gunnarthor

Kinda nice to see two big 10 teams ranked 1 & 2.

We're due. 35-10, us.

Bit of a puff ball video but here's a nice video of Dallas Turner. A few things popped out 1) he's a freak athlete like everyone is these days but 2) he's been playing both OLB but also hand in the dirt DE a bit more this year, I think, with the defense doing more 4-3 fronts.

Yeah, I think that makes sense. I do remember after week one, some online QB guys saying that his mechanics were better than Williams so some regression may have happened. Still, it could be just too many things in his head. "make the right read, footwork, throw" could explain why he's late on a lot of things. In any event, they have five weeks to see if they can fix this or not.

Sounds like the Vikes are trying to simplify things for JJ this week. Telling him not to worry about footwork so much as decision-making. That's probably a good idea. Sorta like not making a guy think about his swing so much as go out and play because that's what got you here in the first place. https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/page/viewersguide47200964/nfl-week-14-picks-predictions-schedule-fantasy-football-odds-injuries-stats-2025#wshmin

So, take this with a grain of salt but this article on SBNation suggests that at least one QB evaluator believes that if Arch Manning declares for the draft, he'll go #1 overall. I have no idea who Nate Tice is. https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/1091884/nfl-mock-draft-2026-4-qbs-in-first-round-plus-the-arch-manning-dilemma#comments "Manning has played much better as of late, including a three-touchdown performance against Vanderbilt, and then last week’s win over Texas A&M. His recent stretch has led Nate Tice — one of the voices in the quarterback evaluation space I listen to — to declare that if Manning were to enter the draft, he would be the first-overall pick."

Yeah, I think that sounds about right, actually. Last year it was Will Johnson. I had to look him up. He's played really well for Arizona but has only played in 7 games, starting 5. Before the draft, he was a potential top10 pick, they got him midway through the second.

Looks like he's a bigger Ivan Pace. https://www.nfldraftbuzz.com/Player/Jacob-Rodriguez-LB-TexasTech "The modern NFL game might challenge Rodriguez in obvious passing situations where he'd need to cover athletic tight ends or running backs split wide, but his value as a run defender and blitzer gives him a clear path to contributing snaps early in his career. His quarterback background provides an intangible edge in recognizing offensive tendencies and making pre-snap adjustments that defensive coordinators covet. Teams running traditional 3-4 fronts where inside linebackers can flow freely to the ball should have Rodriguez high on their board, as his skill set aligns perfectly with that aggressive, downhill style."

Man, I gotta catch up on the mocks. But I really like the idea of the Clemson DL to go with Redmond inside. I did a mock draft and in the second round it looks like there are two centers worth nabbing, so I'll be happy if we take either of them.

A mock draft! There have probably been more out but this is the first one I saw. https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/draft/2025/12/03/nfl-mock-draft-2026-quarterback-first-round/87567716007/ Has something special for Nick, too. Has us taking a cornerback who is injured.

I like that they are willing to spend money. My guess is they don't care about championships as much as revenue. Fans show up for winning teams.

That presumes a GM's only job is to run the draft. The GM is literally leading a billion dollar business. His role includes managing payroll, profit, free agency, hiring/firing coaches, etc. The idea that a smart GM would delegate and listen to the people makes sense to me. In one of the linked articles about Dallas Turner, KAM said "we trust our board, and our evaluation process is pretty good." He doesn't do the scouting, he's not a scout. The Vikings have about 50 people involved in the scouting process. That seems like what you want. Zimmer pouted and walked out when Speilman drafted Hall is not a good thing. You want you coaches explaining their schemes and the types of players that fit it to the scouting people and you want to be able to trust those folks to put together a competent big board. That isn't something a GM should do. That's why I tend to think the GM should be graded on his overall results - 38-25 - rather than small parts of his job. Others disagree. And, to Levi's credit, he has pointed out that KAM was put in a tough position where he had to create a "competitive rebuild" where others might have wanted to tear things down more after Zimmer's last two seasons. Also, to your point, no, I think if they fired KAM, not a lot would change in the drafting process in the short term b/c the new guy would have to change staff. It takes a while to do things like that. KAM made significant changes to the drafting room after the 2023 draft. Again, he made significant changes to the drafting room after the 2023 draft so that might fix your problem there. I don't think that scenario works like you think it should. It shouldn't be an all-or-nothing evaluation. It's been pointed out in many threads by many people that Ingram and Bradbury look better in Houston and NE. It's also been pointed out that Kelly and Fries look worse here than they did in Indy. (And we have a bit of a longer history of other IOL not working out, including Elflin, Cleveland and Davis who were pre-KAM but same o-line coach). But Turner and TID seem to be good fits in Flores' defense. So it could be - and I think this - that certain coaches/development groups aren't as good as others. I do want a new offensive line coach, for instance, but I don't think KOC should be held accountable for Ingram being better after he left.

I don't usually root for Dallas but I hope one of their offensive linemen score a TD tomorrow against Detroit.

Well the obvious answer is that he goes off. If he completes something like 67% of his passes, averages over 300+/game, throws 15 TD to, say, 2 int.

Checking in on the latest moving of goalposts. This craptastic thread started when you said 1) our drafting under KAM was putrid. 2) we lack an identity 3) owners need to allow a complete tear down and referenced "New England. The Commanders last year. The Colts. The Broncos. The Bears. The Seahawks." On #1, my first point was asking if the drafting process was wrong or if the coaching/developing was failing since that seems pretty important distinction. After ignoring that for several posts, you finally seem to be in the camp of it doesn't matter. Which is a problem, depending on what should be done about it. Since we're both just idiots on the internet with no power, that's fine but does show a bit of a reluctance to think outside the box you want to be in. I also pointed out - again, several times - studies that have shown anticipated results of drafts based on draft round and player position which shows the Viking drafts have not been atypical under KAM. This is usually where you start active insults and straw men. Also, re-reading this, I missed it but I have never praised his drafts, I have defended them, saying they are typical and to be expected. I have praised KAM, as a GM, because his results - .600+ winning percentage is remarkable for a team without a franchise QB (if you don't think of Cousins and Darnold as franchise QBs, which many here don't.). You knew this but you have to attack and have to also ignore the success he's had. On #2, this is just stupid. The Vikings very clearly have an identity under KOC and Flores, it's an aggressive attacking downfield passing game and a chaotic blitzing defense. Most of the announcers talk about it week-to-week. Your idea that we lost in the playoffs because we lacked an identity was mocked because we lost for real reasons, not made up ones. On #3, we fought over the viability of tear-downs/rebuilds/tanking with you essentially suggesting every team with a QB was a successful tear-down/tank. Whatever, your own definitions changed from post-to-post to make new teams the correct model. I pointed out that these teams generally sucked and sucked until they got a good QB, with many of them still sucking after they got their good QB. But, whatever. We both agree, at a minimum, that a full tear-down like you're suggesting won't happen b/c the Wilfs won't allow it. Lastly, you've added a new argument that doesn't really fit into your first post but I guess is just to add more to the "KAM can't draft" argument - that this year's team isn't getting production from drafted players. Again, this is a bit subjective like most of your posts, but also it would require some understanding of what would be typical. The average career is 3 years but that's propped up by long careers for a few players, rather than the norm. Most drafted players don't play two years. The Vikings have traded a bunch of draft picks. So that also suggests they wouldn't have as much production because they have less picks. The picks they have had have generally been low round picks (only 4 picks in the top 100 in the last 3 drafts, for instance). They've also generally been good, which makes it harder for a rookie - especially late round ones to break in. This also means the Vikings have found a different way to be competitive and that pesky .600 winning percentage rears it's ugly head again. Probably things like trading picks and UDFA have helped. And general coaching competence, but I go off tangent. But it also begs the question - so what? The Vikings suck this year because of QB production not because Vederian Lowe isn't backing up O'Neil (oh, he's another offensive lineman who left us and seemed to become better. Asking why things happen might be helpful to see we need a new offensive line coach rather than blaming KAM). If they had Darnold they'd likely be 8-4 and no one would care that we traded a 6th round pick to get our leading rusher. Lastly, general apologies to other posters. This thread blew up badly and I am sorry to the extent it took over the board and prevented better things from happening.

He does seem like a jerk. If I recall correctly, didn't he want to coach the Vikings at one point?

Thesis? Wow. Yeah, you didn't say Speilman's name but you bitched about the Vikings history. He and KAM have been our only two GMs for 20 years. So not saying his name doesn't really matter because you're referencing his work. Again, you claim KAM can't draft for ... reasons. Those reasons keep falling apart under inspection. At least you're finally admitting you don't know if it's a drafting problem or a coaching one, i think? Slow progress, I suppose.

If that's your definition of tanking, great. In theory, I agree with you but in practice, it doesn't work that way. And, that's not what most of the teams you cited were doing. Most teams always try to find extra wins. Too many people are invested in winning - coaches, gms, players. The one known example of tanking - that you also didn't include on your list - was Miami, where the owner wanted the team to tank for Tua (IIRC). Teams just don't see themselves as 4 win teams, they always expect better. Also, as fans, we should want better. I don't want the NFL to be like baseball or the NBA where the crappy teams just give up. I like "any given Sunday." (Also, most of your complaints about the Vikings history of mediocrity was a problem under Speilman. KAM has at least "gone for it" multiple times. Speilman was ok with 9 wins.) As for your draft excuses, you still haven't answered how you know that the drafting is the problem as opposed to coaching/development. You mock Ingram but PFF has him as the 7th highest graded guard in football. That seems like a good result for a 2nd rounder. But he wasn't that with us. Also, Mekhi, not Mechi, is playing decently well for Indy. Why? You also refuse to accept that the Vikings draft results are fairly typical of normal expectations of those picks. Those seem like a pretty important questions if your objective is to find out why things went wrong. If the objective is, "let's blame Kwesi Adofo-Mensah for everything," perhaps not so much.

I honestly didn't think he'd get signed anywhere.

Lot of revisionist history happening here. So, let's go through those that you singled out as successful tanks. Bengals - didn't tank. Sucked for five years, eventually got Burrow. Made playoffs twice in six years since acquiring franchise QB. Rams - I mean, kinda? Like, they went through the hell of the Fisher, Fassel, Spagnuolo, Haslett, Linehan years of 10 straight losing seasons. Missing on Bradford (so did we!), eventually getting Goff. But then they made a really smart trade to add Stafford and have had one losing season in the last nine. Like, it's a successful tank so long as you ignore the decade of futility. Which you're doing. Patriots - Again, not really. They failed with Mac Jones first but ignoring that, they had two losing seasons and got Maye. They didn't try to lose on purpose. Belichick had the game pass him by. That's not tanking, that's sucking and lucking into Maye. Jags - I'll give you that one. Jags sucked but then they sucked to end all sucking to get Lawrence. Assuming they make the playoffs this year, they will have made the playoffs twice in his five seasons. Colts - Not sure how this fits your theory. I guess they traded Wentz and went with Ryan and got Richardson but the big tank move was him sucking so much that the roster kept getting high picks so Daniel Jones could ride in and save them? Great plan. Denver - doesn't really fit this narrative at all. They sucked for six straight years but improved b/c they got a great head coach - Payton, whom I hate - nearly made the playoffs and then drafted Nix, as the 6th QB in a loaded QB draft. Chargers - they didn't tank. They were a playoff team, had a snake bit year where they won 5 games and landed Herbert. Washington - Again, not a tank plan, they just bottomed out with a ****** coach and GM, both fired, and the new guys drafted Daniels. And, a year later, they have a worse record then the Vikings (for now). Bears - the team that constantly picked QBs, fired their coach, fired their GM, picked a new QB, fired their coach, fired the GM, repeat again is the team with a plan? No, they sucked, they didn't have a plan. Constantly hoped that firing people would make them better. No plan. Bad team for long time. Lions - sucked forever. Had the #1 pick eons ago and used it on Stafford. Continued to suck so bad that Stafford just now has a career record over .500. Traded him to the Rams for Goff, continued to suck a bit more with Goff but have now made the playoffs twice in five years with Goff. (Also, if Goff is a franchise QB, why wasn't Cousins?) SF - Tanked their way to a 7th rounder. Where you and I differ is that you seem to think losing is a strategy. It's not. Bad teams will eventually get better because that's the wonderful, cyclical nature of the NFL (except for the Jets). But it's not because those teams had some grand strategy to tank until they get Cam Ward or Josh Rosen or Sam Darnold. As to the draft pot-shots, I know you constantly draft future HOFers in the second round on Madden but the draft is far less helpful in real life. I shared a few articles on draft success rate based on rounds and positions to show the Vikings' results weren't atypical. You wanted to ignore it. I asked how you know the problem is drafting rather than coaching, you just kept blaming the GM for whatever reason.

This is a pretty good article on upcoming prospects for the draft. Figured it's worth starting now, since the college season is mostly done. Obviously, after the football is over, players will really sky-rocket up these lists. https://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2026/story/_/id/47097046/2026-nfl-draft-questions-top-prospects-qb-class-risers Sounds like Tennessee would trade down with us (if we're top 10) to get more picks. Two of the top three QBs look good but haven't had a lot of experience. If they Vikes sit somewhere in the 8-13 range, don't move up, and don't get a QB (for whatever reason), it looks like there might be a really good safety, running back, or a nose tackle that could be available. Also, if it's ok with everyone, let's try to keep this thread to draft stuff and wants rather than to complaining about KAM.

I think that the Vikings dodged the bullet with Rodgers.

Re-upping this b/c the Vikings and Twins suck.

To get Maye, the Vikings would have had to lose 4 more games that year (because of tie-breakers). Even with Dobbs, Hall, and Mullens starting over half the games, we were only -18 in point diff. NE was something like -130. We were a good team who lost its QB. And they only won 3 games after Cousins went down.

? You're the one that keeps moving the goalposts. You said we lost because we don't have an identity and then forgave the Lions for doing the exact same thing. I understand you want to accuse the Vikings of being unique losers but have to ignore their winning percentage to do it however, it's getting old. The Vikings aren't cursed. They aren't losing because of "identity." They lost to the Giants b/c Donatell's defense couldn't get them off the field. They lost to the Rams b/c they couldn't adjust to pressure up the middle. As for your losing/tear down/tanking plan - it doesn't work. If it did the Lions wouldn't have sucked for 20 years. Suck until you get a franchise QB isn't a plan. Smart teams - Eagles, Bills, KC, Baltimore - can get a franchise QB without tanking. Plus, sucking on purpose is a great way for coaches, players, and GMs to lose their jobs. As for your attacks on KAM, whatever. You're just not rational on him for reasons. He's already shown he can put together good teams. Spielman was our GM for 15 years. He was 9 games over .500 in those seasons. He made the playoffs six times, winning three games. He fought with the coaches he hired, constructed rosters against his coaches wishes. I'm glad we've moved on to a smarter FO.