Oh, No You Didn't !!!
by krinkle on Feb 13, 2012 5:38 PM CST
Email
PrintWell, yes i did....I did it....I'm guilty....I'm guilty of....thinking outside the box. OMFG !!!
And the reason I am sharing these crazy thoughts out loud is because I know that between massaging his magic 8 ball and playing with his ouiji board, Rick Spielman scans the Daily Norseman desperately looking for some sign of "what to do now"...now that he has a new job title and has the little general George Paton nipping at his heels, waiting for him to screw it up more.
So, I was scanning the Yahoo! sports page and came across an interesting article :
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=pfw-20120212_patriots_could_make_run_at_texans_williams
It basically states that Bill Belichick regrets letting superstar Richard Seymour go in 2009 and is in need of another superstar playmaker on defense. It goes on to speculate on the notion that Belichick and the Patriots might make a real play at free agent pass rushing machine, Mario Williams of the Texans to fill this need.
Apparently, the Texans are cap strapped and will have a really hard time trying to retain his services at the price he will command, and might accept the fact that they need to just let him walk away and possibly get nothing in return. Well, the Patriots just happen to have the cap room to potentially sign the superstar pass rusher. And acquiring that type of player could push them over the top, seeing as they were just a few plays away from winning the super bowl this year.
Well, that got me thinking....outside the box.
Because, Mario Williams has a classic 3-4 outside linebacker build at 6-6 285 pounds, and he has been playing in a 3-4 defense down there in Tex-Ass. And the Patriots play primarily a 4-3 defense and it appears that they are set up to remain that way. Perhaps Mario Williams, although a serious superstar, is not exactly the right guy for their system. I wonder if there is a different solution that might be a better fit.
I also noticed that the Patriots once again have more draft picks in the first 2 rounds than any 13-3 team should ever rightfully have. They hold the #27 and #31 picks in the 1st round of the 2012 nfl draft, and they hold the #48(16th) and #61(31st) picks in the 2nd round of the draft. I also noticed that they have 2 almost equally good young starting caliber right tackles in Sebastian Vollmer and Nate Solder. (See Spielman, that is how it's done).
Now, the Vikings somehow ended this disaster of a year at 3-13, thanks to Joe Webb coming on strong in relief of our "saviorback of the future" once again, and leading us to a completely unecessary victory over the Washington Redskins in week 16. This effectively knocked us out of our rightful position to snag the future President of Planet Earth, Andrew Luck....but that is a discussion for another time.
So, the truth is that the Vikings are in a classic re-build mode. It has taken a couple of years for this obvious point to dawn on the powers that be who control the fate of our burning ship. That being said, we need talented youth to fill out the many positional deficiencies on our roster and to thus mould into a future solid roster and team. This team is a few years out from being the solid play-off caliber team we all want. So, this leads me to the "outside the box" part of this potentially explosive fanpost.
Are you ready?
What if we, the Vikings, offer a trade to old Belichick. We will trade the Almost Defensive Player of the Year and superstar Jared Allen and our 6th and 7th round picks to the Patriots in exchange for their 1st round pick #27, their 2nd round pick #48 and young tackle prospect Nate Solder (the #17 overall pick in last year's draft).
Ouch! Oh Wait, Wow! What? Seriously, WTF did you say?
Well, Jared Allen's stock is at it's absolute peak right now, it will never be any higher than this. He has 2 years remaining on his contract, equalling $26 million in base salary and $31 million against the salary cap. Then there is the question of his age and whether or not we try to resign him, at top dollar again, for sure. Is that the wisest thing to do when trying to re-build for the future?
We have some good young talent at the position that we can utilize right away. Everson Griffen is a beast and Christian Ballard was looking better than Brian Robison by the end of the season. Plus, we can supplement the loss of Allen with another draft choice, free agent or trade. And then we can focus on building a solid defensive backfield so we can be more balanced on defense.
The Patriots are built to go right back to the super bowl and should be in contention for the next few years, otherwise known as "Brady's Golden Years", so Jared Allen would be a perfect fit to fill Belichick's apparent desire for a superstar pass rusher....like, right frickin' now.
Also, the Vikings are currently projected at anywhere from $115.3 to $116.3 million in 2012 salary cap commitments, and I believe that is a little bit of an under-estimation. The 2012 salary cap is currently rumored to be around $124 or $125 million. That means that the Vikings are essentially operating on a budget for the upcoming year.
So, the extra $26 million in cap room over the next 2 years would go a loooong way in terms of being able to sign a couple of solid veteran players to fill, say, our needs at d-back and receiver. And, the extra 2 top-50 draft picks would allow the team to start acquiring top notch prospects to re-build with....starting this fooking year.
Additionally, we would gain a starting quality right tackle, who would look really good along side, say, Matt Kalil on the left side. And, we could still either keep or trade away Loadholt depending on how things shake out in training camp.
Another real bonus to this scenerio is that it would not affect our chances of possibly making another trade with our #3 draft pick, depending on how the feeding frenzy and musical chairs of free agency plays out prior to the draft this year. We would still be in a position of power.
There, I said it. Try to trade Jared Allen away to the Patriots for picks #27, #48 and Nate Solder and some trade filler. And get on with the future and re-build this disaster of a franchise to be good over the long haul.
And to Rick Spielman, because I know you are reading this...just agree with everything I said or die!
Okay, shoot me now.
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.
146 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
That was fun to read...
…with a bonus offering of good food for thought.
I didn’t hear such great things about Solder this year, but I didn’t really follow him at all. Is he good? Will he get better?
A late 1st round pick and a mid 2nd and a RT who is better than Loadholt? Eh, I’m struggling just a little bit more than I would have expected myself to. I want more, but I can see the benefits. I think Allen’s age is the biggest factor I would use to support the scenerio you are suggesting.
Again, that was a great read.
"Men are creatures with two legs and eight hands. - Jayne Mansfield
i was angling for the youth, high draft picks and cap space benefits.
i know that the pats picked solder not knowing if matt light would return, and that he is supposed to be the heir apparent at left tackle, and he has great scouting reports. he also filled in for a good part of the season for injured starting right tackle sebastian vollmer. who knows if the patriots would even want to part with him, i was more just tossing out a bold idea to immediately acquire building blocks for the future.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
by krinkle on Feb 13, 2012 7:08 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Pats (and Vikings) fan here
Soldier was solid, making a few mistakes here and there but generally doing well. Nothing too awful or too great, I guess, but I liked what I saw. He wasn’t starting the entire year, though he did get plenty of playing time.
Now onto the deal, I’m not sure. Our situation at WR is more serious then our situation at pass rush (while you had the NFC’s sack leader, we had the AFC’s sack leader, so things aren’t too bad) and thus that will probably come first. If we could get a good WR and do this deal, I’d think it was ok, though I really don’t see it happening. If you want one of our offensive linemen thats fine, ( I’d say we have more capable starters then we have spots to fill) but I’d hesitate give up the draft picks.
Oh my god a floor zombie! Oh wait, thats you
- Toby Turner
Follow me on Twitter! https://twitter.com/#!/J53D
by New Century Silver on Feb 24, 2012 11:26 PM CST up reply actions
Solder* not soldier
I always make that mistake =(
Oh my god a floor zombie! Oh wait, thats you
- Toby Turner
Follow me on Twitter! https://twitter.com/#!/J53D
by New Century Silver on Feb 24, 2012 11:27 PM CST up reply actions
okay, we'll throw in randy moss !
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
I would just like to say..
Mario Williams was a 4-3 DE for most of his career.
"I wanted to do it because it's fun, it's fun to do bad things and drive into a car."
by PurplePeopleEaters on Feb 13, 2012 6:23 PM CST reply actions
And he's a pretty great one, at that.
"I wanted to do it because it's fun, it's fun to do bad things and drive into a car."
by PurplePeopleEaters on Feb 13, 2012 6:24 PM CST up reply actions
you are right, oh well....but that still doesn't help us. just don't tell belichick.
i believe that Williams’ contract/salary is going to be a possible record breaker. If the texans franchise him, they would have to pay him more than $20 million, due to his already high salary figure. i wouldn’t be surprised to see his deal exceed the contracts of dwight freeney, elvis dumervil and julius peppers. maybe they could restructure allen for longer term deal without the escalating salaries, due to his age.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
In my opinion
even in a rebuild mode you don’t trade away the few good players you have for unproven rookies.
6' 3", 209 lbs, long blond hair, moustache and beard.
As a Viking ought to be ;-)
Think about this for a second...
Jared Allen is arguably the best DE in the NFL right now, but he’s turning 30 in April. By the time we’re back into contention again he’s probably going to be past his prime.
Maybe not...
Several top DEs of all-time were effective players up to their mid-30s and since Allen does not need to rely solely on brute strength to be successful, it’s possible he could be one of them. I do not think it’s too much of a pipe dream to think that this team could be a legitimate threat within 3 years and Allen could very likely still be a force at that time.
You may be correct
But in my opinion even in a rebuild mode you don’t trade away the few good players you have for unproven rookies. ;-)
6' 3", 209 lbs, long blond hair, moustache and beard.
As a Viking ought to be ;-)
by Tor 66 on Feb 13, 2012 9:18 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
actually, it's only trading away one player, and it's more than meets the eye...
the make up of the trade scenerio is far more than what you are trying to characterize.
first, we would gain another pick in both the 1st and 2nd rounds. this would give the
vikings picks #3, #27, #35, #48 in rounds 1 and 2. that would be a huge asset.
secondly, nate solder was a first round draft pick last year at #17. the pats already have matt light and sebastian vollmer, but vollmer got injured last year, and nate solder ended up starting 13 regular season games and 3 playoff games, including the super bowl. he was selected to several all-rookie teams including the national football post, draftinsiders and the professional football writers of america all-rookie teams. snagging him would be a huge bonus given the state of affairs with our o-line.
thirdly, trading away allen, though a loss of a fan favorite and a productive individual player, would free up $26 million in salary cap space for the next 2 years. that would go a long way in allowing the team to sign other top notch free agents.
fourth, trading away an aging veteran before his contract is up means that we not only free up cap space now, but we avoid having to pay him another gigantic contract to try and re-sign him in the future…and thus tying up even more cap space on one single player. i think in a rebuilding mode, that kind of flexibility would be a real asset.
something clearly isn’t working with the way that thew vikings have been doing business, because even though the almighty jared allen got 21 sacks last year, we still only went 3-13 after going 6-10, after getting lucky with brett favre (which we are still paying for), after going 10-6, after going 8-8, after going 6-10. now we have a depleted o-line and defensive secondary, we have a questionable receiver corps, and a big question mark at quarterback. not tot mention that we are also now looking for linebackers. the wheels fell off a while ago, keeping one aging player will not fix the mess.
i’m just trying to think outside the box here. belichick does that, and somehow he has been to the playoffs nearly every year, and just made it back to his 5th super bowl. and yet, his team is currently over $20 million UNDER the salary cap, he has 4 picks in the first 2 rounds again this year, he had 6 picks in the first 3 rounds last year (2 in each round), and his team is going to be in contention to go back to the super bowl again next year. just saying.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
by krinkle on Feb 14, 2012 2:18 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
Trading Allen will set back that 'contention' year
a few years. He is our sacks. I think my dislike of Allen-trade scenarios is well documented, so I’ll just say that no team trades a guy who just gave them 22 sacks. Especially with how quickly teams can turn around in this league, if you make the right decisions.
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 14, 2012 10:17 AM CST up reply actions
no it won't...it'll probably speed it up and help make our roster solid for the long haul.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
i'd rather be a complete team, than a poor team with a sack champ.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
by krinkle on Feb 14, 2012 2:31 PM CST up reply actions 5 recs
that's the point
and who knows, maybe the players acquired/drafted would end up all being busts and we’re set back yet again, but right now our DL doesn’t get consistent enough pressure to help our secondary and our secondary sucks so bad all the offense has to do is get protection on 1 out of every 3 plays to convert at least a 1st down. One player doesn’t make a defense, it just sucks that Allen is probably the best player to trade at this stage because of what we could get for him and the $$ he is.
White Horn Gold Pants
I would hate to part with Jared
but that deal is sweet enough to make me consider it. With Kalil left and Solder right we would be much improved on the OL and still have some useful picks for WR and DB.
The NDSU Bison rock.
I don't think that the Vikings should make trades with Belichick ever again.
He’s still laughing from the last time.
by vking1 on Feb 13, 2012 10:38 PM CST reply actions 4 recs
The Bigger Problem
Wasn’t the Vikings trading with Belichick as much as it was the Vikings giving so much power to Mr PotatoHead. (Childress). That trade might not have been so bad if Childress wasn’t the coach.
Although in hindsight that trade may have been a blessing as cutting Moss is probably what started the ball rolling to can Childress.
by VikesFanInTulsa on Feb 14, 2012 6:27 AM CST up reply actions
well, if chilly apparently had so much power,
then why did he “allegedly” trade for moss in the first place?
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
exactly
But Chilly thought that Favre needed another deep weapon to replace Rice, that’s the reason for the trade. Now, Chilly didn’t stop to think that he would have to deal with Moss’ ego. That’s where the mistake was made. Chily not using his noggin. He hoped all would run smoothly without understanding the player. Anyone think of any other examples of Chilly not relating to the players? Exactly.
White Horn Gold Pants
Not sure what you're trying to get at?
Chilly had total control over personal decisions and was always overthinking situations. The Vikings were in need of a WR that could stretch the field and all the ducks fell in a row. Moss had pretty much worn out his welcome in NE.
When the trade happened most were excited to have Moss back in purple so I don’t understand the problem with making trades with Belichick. Did the trade work out? I guess that all depends on how you look at it. Trading away a 3rd round pick for a 7th and Moss seemed like a good deal at the time, although after the problems and the release, not so much.
I’ll say trading the 3rd for the 7th and getting rid of Childress is a win for the Vikings so if it took Moss acting like a 2 year old to get rid of Chilly I’d make that trade all over again.
by VikesFanInTulsa on Feb 15, 2012 7:41 AM CST up reply actions
just saying that chilly didn't "have total control over personnel decisions"
he had final say over the 53 man roster, i believe only coming out of training camp. and he was supposed to work in concert with spielman and brez. for instance, they are the ones who had to put the trade together and agree to trade away a 3rd round draft pick for him, that wasn’t chilly. also, i recall zygi wilf was pushing for the trade and apparently worked the phones to help make it happen.
also, i’ve got no problem making trades with belichick, just as long as we don’t get hosed again. that guy makes great trades and keeps his team in contention, under the cap and stockpiles high draft picks in the process. i want this team to start doing the same.
i can’t stand chilly, to this day still. i’m glad he got canned, i only feel jipped the he wasn’t paraded through the streets in shackles, so we could hurl rotten vegetables and insults at him on his way out.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
Well,
for that deal, hell yeah, I’d do it; and I’ve always been in the “don’t trade your best players away” camp. Unfortunately, Belichik knows that he needs a lot of help all over the defensive side of the ball so he needs a lot of draft picks, and he would never trade away a star tackle (though Soldier did struggle at times) when he knows the team’s strength is their offense-and protecting Tom Brady is their top priority. So while this thread is a good discussion generator, the trade scenario is a bit ridiculous.
If we can't laugh at ourselves, Packer fans will call us crybabies and we will be forced to kick their tooth in. I really don't want to go to jail (again).
by Alittlemore_cowbell on Feb 13, 2012 11:22 PM CST via mobile reply actions
It looks like a good deal but
The passion and the fans which Jared Allen brings cannot be drafted, traded for, or bought by the extra cap-room.
i know that is probably the prevailing reaction, but his passion hasn't brought wins lately.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
Oh, just saw your reply.
Kind of makes me response redundant. Oh well.
"Men are creatures with two legs and eight hands. - Jayne Mansfield
More wins will equal more fans... sad to say.
And more wins will also bring more passion from the fan base.
I understand your point but if trading Allen brings other “quality pieces” to the team, I think our wins will increase.
"Men are creatures with two legs and eight hands. - Jayne Mansfield
by kcskol on Feb 14, 2012 3:00 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
(reply to )Izziefans
OMFG you are SOOOO correct Izzie, when I read this blog it brought back memories of other blogs that more or less said the same thing, “trade JA.” I then had to turn from my computer screen and walk out side and take a moment of peace. After that long moment of zen I was suddenly consumed with the rage 3 QB killing souls that dawned the purple people eating garb. they were that or Chris Dolemen, Johnny Randle, and JA. I then turned my head and a tree all the sudden took the form of Brett Farve in a Packer’s Puke colored jersey. At that moment I broke from my location and smashed into the tree with the momentum of a train loaded with bowling balls that stretched for 10 miles. the tree exploded into 1,000,000 little puke colored slivers. I was then released.
I went inside and decided that I didn’t like the idea of a trade if it ever involved the lose of JA.
Skol Vikings! I Fight for my country and the Vikings fight for my soul
If I remember right
we led at the half for the the first four games, often by alot. If we could just close things out we would have been 4-0 at that point, and the season would look alot different. I’m pessimistic as to whether we can make the playoffs next year, but 8-8, 9-7 or 10-6 seem realistic.
Oh my god a floor zombie! Oh wait, thats you
- Toby Turner
Follow me on Twitter! https://twitter.com/#!/J53D
by New Century Silver on Feb 24, 2012 11:31 PM CST up reply actions
Playoff Contention
I think that people saying we cannot be in playoff contention in 2012 is wrong. I feel we were close in a lot of games. And the games at the beginning of the season where we dominated the first half shows that the team has potential. Now with OTAs and a full offseason, were only going to improve. Keep jared allen, get Cook back along with some other secondary help in the draft, put Kahlil at LT, and get a WR in free agency. Those are all attainable, and strengthens the team dramatically.
I might agree....
If it wasn’t for the Packers and Lions having better talent and being young and hungry. 3rd place at best in our division and that will take some luck. So the playoffs are a pipedream with the ATL, NO, Giants, Eagles, and maybe even Cowboys all being better suited for playoff runs than the Vikings. I do agree we will be better than last year just not as good as you think.
by VikesFanInTulsa on Feb 14, 2012 9:19 AM CST up reply actions
Depends on what we do in the draft/FA
If we can shore up the defensive backfield and WRs in FA, then nab a good O-line prospect or two in the draft, it will go a long way toward putting the team back in contention. Yes, we play against Rodgers and Stafford/Megatron twice a year, which is a beastly match up.. but I’m pretty sure they both sat at home during the SB. They’re beatable. Especially by a defense that can get pressure on their star QBs, which we have.
We just need a better/deeper secondary that can actually cover WRs and the Defense should get back into form. Offense is a bit trickier, since we have Webb or Ponder starting. That will be the big question mark.
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 14, 2012 10:21 AM CST up reply actions
Stafford
I agree the Packers are tough, but they are beatable. If we throw together an offense that can put up points, we can run with them. Rogers gets flustered when hit, if we can give our rush time to get there with a better secondary, I feel we can get 1 W over them. My odds are on them winning the division though.
I think the Lions are way overrated, especially Stafford. Give Ponder Megatron to throw at and he could put up those same numbers. I dont feel the Lions are all that tough, and will continue to have breakdowns every year. They werent that impressive after their 5-0 start.
I think we could take 2ond in our division next year. Would I bet on it? Probably not. But I really dont think its that far out of the question. Then hopefully seal a wildcard spot.
On paper, the Vikings have a very doable schedule for 2012.
But I agree that our biggest challenge will come from within our own division. The Packers and Lions are Superbowl contenders. A team you left out is the Chicago Bears. They were the NFC North champions in 2010, and were rolling along pretty good in 2011 until Cutler was injured. Don’t underestimate them.
Da Bears..
I think the age on defense has got to catch up to them sooner rather than later. But they could surprise, they have done it before.
by VikesFanInTulsa on Feb 14, 2012 12:03 PM CST up reply actions
someone mentioned randy moss to the bears as a possible fit.
i think that could end up working if they pulled it off, and then totally burning our butts.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
With our secondary
Cutler to Moss would be a scary thought.
by VikesFanInTulsa on Feb 15, 2012 7:42 AM CST up reply actions
That would be the fuel he needs...
As has been known for ages, if he has something to prove he can be a beast.
Moss at 35 is still better than anybody on the Bears receiving corps…
I could see him coming to that game with a bunch of Barbeque...
and then handing it to the Vikes to show them what real BBQ tastes like…
The Vikes aren't in a remodeling or reconstruction they are in a burn the place down and start praying they don't mimic the Lions rebuilding process.
I agree, we could be in contention for the playoffs in 2012.
I do not think that should be our goal, though. We need to be rebuilding for a Superbowl victory and that will not happen in 2012. I think we should be focused on a more long term development and we might well be in the playoffs in 2012.
The NDSU Bison rock.
Not to be an ass
But I stopped reading after this line:
Because, Mario Williams has a classic 3-4 outside linebacker build at 6-6 285 pounds, and he has been playing in a 3-4 defense down there in Tex-Ass.
Mario Williams is a classic 4-3 DE. In fact, many football fans and analysts were questioning the move by the Texans to covert to the 3-4 BECAUSE Williams is such a perfect fit for the 4-3. Unfortunately he was injured very early on in the 2011 season so we won’t know how effective he will be at that 3-4 OLB position until next season.
"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
He was showing some promise at the 3-4 OLB spot
before he got hurt though. Wade Phillips is making that Texans defense pretty fierce.
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 14, 2012 10:22 AM CST up reply actions
Not the point
Mario Williams was a DE in college and he was drafted by the Texans to be a 4-3 DE. He is a prototypical 4-3 DE. 2011 was the first year that he was asked to play OLB in a 3-4. Many football “experts” questioned the move because Williams was viewed as a 4-3 DE by those same experts.
He did register 5 sacks in 5 games this year, but he only had 10 tackles. It is pretty clear that he was used primarily as a Rush OLB, which is essentially a glorified 4-3 DE.
"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
Their D was definitely fierce even without Williams in the playoffs.
After the improvement they showed under him, I’d bet that Wade Phillips would get the last word on any trade involving Williams. We would miss JA way more than Houston would miss Mario.
oh well, my goof. the point of the post is not about mario williams though.
and he is going to cost a whole bundle of money for the long term, something the pats don’t generally do (unless your girlfriend is a brazilian supermodel).
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
Trade a future HOF player for a bunch of maybes?
If I had any trust at all that our front office could turn those draft choices into solid, productive players I might consider it. If they could make good draft choices then we would be competitive much quicker with the picks we have and we would need JA. I see it as a lose-lose.
If I had any trust at all that our front office could turn those draft choices into solid, productive players I might consider it.
well, there is the kicker right there. i have to agree, i don’t feel confident in our front office either.
If they could make good draft choices then we would be competitive much quicker with the picks we have and we would need JA.
this part i dunno about. i think we can handle the loss of jared allen if it means we get to build up the entire team, plus we already have some solid prospects in griffen and ballard who need more playing time. imagine what they could do when/if we actually have good d-backs and linebackers, the d-line had been covering for our lackluster defensive backfield for a few years, but last year that was virtually impossible to do.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
Yes, remember Herschel Walker? Dallas turned him into a few Super Bowl wins...
Trade that future Hall of Famer at the peak of his career, when your team needs to rebuild. Thats a faster way to rebuild. Bet there are many more examples than Walker.
Jamie Nesselroad, MD, MBA, CPE, FAAFP
100% Husband and Daddy
by JMN3MD on Feb 18, 2012 8:21 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
You seen anything like that happen recently?
Why don’t we look at the Browns, who have been wheeling and dealing the past few years in the draft, constantly trading back and aquiring more selections. How’ve they been? Perennial top-10 selections, that’s how. Just because you have a bunch of draft picks, doesn’t mean they’re going to pan out.
Or we could look at the last team to trade Jared Allen. Kansas City. How’ve they been since then? One playoff appearance since, in a division where 8-8 has been enough to take the crown for 3 of the last 4 years or so? Really worked out for them..They had to trade with another team to get their QB, couldn’t find what they needed in the draft.
I don’t get why people go so crazy for extra draft picks. If they all panned out, then sure, trade Allen, get more, better players. But they don’t typically work out like you have planned. Why even bother gambling when you have an all-pro DE? It boggles my mind. Trade quality for quantity?
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 24, 2012 10:38 PM CST up reply actions
so you don't trust them any more than I.....
but you are going to get rid of your best player (until A.P. is back up and running) and turn them into even more picks for them to miss on? That logic is beyond me.
hey, it's just a scenerio to discuss...
if i were running the team, i would probably not make a lot of the personnel decisions that the team has made. and if we had smarter/savvy coaches, i’ll bet they could make something out of the opportunity to build their roster up with young top tier prospects and a bunch of cap room.
the point of thinking outside the box is to find new possibilities where you otherwise wouldn’t look. that’s all i’m trying to get at here.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
Just think about this
Next year we trade out Jared Allen, and realize that AD can no longer play football.
Wow, what a train wreck that would be. Of course it’s not going to happen Jared will still be here because Frazier doesn’t have the nuts to pull that trigger, and AD will play great because he’s well AD.
The Vikes aren't in a remodeling or reconstruction they are in a burn the place down and start praying they don't mimic the Lions rebuilding process.
Almost flagged
For even mentioning the possibility that AD won’t be elite anymore.
If we can't laugh at ourselves, Packer fans will call us crybabies and we will be forced to kick their tooth in. I really don't want to go to jail (again).
by Alittlemore_cowbell on Feb 14, 2012 7:13 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
Woah
bold statements bro. I just don’t see the upside in trading Allen. Do you remember the pre-Allen days? Even the Patriots admitted regretting letting Richard Seymour go to the Raiders. You don’t just trade your best player. Allen makes everyone around him better and makes the whole D-Line’s job much easier.
Rule #76: No excuses-play like a champion.
☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/
by UnBannedVikingholic on Feb 15, 2012 11:22 AM CST up reply actions
comparing the vikings situation to the patriots is like comparing rotten apples and juicy oranges
the patriots are/were a top tier team coming off multiple super bowls. guess what, even without richard seymour, they were only a few plays away from winning their 4th super bowl under this team/regime. meanwhile, the vikings finished the year even worse than last year. the fluke year of 2009 was because of brett favre, not jared allen. we were 3-13 this year, his sack total means very little. i just think this team needs to get overall better talent. we could sign 3 solid free agent veterans to fill holes with just his salary alone. and we sure could use the top tier draft picks and a great young starting offensive tackle.
you just have to not be so myopic in looking at the situation and seek ways to get beyond the quagmire of two gigantic contracts we have for superstars that still only managed to muster 3 wins this year
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
by krinkle on Feb 15, 2012 4:15 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
You build around Superstars.
The Vikings got Jared for a reason. He can’t do it alone. His sack total didn’t muster anything. You can’t directly add our loses to his sack total. Childress left us in a dumpfire waiting to ignite, and now that the worst have come, people are going nuts trying to figure out a way to get better. You don’t get better by trading your best players. Again, do you even remember the Pre-Allen days? It was horrible.
Rule #76: No excuses-play like a champion.
☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/
by UnBannedVikingholic on Feb 15, 2012 9:40 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
your platitudes and cliches sound pretty silly. i'm trying to address the big picture.
i hope you realize that we have now apparently been trying to build a team around allen for 4 seasons and adrian peterson for 5 seasons. and yet we are headed in the wrong direction. the anomaly was 2009, when brett favre helped us fluke our way to a 12-4 record. and the team did not do much to help out it’s future. now we are 3-13 and we have 2 huge contracts for 2 individual players that are like anchors to our salary cap situation. and adrian peterson just shredded his knee, so we are stuck with his contract for 2 more seasons at approx. $13.33 million per year if he isn’t able to bounce back.
if you look at the vikings defense statistically, the years before jared allen came here (as you mentioned) you will notice that in 2006, we were ranked #5 in the nfl overall, #1 against the rush and #16 against the pass. in 2007 we were ranked #2 against the run and #24 against the pass. in the 5 of the last 6 years, the vikings have ranked in the bottom half of the league against the pass. last year we ranked #25 overall and #32 against the pass…dead freakin last.
while the presence of jared allen has been an asset on defense, it is clear that the success of the team defense relied on the play of several players, namely the younger and healthy (and roided) versions of kevin williams and pat williams along with ray edwards, antoine winfield, cedric griffin and darren sharpe. without these players, and without equivalent talent to replace them, the team defense has continually gotten worse in spite of jared allen’s presence.
check out these defensive stat metrics:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef (2011)
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef2010
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef2009
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef2008
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef2007
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef2006
the defense peaked in 2008 and has plummeted ever since. i think it is time for some actual change and to stop pretending that one player makes the defense tick. granted, he is all-pro and had what will probably be his peak season last year, but there is more to assembling a solid roster and planning for the future than one or two individual players.
the fact is that antoine winfield is old and will try to bounce back from yet another injury. cedric griffin is toast and got benched because he was a liability on the field. chris cook showed some promise, but he might be going to prison. everyone else we have in the defensive backfield is back up quality at best. if you think we are in good shape back there you should go see a doctor. i’d rather address the obvious multiple problems this roster has by finding a way to actually help 3 different facets of the equation instead of holding onto the guy whose jersey number you have embroidered to your panties (btw, that was just a 69 joke ;).
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
by krinkle on Feb 16, 2012 5:30 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Yet you left out animportant stat
Our DLine was Top 5 in sacks. Thanks to who? Jared. Also you can’t put it on Jared Allen or our Dline or our LBs on the secondaries’ faults. That’ s like saying our DLine did their job, collapsed the pocket, rushed the Qb, and hit him and the secondary allows a 9 yard catch turn into a touchdown, and it’s Jared’s fault. It seems like your interpreting that since our Secondary sucked, therefore Jared didn’t help much. And how in the hell have we been trying to build around Adrian Peterson? By getting older and less talented on the OLine? The Vikings aren’t built around Adrian Peterson. I don’t by that crap for one second. He’s the man to go to, but we haven’t done anything to help APs production through the draft or free agency.
Rule #76: No excuses-play like a champion.
☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/
by UnBannedVikingholic on Feb 16, 2012 7:21 PM CST up reply actions
the sack stat is not important, because we were 3-13.
and i didn’t say anything was jared’s fault. nothing was his fault, he has done great.
but the rest of what you wrote beautifully makes my point. because the rest of the defense matters, as you point out. and thu, we clearly need upgrades and free agent re-signings at linebacker as well as d-back in order for THE TEAM DEFENSE to do it’s job (please note the emphasis on “team”).
additionally, since you also point out that we are sorely lacking in offensive talent beyond adrian peterson’s individual 2-down back type of talent, we clearly need to upgrade several positions on THAT side of the ball as well.
now, i am proposing that this is a very large task to do. and it is made more difficult because we have only about $9 million in cap space for the upcoming season, and we haven’t even drafted any rookies or attempted to sign any free agents yet. this presents a terrific problem for the front office in terms of trying to sign free agents we want to keep, new free agents we want to sign, and new draft picks that we also want to sign. do you see where i’m headed?
and, remember, we were 3-13 in spite of some sack total. that means that the efforts of that one individual did not have much of an impact on the relative strength and success of the team. the same thing applies to the offensive side of the ball, where adrian peterson’s quantity of tds look good on paper, but the offense as a whole struggled and were ranked at the bottom of the league overall (inspite of being a statistically good running team).
and, if adrian peterson is “the man to go to”, then why is he only a 2 down back? it’s because he is not a complete back, he is a poor blocker and receiver, so he gets yanked. look at matt forte, he is a complete back, he costs a fraction of adrian peterson, and he was arguably the most important player on the bears last year. now adrian peterson has a shredded knee, his recovery is going to be a mystery for a while….while his cap number is still going to be over $26 for the next 2 years qhile he hopefully gets back to some decent level of playing ability. let’s not forget that toby gerhart finished the year off with a torn medial collateral in his knee, and he is already playing without a pcl in one of his knees.
we are close to the bottom of the league in several catagories and overall on both offense and defense. we have serious question marks at several positions, including the most of the most important ones (qb, wr, rb, db). we are operating on a cap budget, and we still have at least a dozen players we will need to sign for next season.
it’s funny how you are completely ignoring the obvious needs of the team, unless you are trying to use it as an excuse and a reason we need to keep your favorite player. at least i have offered some ideas as to how to improve the team in several ways. all with the objective of making the TEAM better in a way that equates to WINS instead of losses, and helps to create a solid roster for the long haul…with the ultimate objective of going to the super bowl, in reality, not on some madden video game you play in the basement.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
by krinkle on Feb 16, 2012 9:55 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
How is keeping one of the Vikings best players, " completely ignoring the obvious needs of the team"?
Due to trades and the loss of Sidney Rice and Ray Edwards, the Vikings already have some extra picks. Last year the Vikings had a first year coach, a rookie quarterback, a short offseason, no offensive line , and a decimated secondary. Drafting the best tackle available in the first round should do wonders for the offensive. The Vikings will still have plenty of picks to address the secondary, receivers, and other needs without losing the veteran leadership that Jared Allen provides. Even high draft picks are never guaranteed. The Vikings know what they have in Jared. While the Vikings need to get younger, they still need quality veterans to push them, and show them the right way to play.
i think you misunderstand the comment...
as you can see from his response below, there is no indication by him of the obvious problems that the team has with the roster and the relatively limited position the team is in to acquire the players we need due to salary cap, our own potential free agent losses and lack of enough top tier draft picks to fill the voids.
as for your comment regarding compensatory draft picks, those are looking like 4th, 6th and 7th round picks. i consider those to be bottom tier draft picks and not anything i would count on as a means to get the talent level of the roster improved. i would rather get solid free agents and top tier draft picks to do that. at least i have presented a way to achieve this objective.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
and, if adrian peterson is "the man to go to", then why is he only a 2 down back?
Umm, because the team realize how valuable he is to keep for the future therefor they want to take some of the “load” off him. And who the hell do the Bears have after Forte? NOBODY! That’s why he’s put in 24/7. And you see what it did to him and that team to NOT have a quality backup rb like the Vikings have. As I said already, Adrian is better than Forte and I’ve already explained that to you in another comment. And I didn’t know I owned a madden game let alone a video game. Your vision of how you want the team to be isn’t gonna cut it. You trade Jared for some nobodies or some people who may not even have a successful career? Jared isn’t even my favorite player on the team, Percy is! I don’t know why you’re assuming crap. The Team won’t getting better by losing their best players, who not only gives a fuck about this team, but are leaders in the lockerroom. You can’t teach those things.
Rule #76: No excuses-play like a champion.
☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/
by UnBannedVikingholic on Feb 18, 2012 2:45 PM CST up reply actions
you still only reinforce the points i have been making...
if adrian peterson is “the man to go to” then why does the team take him out of the game exactly when we need a “go to guy”? you see, third down is critical, and for $13.33 million per year, i would expect that player to have enough skill to be an asset to have in the game at critical moments. but, the fact is that he gets yanked a lot on third down because of his inability to block and his suspect pass catching skills. your opinion of him as being better than forte, and any previous comments to that effect mean nothing and are of no value to this conversation.
also, the bears have marion barber (who is better than gerhart) and use him when they need a “go to guy” near the goal and in short yardage situations. he and forte make a great duo. your statement about them having nobody else is simply untrue.
and your point about using him 24/7 is off the mark as well…btw, look at what paying adrian a boatload of cash and sitting him down on third downs got us….adrian peterson still shredded his knee. i guess your theory of “saving him for the future” doesn’t mean much considering that.
if you think that the only way to get better is by keeping jared allen, then i think you lack vision and awareness of the basic facts of the situation that our team is in. we are still a 3-13 team that has gotten worse the last few seasons and is still cap strapped to some degree and needs several player just to fill holes, and several talented players to upgrade the mediocre talent that exists throughout the roster. this is about a 53 man team, not one individual player.
perhaps you could actually come up with some form of idea as to how to realistically make improvements to the team instead of only harping about your own myopia about jared allen. maybe you just think we are a super bowl caliber team already because we have jared allen and the guy with the shredded knee.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
by krinkle on Feb 18, 2012 6:01 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
The guy with the "shredded knee"
quadrupled Forte’s TDs. What’s the use of racking up all those yards if you can’t score. AP scored more TDs then the whole Bears roster combined. Yeah, Mr. “Shredded knee” isn’t valuable arlight. Barber is better then Toby? What have YOU been watching?
Gehart: 531 yards rushing. 4.9 per carry, 1 td, 24 first downs 3 20+ runs 1 40 + run 1 fumble 3 receiving TDs.
422 yards 3.7 per carry 6 tds 2 20+ runs 0 40+ runs 1 fumble. No receiving tds, 50 total receiving yards. 1 lost fumble.
If 3.7 yards a carry is “better” to you, then I think you could use some help.
It is about the team. It’s not about Jared or Adrian. We were 3-13. I haven’t said we weren’t. But at the end of the day, you’re the one going on “Madden Franchise” trying to envision a trade that is ludacris. You build through the draft and free agency, not trade away your best players. Please name me the last time some “Superstars” of such high talent and character on any team being tossed around and traded? Don’t worry I’ll wait.
Rule #76: No excuses-play like a champion.
☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/
by UnBannedVikingholic on Feb 19, 2012 9:00 AM CST up reply actions
I left out some of Barber's stats unintentionally
26 first downs should be there also.
Rule #76: No excuses-play like a champion.
☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/
by UnBannedVikingholic on Feb 19, 2012 9:03 AM CST up reply actions
Barber also only player 11 games last year.
He played much of the year with a couple of nagging injuries. The Bears also have a worse line than the Vikings. I don’t think it matters though. This seems to be about the Vikings, not the Bears.
Peterson might never be the same.
You don't tug on Superman's cape
You don't spit into the wind
You don't pull the mask of the Spiderman
And you don't trash talk about him
by REVENGE4WEBB on Feb 21, 2012 6:10 PM CST up reply actions
It's hard to beleive anyone had a worst line
than the Vikings, but somebody else pointed that out to me as fact.
Rule #76: No excuses-play like a champion.
☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/
by UnBannedVikingholic on Feb 21, 2012 9:41 PM CST up reply actions
I see another mistake. AP scored more Rushing TDs
Rule #76: No excuses-play like a champion.
☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/
by UnBannedVikingholic on Feb 19, 2012 9:05 AM CST up reply actions
I think the fact that we only had 3 wins is telling.
And now Adrian has a bad knee injury to try to return from. I doubt he will ever be the same. Gerhart also ended the year with a torn knee ligament injury. These things are also not working in our favor.
You don't tug on Superman's cape
You don't spit into the wind
You don't pull the mask of the Spiderman
And you don't trash talk about him
by REVENGE4WEBB on Feb 22, 2012 12:37 AM CST up reply actions
Why do people steadily bash our secondary?
We were starting our FOURTH string DB. What did some of you expect? Our 4th string DB to shutdown people? I know our secondary isn’t all that great and maybe not that good but they are middle of the pack with everyone healthy. With a few more additions to add some quality depth players our Secondary will improve. Health is our biggest nag in the secondary. Give them a break already.
Rule #76: No excuses-play like a champion.
☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/
by UnBannedVikingholic on Feb 15, 2012 11:19 AM CST reply actions
why? cuz they suck ass.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
by krinkle on Feb 15, 2012 4:07 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
Maybe you didn't read this closely enough.
We were starting our FOURTH string DB
Rule #76: No excuses-play like a champion.
☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/
by UnBannedVikingholic on Feb 15, 2012 9:35 PM CST up reply actions
True.
But I think there are significant concerns about Griffin who was 1st string. Another starter, Winfield, is 35 which is a significant concern all on its own. He’s also not that great in coverage. Cook seemed to be promising, but, well…
All in all, our secondary is a significant concern even allowing for the fact that the back ups saw a lot of action this season.
"Men are creatures with two legs and eight hands. - Jayne Mansfield
by kcskol on Feb 16, 2012 2:07 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
I just hope that the Cook situation plays out in such a manner...
That we can keep him on the team, and not be concerned about what he did to his girlfriend.
Hey I'm not saying trade him I'm showing worst case
Where we wake up next year with no play makers on our team at all.. :p Although if Everson starts to show up on the sack machine I would be interested in talking about it next year.
The Vikes aren't in a remodeling or reconstruction they are in a burn the place down and start praying they don't mimic the Lions rebuilding process.
Reply fail? lol
Rule #76: No excuses-play like a champion.
☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/
by UnBannedVikingholic on Feb 15, 2012 12:17 PM CST up reply actions
complete and utterly
I don’t think of it as a failure so much as a man leading with no one following.
The Vikes aren't in a remodeling or reconstruction they are in a burn the place down and start praying they don't mimic the Lions rebuilding process.
Isn't trading a great playmaker to get a group of playmakers who will all peak at the same time a good idea??
True Jared is a great playmaker. True he demands respect. But losing him and upgrading 2 or three units on the team in NET makes the team better. Hate to lose the guy, BUT Putting younger playmakers into the mix to turnover the roster quicker makes sense.
Question for you- whats the distribution of ages of players in each unit? I think JA, Hutch, and Winfield are out of synch and won’t factor as big in 2-3 years when the rebuild that started with the 2011 draft matures. Since the factor BIG now, let another team with a ‘win right now’ composition over pay for that chance.
Jamie Nesselroad, MD, MBA, CPE, FAAFP
100% Husband and Daddy
by JMN3MD on Feb 18, 2012 8:31 PM CST reply actions 4 recs
There's just no promise that those players will work out.
Like I said to someone else about a similar topic, for every Percy Harvin in the league, there are 5 Troy Williamsons. I don’t see the sense in trading away someone who has proven time and time again that he is one of the very best at what he does and has stuck with us through terrible, drama-filled seasons and not once given up for a couple rookies who could pan out.
Also, I think JA will still be playing good football in 2-3 years. He registered 22 sacks shortly before turning 30. For all we know, his best years could be ahead of him. There is no magical wall that players hit when they turn 30 that keeps them from playing football at a high level.
by SirGrizzly on Feb 22, 2012 5:43 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
Exactly this.
Oh, hey, we need to rebuild the roster. Let’s just trade everyone who’s any good! Then we will get all the draft picks we need!
Yeah, no thanks.. Of course Allen’s value is high right now. Maybe that’s because, I don’t know, he’s an amazing football player. We need more of those. Not less. There’s a huge risk in not even replacing Allen with the potential picks we’d get for him. And with our secondary the way it is, no lead would be safe. Teams would have an easier time against our LBs shitty coverage, because they wouldn’t have to keep a TE/HB in to chip Allen when their LT is struggling to contain him.
I’d really rather not go back to the ’07 days, when 5.5 sacks was the team-leading amount.
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 24, 2012 10:46 PM CST up reply actions
and yet you offer nothing in terms of how to position oursaelves to rebuild...
3-13…3-13…3-13…3-13…jared is expensive and will only get more expensive, then we would need to resign him or let him walk, which meaqns even more cost for one player, not “everyone who is good”. think context here.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
Uhh, we position ourselves by, I don't know, maybe using our already-high
picks to draft better players. We have the DE position covered. Allen IS the cornerstone of the defense. You trade him away, and we’re back to rebuilding it. It would be like if we had, say, Joe Thomas.
If we had Joe Thomas, are you telling me you’d be willing to trade him, just so we can get more draft choices? He’s an expensive player. He’s only going to get more expensive as time goes on..
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 25, 2012 7:03 PM CST up reply actions
that's not really a worthwhile tangent...see below.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
p.s. sacks don't mean crap when you are 3-13. it means you have A LOT of problems.
the question is how to effectively address the multitude of issues when the team is in total rebuild mode and we have a salary cap to deal with.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
By cutting the dead weight. That would probably help alot more than trading
your best player on the team.
PPS: Yes, sacks do matter whether you’re 3-13, 14-2, or 0-16. You want to get hits and pressures on the QB as much as possible. Especially with the league favoring passing attacks like they do not.
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 25, 2012 7:04 PM CST up reply actions
well, we are talking about the vikings here, not the browns...
and the vikings are 3-13 with the worst pass defense in the league. i guess that all those sacks and all that jared pressure really didn’t help that much. too bad our TEAM defense is not good enought to play some balanced ball. the irony here is that the team has been getting worse, not better. now we have a serious hole to re-build out of, and there are more spots to fill than ever.
i hope you realize that if the vikings “cut their dead weight” by cutting players that have some significant level of salary cap attached to them in order to free up some cap space, that we will only be increasing the number of players that we will have to replace! that doesn’t necessarily give the team any real leverage towards rebuilding…since now we will have to replace them, ta-da !!!
also, our team doesn’t really have any additional picks in the draft until the 4th round. those are not exactly real building blocks for a rebuilding team with many weak spots. sure they are nice, but they are clearly not a pick that will get us a top tier or second tier prospect (unless they fire up a doobie at the combine…cough, cough…christian ballard). i want to acquire more top picks in the first and second rounds, free up cap space by trading away $31 million in cap for 2012 qnd 2013 and then signing our top picks and some tiop free agents…to create a balanced and younger roster.
and the comparison to joe thomas is really not looking at the context of the situation at all. it is only trying to argue with blinders on. really, you should be comparing the “vikings” situation to the “browns” situation, and see what similarirties and defferences there are to frame the context…2 different teams, each with 53 man rosters.
for instance, the browns were 4-12 in 2011, 5-11 in 2010, 511 in 2009, 4-12 in 2008, 10-6 in 2007 and 4-12 in 2006 (when joe thomas was a rookie). so, clearly the browns are not a team you really want to use as an example of a team we want to emulate. granted, we are a 3-13 team with a sack champ…who, by the way will be a free agent after next season. he will probably still command top dollar for his position at that time as well. so what do we do, take ANOTHER bigtime cap hit for a single player, or try to spread out the talent to become something more than a 3-13 team. that would keep us in a cap disadvantage
meanwhile, the browns have an overall better defense than the vikings, and they rank a little better on offense too. they have the ability to grab a legitimate top tier qb prospect this year in robert griffin iii, to supplant the guy who many people wanted the vikings to take, colt mccoy. and mccoy is pretty comparable to ponder, so by the looks of it, cleveland wants to replace their christian ponder after only 2 seasons. good thing they have the extra top draft picks to make a move. and where will we be if our colt mccoy doesn’t pan out?
the browns are estimated to have about $13 million more in cap room than the vikings even before releasing anybody to gain cap room. plus, they already have an additional 1st round draft pick to go along with their #4. while the vikings will need to cut 4-5 players just to get down to the cap level of the browns, and then we will have to sign even more players just to fill up the roster. plus, we don’t have the extra high picks unless we make a move.
also, the browns are still paying joe thomas less than jared allen, and they don’t have any other big ticket players to eat up a chunk of the salary cap like the vikings already do with adrian peterson’s $13.33 million/year (and blown out knee).
i get that people don’t want to lose a great player, but i also don’t think that keeping jared allen is the answer to re-building a team at this point in time. we’ve been at it for 4 years now, and we are back sliding. the more i think about it, the more i can see that the arguments for it look like good in the big picture…as unpopular as it may seem.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
***(multiple stars for multiple typos, my bad).
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
*2007 was joe thomas' rookie year, oops
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
It just boils down to what is the right price for Allen and could you get it?
When we traded a 1st and 2 3rds for Allen he was 25 years old. At 29 going on 30 I’m not sure we’d get anything more than a mid 1st rounder for him which I don’t think is enough. For comparison’s sake NE traded Seymour to Oakland when he was a 29 year old pro-bowler for a single 1st round pick and that’s with crazy Al Davis at the helm. If some team offered a deal like you suggested for a 1st and 2nd rounder plus a highly drafted prospect like Solder the deal makes some sense. I just don’t think you could get that much for Allen at his age.
by CanadianViking on Feb 26, 2012 12:27 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Rec'd
If the Vikings could get three number ones and a couple of twos, then go for it. One poster said the Vikings had to trade Jared Allen because “his value would never be higher, and the Vikings should be able to get at least a number one and a number seven for him”. That’s ridiculous. The Vikings aren’t gonna get a Hershel Walker type trade, so they’re better off keeping him. I’m really surprised at how many Viking fans are trying to play Belichick , and want to get rid of our best players for picks that may, or may not pan out.
i think we can get more out of a trade than that for him and some picks.
i suggested trading allen plus 2 picks and whatever for the #27, #48 and a guy that could start for us, but where the pats have a logjam. we are also getting 2 additional 4th round picks, i’d trade away one of those too.
the seymour trade wasn’t a good one, imo. the pats just let him go for cap reasons. i want more than that. i think the return value for him would be higher from a team that is a solid playoff and super bowl contender.
but, if we couldn’t get a good haul of only top picks and starting young talent, then i wouldn’t want to make the trade.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
I don't know. Other than QBs you don't see many big trades in the NFL involving stars and multiple picks.
The Seymour trade is about as close of a comparison as you can get for a possible Allen trade. Seymour was the same age as Allen and a 5 time pro-bowler when he was traded and most people were surprised the Pats got a relatively high first rounder for him and attributed it to Oakland’s overpaying style. Allen is 29 and a 4 time pro-bowler at the moment so even though I think he’s an elite player I just don’t see a team offering much more than a 1st rounder.
For that type of trade package most teams would just take a couple of shots at getting a great DE in the draft. If somebody did offer the farm for Allen it could go a long way towards rebuilding I just don’t see it happening because NFL teams love their draft picks so much.
by CanadianViking on Feb 26, 2012 7:33 PM CST up reply actions
the pats are built to win right now, they almost won the super bowl...
and brady is getting up there in age. a guy like jared allen could be the missing piece to make their defense more of a threat and get them over the top. plus, they have the cap room, the extra draft pick and an extra player they can part with (that we could use).
i don’t think your generalization about trades is really valid, do you remember the carson palmer trade last year? so what if it was a qb, i think jared allen is a unique player. he is a star defensive end, besides, they already have brady at qb and were 2 plays away from another ring.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
QBs tend to have longer lifespans than DEs
I’m sure that was a large part of the trade-value.
Also, it was with the Raiders. ‘Nuff said there. They shouldn’t set the floor for anything. The league is still cringing over their Asomugha contract a few years back.
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 27, 2012 10:33 AM CST up reply actions
funny how a team that went to the super bowl again...
…is so far under the salary cap again this year.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
your counterpoints aren't any good.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
Your logic about the Patriots trade doesn't follow their history at all.
First off, the Patriots had a 29 year old multi-time pro-bowl DE in Seymour that they won 3 SuperBowls with and they traded him for a single first rounder. So now they’re going to do the opposite and trade significantly more for a 29 year old multi-time pro-bowl DE? If this was the Raiders it might make some sense as they do crazy things other teams won’t but this is the Patriots and they don’t operate this way.
Also, you do realize that Nate Solder is the player New England drafted with the pick they got from Oakland in the Seymour trade. If the Patriots were willing to trade so much for Allen they never would’ve traded Seymour in the first place.
I do remember the Carson Palmer trade and he’s a QB and it was the Raiders. There’s a reason I excluded QBs from big trades because they’re the only position that teams will hugely overpay for in draft picks.
by CanadianViking on Feb 27, 2012 1:01 PM CST up reply actions
well sure it is a little against their pattern, but...
the patriots are notorious for changing their pattern. the trade scenerio was something in response to the article i linked about the pats possibly going after mario williams, and needing another defensive playmaker. i also am looking at the fact that they are riding the tom brady train, and he is 35 years old. they are built to win right now (for realz, not like the vikes supposedly were) and jared allen is at his peak right now, so i see it as a good fit. brady won’t last forever.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
Fair enougn.
I don’t disagree with you that Allen wouldn’t be a great fit for the Pats, I just disagree with the price they’d be willing to pay to get him. If it was the Raiders that were an Allen away from a SuperBowl than a trade like yours might just happen : )
by CanadianViking on Feb 27, 2012 1:26 PM CST up reply actions
i don't actually believe the pats would go for it either...
but they might if we throw in randy moss to sweeten the deal.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
I think the Browns are a great example of what we DON'T want to become,
yes. But by trading Allen, that seems to be to be where we’re heading. The Browns are a team with alot of ‘depth’ but no real talent. They’ve had alot of picks in recent years, high ones at that, and haven’t been able to do anything with it. Recently, they’ve been trading back to get more draft choices and are still stuck with a shitty team.
If they’re a better team overall.. why are they just one selection behind us? That ‘spread out talent’ only equated to one extra win. Whoop-di-doo..
More picks doesn’t guarantee results.
Allen guarantees results. Of course he’s going to be expensive. He’s a phenomal player. He’s well worth the money. Does it hurt the team? Maybe a bit in terms of drawing in higher paid players. On the field though? He’s earning every dollar we spend on him. Why would you want to get rid of a player who’s giving you an amazing return investment?
And yes, I’m well aware that cutting the players means we have to replace them. That is, you know, the point to cutting them. And then it will free up space for the cap, so people won’t have to whine about Allen making so much, when he’s one of the few people on the team who’s deserving of his multi-million dollar contract. The guy just got 22 sacks on a 3-13 team. That shows me he has no quit in him. I, and you too, should want a guy like that on your team, even if you have to pay him a little more than half a million per sack.
I guess this depends on how much you see us as being close to contending again. Personally, I don’t think its going to take us 4 or 5 years. Assuming one of our QBs starts to improve, we’ll be ready to be back in the running in a season or two. A strong #1 WR, some CB help, and a better option at LT should be able to get back us into playoff talks. It doesn’t (or rather shouldn’t) take four or five years to find those.
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 26, 2012 10:08 AM CST up reply actions
you are being inconsistent with your comments.
I think the Browns are a great example of what we DON’T want to become…
that’s what i said. so you think i am right.
your attempt to shift the discussion to a browns comparison now isn’t working. they are in a different situation than the vikings, as listed clearly.
Allen guarantees results…
actually he doesn’t, that is one of the main points. we are still 3-13, meaning we have been getting worse. his 21.5 sacks didn’t help out the bottom line that much. furthermore, pass rush is supposed to be help out the defensive backs, yet we ranked at the bottom of the league in pass defense ans points against.
Why would you want to get rid of a player who’s giving you an amazing return investment?
as i have stated several times…to improve the team and roster, which happens to be a mess right now.
YOU are the one who brought up joe thomas as a comparison due to his large contract and star atatus. that means that the browns actually do have some real talent, and they signed him to a bigtime deal. but this is about the vikings, and their situation, not some other team.
allen is a salary cap anchor, and he will only get heavier, restructuring his contract will not aleviate the team of his expense, it will trigger involve taking on more, any way you slice it. then when we want to move him, he won’t be movable do to his age and the fact that we will probabvly take a big hit when we do thanks to his bonus money.
hey, he is a great player, no doubt. but take the blinders off. the picture is much bigger.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
I think you're misunderstanding why I even brought up the Browns..
I was bringing them up to show that having extra/higher selections doesn’t automatically equate to success. Otherwise, they could trade Joe Thomas, get, at least, two first rounders for him, and then suddenly be SB bound. They have alot of holes to fill too, after all.
And just because the secondary is fully of shitty players, doesn’t mean Allen isn’t getting results. He’s given us double digit sack totals every season we’ve had him for. That’s some pretty consistent effort. Its not his fault the DBs can’t keep a WR covered long enough, or that Frazier promoted somebody who couldn’t call proper coverages.
Is there a long list of issues with the team? Hell yes. So why do you want to add to that list by trading Allen? A DE who can bring consistent pressure on a passer is needed in the game today, and nobody does it better than Jared Allen. Yes, he’s getting up in age. Yes, he just had his best season. Yes, his value is high. But its not high enough that we’re going to be able to replace his contributions to the team.
And while Allen may be a salary cap anchor, he’s at least EARNED that position. Some of the other veterans on the team are getting paid less effeciently than what Allen is. Worry about them, first. Guys like Griffin or Herrerra who aren’t pulling their weight on the field but still chipping away into the cap.
If you’re looking for reasons why the team is 3-13, its not Allen. Salary-wise, yes, he’s something of a handicap. But on the field, where the results really matter? He is even close.
I don’t have blinders on. I see a man who deserves his large contract. There’s no legitimate reason for wanting to get rid of him. There’s other guys with lesser contracts who aren’t playing up to their alloted salary that are chipping away at the cap. They should be dealt with before we turn our eyes on Allen.
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 26, 2012 7:40 PM CST up reply actions
I think you’re misunderstanding why I even brought up the Browns.. I was bringing them up to show that having extra/higher selections doesn’t automatically equate to success.
no, that’s not why you brought up “joe thomas”…i then framed the context to "the browns’ to keep things on track. you compared allen’s contract to thomas’ contract. sorry, not buying it.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
Uh, no.
I’m not even looking at contracts. I don’t care about Allen’s contract vs Thomas’. I was looking at them having alot of holes to fill and trading an All-Pro player. Like you’re suggesting we do.
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 27, 2012 10:34 AM CST up reply actions
I’m not even looking at contracts.
that’s the whole reason you brought it up for a comparison to allen. and if you are not looking at contracts, in order to understand the context, then you are not really providing any substance with your comments.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
what you fail to fully grasp...
…is that the Vikings can become better through the draft and free agency. The whole draft structure is composed to provide competitive balance. If the vikings continue to struggle, they will improve more through the draft. Teams generally don’t improve by trading their best players. There are exceptions, but they are exceptions for a reason, they simply don’t happen frequently. For one, free agents are less likely to come to a team with less talent. Secondly, you upset the veterans on the team when you trade a guy like JA and the locker room as well as on the field production suffers. You don’t want the guys who are giving their all for you to feel expendable.
what you fail to fully grasp…is that the Vikings can become better through the draft and free agency.
the purpose of the entire fanpost is to acquire top draft picks, young talent and to free up cap space in order to sign free agency. i am glad you agree with my objectives.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
There's other ways to aquire cap space
You’re just looking at the ‘easiest’ solution: Freeing up the largest cap-hit. Who just also happens to be the best player on the team. Seems like a fair pay-to-results ratio to me..
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 26, 2012 7:42 PM CST up reply actions
i brought up this idea because it has multiple significant benefits.
and allows us to have more ability to reshape the roster with dignificant acquisitions, not 1-2 second tier free agent signings.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
An extra pick, possibly two..
For an all-pro DE who actually set the single-season sack record..
Unless we’re getting multiple first rounders for him, which won’t happen, it isn’t worth it.
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 27, 2012 10:36 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
and again you won't even state the facts of what i proposed here.
and he didn’t set the single season sack record. maybe you are just too afraid that we might gain an advantage and get better as a team….without jared allen.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
Trading Allen should be considered
The fact of the matter is that he is going to count 14 mil towards the cap next year. And 16 mil towards the cap in 2013. This is way too much even for a great player like Allen.
Not that he is not worth the money but it is just too much against the cap for one player IMO who is not the QB.
At the very least the Vikings need to extend him BEFORE free agency starts or very shortly thereafter. His 25 mil in salary that is due is not guaranteed right now. If they give him a four or five year deal for somewhere around 50 mil plus or so and guarantee that 25 mil then they should be able to come to some type of agreement. That should reduce that cap number by 3 to 5 mil or or so.
If they cannot do that then it is a lot of money for a rebuilding team that is clearly not going anywhere next year and can only hope that 2013 will be a possible playoff team.
The thought of trading him does not bother me at all. The Vikings would free up 11 mil or so to use on other free agents (linebacker, safety, cornerback, wide receiver, and defensive tackle come to mind) and they would get at least one first round draft pick this year and another pick in 2013 most likely.
I can live with that since Everson Griffen has played pretty well when given the chance.
However, I do realize that it will affect the pass rush immensely. Where will the sacks come from? This is the big question the front office would have to answer. It also would force the Vikings to select another DE in the draft unless they decide to go with Ballard at base DE and rotate Robison and Griffen in Allen’s spot. It is a tough decision.
But I realize that Allen is the only player that the Vikings could conceivably trade to gain an extra first round pick this year. That combined with his massive salary which is hurting the team in free agency this year and will cripple them next year is the reason why you have to strongly consider it and throw all emotion out the window.
As a fan of trading player a year early rather than a year late, I would go for it. I want the cap money and the draft picks.
Plenty of players were drafted that have done really well. Jason Pierre-Paul, Carlos Dunlap, Aldon Smith, Von Miller, Connor Barwin, Jabaal Sheard, and Geno Atkins are all examples of drafted players coming into the league and doing well.
Either extend his deal to lower the cap hit (like Pittsburgh is doing to free up cap space – why our front office has not done this with Allen is a mystery to me) or trade him! By the time the Vikings get back to competing for a playoff spot he will be on the way down in his career arc.
by MarkSP18 on Feb 25, 2012 6:35 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Restructuring him and adding a few years to his contract makes the most sense to me.
I can’t see him netting much more than a mid first rounder at 29 and for me his production is worth more than that. I would like to see his cap number reduced by extending him for a few years though.
by CanadianViking on Feb 26, 2012 12:31 AM CST up reply actions
If they leave his contract as is then it is curious at best
Creating an extra 3 to 5 mil in cap space will allow them to sign another free agent even if it is depth.
I think that Seattle may be a team to give up that #12 pick and a 2013 conditional 3rd or 4th. Obviously New England with two picks is a candidate too and as this post states getting one of their firsts and seconds is pretty decent. I do not think they will give up Nate Solder though. I wouldn’t. Matt Light is the guy they may trade in this scenario.
I also believe that if Cleveland hangs onto that #22 pick somehow, then they may be interested too. Tennessee is also a team that may have interest.
You never know who would be interested in a player like Allen.
You are never going to get the kind of return that you want. But you will get what you need if you decided to move him. Cap relief, a first round draft pick plus at least one other pick this year or next, and the knowledge that you did get value for the initial trade is all you need IMO.
It is a very tough decision that the team would have to make if they seriously considered any offers. There probably are offers too. Other teams know the Vikings situation and probably are trying to pry Allen away.
At the very least they need to do something about his contract this year (as in right now). If they extend him then he will be here another 4 or 5 years. Everson Griffen will probably never get a shot at more playing time and will end up walking away when he is up for free agency. The Vikings will never know what they have in him if he never gets a shot. Look at Robison. When he finally gets a shot he did fairly well. Next year he could be even better.
You are never going to get the kind of return that you want. But you will get what you need if you decided to move him. Cap relief, a first round draft pick plus at least one other pick this year or next, and the knowledge that you did get value for the initial trade is all you need IMO.
That pretty much sums up an Allen trade for me. You’re not going to get a huge blow me away offer so you’re going to get to dump a big salary and get a 1st rounder to take a shot at replacing an elite player. For me that’s not enough as odds are you’ll get a good player with that 1st rounder but low that you’ll find another elite guy and there is the possibility of a bust as well. So the main plus in a deal for Allen is salary cap relief.
If I’m the Vikings and want to create more cap room I cut lesser producing vets like Hutch, Griffin, and Hererra before I think about trading Allen. Extending his deal to a 5 year contract would probably be the smartest idea for the Vikings as they’d keep Allen’s production for as long as he’s still elite and they’d be able to trim a few million off his cap hit.
Like the Million Dollar Man used to say " Everybody’s got a price". I just don’t think the right price for Allen in a trade is out there.
by CanadianViking on Feb 26, 2012 9:30 AM CST up reply actions
i would not be so quick to assume what we could get in a trade scenerio.
i think it is better to test it out instead and see what other teams would be willing to give. i sure hope spielman is smart enough to investigate this angle, even if it doesn’t result in any deal, it will inform him of his value in any potential restructuring scenerio. also, it doesn’t hurt to contact teams with one potential trade idea…and then let it lead to OTHER trade scenerio discussions. the result could be a deal that nobody had imagined.
i coild see restructuring, but there is no way his cost will decrease, it will only increase. i look at the situation we have with adrian peterson’s huge deal in relation to allen’s huge cap numbers too. combined, they are over $57 million over the next 2 seasons, and adrian is on crutches after completely blowing out 2 ligaments in one of his knees. that money i listed is guaranteed, and he is certainly not tradable. that is another bigtime cap anchor.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
by krinkle on Feb 26, 2012 7:02 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Restructuring should always decrease cap hits because the largest numbers are on the back-end of deals and aren't guaranteed.
In Allen’s case he’s due roughly 12 million next year and over 14 million in the final deal of his contract. Say we give him a 5 year 65 million dollar contract extension with 30 million guaranteed. His salaries would likely go something like 9, 11, 13, 15, and 17. Allen gets more guaranteed money spread out over the first 3 years of the contract and the Vikings save 3 million in cap hits in each of the next two years. Cap hits are the main reason teams restructure players. Look at Pittsburgh and Roethlisberger as an example as they’ve restructured his contract two or three times to lower his cap number over the last few seasons. Roethlisberger is cool with it because he just ends up getting more guaranteed money with each restructure instead of the phoney money that pads out the end of his deal.
Adrian’s extension netted him 36 million guaranteed over the first 3 years and depending on where you read anywhere between 10-12 million was payed out this year and his cap number for next year is lower under the new deal than if the Vikings had franchised him. I’m not saying it’s not a huge amount of money but there’s only 2 more seasons of guaranteed money left on his deal so it won’t cripple the Vikings for long-term if he fails to regain his past form. All of Allen’s guaranteed 31 million has already been paid out and if you google his contract he agreed to a minor restructuring of his contract back in 2009 to free up 4 million in cap space so I’m sure he’ll do it again if necessary.
I get that you’re worried about so much money being tied up in 2 players but with the non-guaranteed contracts in the NFL there’s a ton of ways to restructure and reduce these large cap hits. Also, with the new CBA teams have to start spending to a minimum percentage of the cap (90% I think) in a season or two so teams can’t hoard cap-space like Tampa and others have done in recent years so expect teams to get even more creative in the way they shuffle cap-hits from year to year.
by CanadianViking on Feb 26, 2012 8:46 PM CST up reply actions
oh boy. where to begin. i think you are misunderstanding a few things here.
first, we should clarify that “contract restructuring” and “contract extention” are 2 different things. either way, the cap hits become bigger when you do this, because of the way the bonus money is treated and counted. a team simply cannot escape any signing bonus money or guaranteed money from a contract by either restructuring or an extention. an extention actually accelerates ALL of the remaining bonus cap money of the original contract to the year that the new contract is signed.
the numbers that you are listing for contracts are not even accounting for any bonus money and not reflecting the cap figure, which is what matters here.
jared allen accounts for $14.2 million against the cap in 2012 and $16.86 million against the cap in 2013 (not $11.6m and $14.2m as you suggest). this is due to his prorated signing bonus money. this signing bonus money will not disappear, it will get counted immediately against our salary cap. if we extend jared allen’s contract right now, there will be (2)x$2.5833million (or $6.66 million) in cap hit related ONLY to his previous contract. then, there will also be additional cap money counted for the first year of his “new” contract in the form of a base salary and some level of signing bonus money. i believe the net saving on cap money for this year will be negligible, especially when considering the subsequent years of the deal (i.e. expensive).
also, jared allen is one of the top players at his position, is still in the peak years of his career (although aging) and already commands $14.28 million in 2013 salary, this is his price point. this means that he will command similar top dollar in any newly negotiated contract extention, with the requisite increase in annual payment due to the earning status he has achieved. he will therefore end up costing the vikings anywhere from $15-$20 million per year on his extended years. he might be a very short term cap reduction, but those figures represent his earning potential, so he will get it, and we will have to pay. that means that the cap anchor will be heavier than ever in 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016. there is no way to magically make his salary/bonus’ disappear.
also, jared allen’s big ‘contract restructuring" that you mention didn’t do anything for the vikings, and was in no way a sacrifice for jared allen. the “guru” brez had structured an additional $8 million worth of bonus money to ne paid to allen in 2010, and brez restructured that money to pay allen $4 million of that…EARLY !!! as in, jared allen gets $4million more in 2009 in order to free up some cap space for 2010. the funny part is that everyone knew that 2010 was going to be a ‘no cap year", so brez’s maneuver didn’t help the team out at all with regards to cap room.
ironically, brez did the same thing with brett favre, he restructured his 2009 deal to load up money for the 2011 season. so we took a major cap hit this year just for brett favre. brez was just putting off payment, and strangling the team with dead cap money in 2011, when we were OVER the cap limit…and they call him a genius?
ben roethlisberger “restructured” his deal, that does not change the duration or amount of his contract. it only pushed off cap money out of the year that it was restructured, and into the follwing years. that means that the steelers are going to take even cap hits for big ben the follwong year. the steelers did this because they too ran into serious cap issues due to their huge ass contracts they ponied up for 4-5 star players.
last year, they restructured ben’s deal to free up cap room for LAST YEAR, so they could remain under the cap for 2011. now, they have restructured his deal again BECAUSE THEY ARE $8 MILLION OVER THE CAP FOR 2012. so, they are pushing off $8 million in cap money until the following seasons of his deal. but there is no way in hell they can avoid his gigantic salary, they will be paying even more cap money for him in 2013 and beyond. they are sort of screwed.
also, they are going to have to try and “restructure” james harrison this year just to be able to have a little room to try and sign mike wallace to a contract. that will do the same thing as ben’s deal, it will push even more cap costs off to the next few seasons. THEN, next year, they will be in the same situation with lamar woodley. his 2012 number is low, but it spikes heavily in 2013.
the steelers are fooking scrambling to hold it together because they haven’t handled there sh!t very well. the vikings are not in quite as bad of a situation as that, but then again, we were 3-13 and are looking at a total re-build. the bad part of it is that we do have jared’s and adrian’s big deals on our plate.
it is simple, if we keep allen, we will have to pay him a boatload, and then pay him even more to keep him around longer. this will mean less money to spend on other positions. and right now, we need so many different positional upgrades it is ridiculous, and we don’t really have a great deal of cap space to work with…some, but not enough to fill our holes properly.
again….
THERE IS NO WAY TO MAKE CAP MONEY GO AWAY BY RESTRUCTURING OR WITH CONTRACT EXTENTIONS. it will only get pushed off and we will be paying more the following years. plus, we are already paying out the minimum percentage that will be required, that is not a problem for us at all.
jared allen’s and adrian peterson’s contracts are anchors. the question is…is it worth it?
i say trade jared allen to get as much value as possibe right now. then we can have something to work with in a true re-build with several top young prospects and a collection of solid veteran free agent signings. 3-13 folks…22 sacks don’t mean sh!t.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
oops..."(2)x$2.5833million (or $5.16 million)" on jared's salary bonus $$
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
Yeah, 'cause everyone gets 22 sacks..
I’d like to see you tell Allen to his face his 22 sacks don’t mean shit and he’s an anchor weighing the team down.
That aside, yes. It is worth it. You want a guy who can play the run and get to the QB at the DE position. Allen does both terrificly. He is worth his contract. That’s a fair value for both team and player.
Peterson is a different story. I love the guy, but we got screwed with his injury. He’s the bigger anchor than what Allen is, especially considering the wear and tear Peterson’s had the last couple years, and a RB’s lifespan is far less in the NFL than a DEs, especially one who relies more on technique than brute strength.
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 27, 2012 10:41 AM CST up reply actions
it doesn't matter. we were 3-13.
we had one of the worst pass defenses in the league.
we gave up more passing tds than any team in the league.
we had the fewest interceptions of any team in the league.
we gave up the 2nd most points per game in the league.
we have the 2nd worse record of any team in the league.
we are losing 16 players to free agency that need to be replaced.
we will probably be cutting 4 more starters that will need replacement.
of course he commands a contract of the amount he is getting paid,
and he will only get more expensive as he signs a new deal.
!!! oooooh >>> 3-13 <<< ouuuch !!!
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
RE/ 22 sacks don't mean sh**
Yes it does. It translates to pressure on the quarterback. Last year’s 3-13 was kind of a fluke. A lot things contributed go last years poor season, and a lot of them should be improved upon going into next year. Last year the Vikings had a short offseason, new coaches and really inexperienced quarterbacks. Next year the Vikings will a full offseason and another year under their belt. The short offseason hurt the Vikings more than most due to the inexperience.
The Vikings have had a poor offensive line for the last couple of years. Drafting a quality offensive lineman like Kalil will do wonders for the entire offense. Antoine Winfield’s injury coupled with Cris Cook’s legal problems led to a depleted secondary. I have no doubt that this position will be addresses in the offseason. Better secondary play coupled with Jared’s 22 sacks (QB pressure ) translates to a much improved defense. Last year was a fluke. The Vikings have an off year, and everyone panics and wants a firesale. Next year the Vikings biggest problem will be its own division, not our roster.
that's "at 3-13 folks....22 sacks don't mean sh!t".
that is putting it int perspective. we sucked as a team, we got worse after being really bad the year before. the wheels fell off and we have a much bigger task to deal with. trading away one player is not a fire sale, it is a windfall if we can gain in the 3 areas i addressed in the trade scenerio.
all the reasons you state about the team not having an offensive line, and having poor secondary play has to do with the fact that the team did a shit job of planning for the present and future. the reason we couldn’t sign more quality players is BECAUSE WE WERE OVER THE CAP, einstein. and we got that way by paying a few players a whole lot of money and screwing our future in the process.
of the 2 super bowl teams last year, neither of them give big dollar contracts to non qbs. the giants spread out their salaries to several top tier players without breaking the bank on any one player. the pats only give top dollar to tom brady, and less than top dollar to their next 2 big salries, logan mankins and vince wilfork. and both teams are under the cap, the pats are way under the cap.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
by krinkle on Feb 27, 2012 12:47 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
BECAUSE WE WERE OVER THE CAP, einstein.
Just because you don’t happen to agree with my point of view is no cause to yell at me, and call me names. One of the great things about this site is the respect that is usually given to one another, even though there are different points of view. I happen to think that no team is going to give the Vikings the kings ransom that Jared is worth to make this trade worthwhile. Jared isn’t just a sack machine. He plays the run as well. He is one of the greatest defensive ends ever. While Everson Griffen has looked good at times, there is no evidence that he can be consistent and stay at the level of play of Jared Allen. If the Vikings lose Jared Allen, the Vikings don’t just lose his great on field play, they also lose his leadership and locker room presence. Jared is the type of player that shows young guys how to play, and builds locker room chemistry.
i get all the reasons why you want to keep him.
i just think that the bigger picture is overlooked. one defensive end is not going to be the thing to build a team around, no matter how accomplished he has been. the very way the team has done things has brought us to the very bottom of the league. i proposed a change to free up 3 important factors to building a team up from the 3-13 situation that we are in.
maybe we won’t be able to find a team to make this type of trade, but i would certainly try, and i would certainly take what i proposed. you can’t ignore 3-13, and you can’t ignore the cap.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
I'm not ignoring 3-13 or the the cap.
As I stated above, a lot of the problems from last year should be easily fixed without trading one of our best players in his prime. Draft Kalil and offense should be greatly improved. The rest of the draft concentrate on defense, and maybe a receiver.
i guess i'm just thinking bigger, i want a winner.
and i don’t think we have enough tools to acquire the personnel to make a winner, especially in our division. we are still paying for lousy cap management and lack of planning. i want to go to the super bowl.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
One trade doesn't guarantee a Superbowl any more than keeping a stud DE
Just two different opinions.
of course that is not what i am suggesting...
as i keep stating, we need to make several moves just to right the ship and get us moving in that direction. it just so happens that this proposal will open up the opportunity to make several moves now and make serious headway. now, if we didn’t have adrian peterson’s deal on the plate, we would have a little more leaway…but we don’t, and he is untradable now.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
Wow, hell of a reply, but I think you misread some of what I wrote.
In my comment I never said that restructuring makes cap-hits disappear I just pointed out that it’s a common way to lessen the cap hit in the current year and possibly the subsequent year. It’s a shell game that NFL teams play every year to stay under the cap which you obviously realize with the impressive detail you went into.
The two numbers I listed for Allen were just his salary numbers and not his cap hits as I rarely find reliable cap numbers. Spotrac lists cap hits and I like their site but there info is often out of date or incomplete. If you find a reliable site for cap hits I’d love to know about it as it’s frustrating with so much incomplete and incorrect info out there. The dummy contract I threw out there for Allen was just off the top of my head and an example of how large cap hits are pushed forward with extensions. Your salary figures seem closer to reality but the concept is the same.
Right now the Vikings are 10 million under the cap and can free up more space by cutting or restructuring some overpriced vets like Hutch, Griffin, and Hererra so even with Allen and AD there’s plenty of room to operate. I understand your concern about being hamstrung by the cap like the VIkings were last year but with the new CBA teams are going to be required to spend to a minimum and a total rebuild with all cheap young players isn’t going to be in the cards for much longer. It’s a good thing to have star players on your team and like it or not you have to pay them a lot.
In previous comments I agreed that your Allen trade with New England made some sense if you can get such a big haul for him. I simply disagree that he’d net that much and offered the Seymour deal as a good comparison of his value which you just laughed off because it didn’t support your opinion. Find a trade of a Non-QB star player traded for the amount of picks you think Allen is worth and than I’ll give your trade idea much more credence.
I think trading vets for picks and young talent is a good idea in theory, but I just don’t see many NFL teams making these kind of deals as they, like you, prefer young talent and draft picks to star veterans with big price tags.
by CanadianViking on Feb 27, 2012 12:44 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
well, when you tossed out the notion that we could simply restructure...
it just sounded like a generalization and is a huge misnomer. sportrac is not consistent player to player, but the players that they have full info for is pretty clear. combine that with rotoworld and a google search (i.e. “roethlisberger contract restructured” et al) and you can fill in the blanks quite a bit by cross referencing the info. (p.s. notice how the sportrac adrian peterson details are simply incomplete because the team has not issued the complete details of the deal, he is NOT an $8 million cap hit).
the seymour-patriots comparison is just a totally differnt context to the situation with allen and the vikings. seymour was 30, in the last year of his contract paying him only $3.685 million. they would have had to give him a big payday to resign him, except that they had several other players that they were going to have to resign to large long term deals that were ensuing, so they got a 1st round pick for him. i think that was a steal by the raiders. (the pats went on to sign tom brady, matt light, vince wilfork and logan mankins to big contracts).
while the vikings have already signed allen and peterson to huge deals that are now going to seriously affect our cap while we are trying to deal with the fact that…we are a 3-13 team. notice how the patriots went to the super bowl again?
with the non-guaranteed contracts in the NFL there’s a ton of ways to restructure and reduce these large cap hits.
the main gong i am trying to bang loud enough for you to hear is that this doesn’t matter. it will only push off the cap hits to the following years, making them doubly hard hits. it is painting the organozation into a cap corner. just watch what is going to happen to the steelers. ben roethlisberger is going to count $19.6 million against the cap next year, and the year after, before it increases to $20.5 million. they don’t even have any money to resign mile wallace right now.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
I understand your point about cap hits, I'm just not as worried about the Vikings cap situation at the moment.
I know that restructuring only provides short-term cap relief and can lead to problems like the Steeler’s are encountering but that’s life in the NFL. Even when you have a young player under a cheap contract if he performs like a star he’ll holdout or renegotiate for a big deal and eventually if you have enough stars the cap becomes an issue and a team will either have to cut, trade, or restructure multiple players. It’s nice to avoid that situation but like most things in the NFL cap-problems tend to be cyclical unless your team is super-cheap like Tampa or just stupid like Oakland and Washington.
The Seymour trade had different context between where the Vikings are at the moment and the situation the Patriots were in but he’s as close of a comparison as you can find for Allen’s approximate trade value given their accomplishments and age are very similar.
The reason the Patriots went to the SuperBowl has little to do with their cap-prowess or team building philosophy. They’re successful because they have Tom Brady and a great coach. The Pats had 18 UDFA playing for them last year, a terrible defense, a mediocre running game, and they were still successful because a great QB covers up so many holes. If you’ve got a top 5 QB you’re a threat to win the SuperBowl every year even when the rest of the team may be average.
by CanadianViking on Feb 27, 2012 1:50 PM CST up reply actions
the pats are great at turnover and managing the roster over time.
afterall, they are a perennial winner because of it.
The reason the Patriots went to the SuperBowl has little to do with their cap-prowess or team building philosophy.
it actually has a lot to do with their team building prowess. that is why they can win with 18 udfa’s, they clearly have a system in place to build a roster that can consistently win, even with lots of player turnover.
also, since they also manage their cap money well, they are in a position to be a winning team every year. if they allowed themselves to get cap strapped, then they would likely have problems trying to rearrange their roster effectively. i think the star qb gives them the trump card to be able to do this, but i have to think that belichick is just smarter than anybody in the league too.
well then who the hell are you talkin' to...are you talkin' to me?
I think it's Belichick and Brady more than anything else.
The Patriots wheel and deal for extra picks in the draft every year but even with a ton of picks they haven’t had a ton of hits. It’s also pretty easy to be under the cap when you sign so many UDFAs to fill out the roster.
What makes the Pats special is that Belichick changes his schemes so often to get better than average production out of average players. Offense isn’t working because they don’t have great WRs so they switch to a 2 TE set that’s hard to defend. Defense isn’t working so they switch from a 4-3 to a 3-4 and back to a 4-3 while throwing in a WR to play DB.
The actual players on the Patriots roster aren’t that impressive compared to other top teams but with a great QB like Brady and Belichik’s game-planning they outperform their on paper talent every year. Basically I think Brady’s a luxury that covers up holes and I agree that Belichick is smarter than every other coach in the league because he gets more out of his players than anybody. Hell, Belichick could probably find a way to make Cedric Griffin and Tyrell Johnson look good : )
by CanadianViking on Feb 27, 2012 3:06 PM CST up reply actions
I don't think the Vikings are going to be looking at the Salary Cap this year
They are going to be looking to lower their total payroll, since they were highest in the NFL.
This scares me, as I don’t know who they will dump to get the cost down in line with other teams.
by liveforadrenaline on Feb 27, 2012 2:14 PM CST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Daily Norseman
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
- Alex Smith gets blown up by Jon Beason over Cam Newton comments
