I hadn't paid much attention to Mike Zimmer's career until this year when it seemed the Vikings would be in the market for a new coach. But I vaguely remembered seeing his name pop up a few times. Then it dawned on me: he was the guy that publicly took
Bobby Petrino the Coward to task for bailing on the Falcons midseason! His honesty excited me, so I decided to do some research on what type of candidate he'd be and came across this article.
The aforementioned article by Dan Zinksi, really made me think. I remember cringing every time Frazier would head to podium because I knew some type of rehearsed, canned response would come from him. It was obvious that he was being fed company lines and he didn't seem too upset about it. I really doubt that Zimmer, given his history, would play ball.
Rick is the master of spin and secrecy. The combination of him and Frazier/Childress seemed to be a perfect match. Zimmer is more like an old-school, perhaps more respected version of Rob Ryan. Could Speilman tolerate a guy that speaks his mind? With his job on the line, is he more concerned with the quality of product on field or comfortability in operations?
I'm not surprised to hear that he said the Bowles interview went great. Bowles seems similar to Frazier in being happy for the opportunity to be a HC. I think Bowles may be a better coach than Frazier (able to make adjustments?), but I think he'd fine with being fed lines. I could be wrong (and I hope that I am, cause I really like Bowles's potential), but just seems as Speilman would take advantage of another former player/current coordinator who feels a need to return the favor. He was before my time, but seeing press conferences of Jerry Burns, Zimmer seems to be cut from the same cloth (minus the f-bombs!).
I really like Zimmer's track record, and I think he's just the kind of jolt the Vikings are in need of. He won't ruffle as many feathers as Rob Ryan, but also won't be docile like Leslie Frazier.
What do you guys think? Is Dan Zinksi right in his assessment?