 8, 2012 7:38 AM CST reply actions