7 Comments
User's avatar
andrew stead's avatar

While Zimm's candour made for interesting reading, this is a much more professional operation. The HC makes everyone feel like he is in their corner and publicly supports them, which is extremely valuable when it come time to manage a player who didn't get his desired opportunities in week 11. The GM (and KAM *really* needs to be extended or replaced, immediately), whose relationship is far more distant, can be the bad guy who demands a pay cut. That's good business.

Speaking of--with the PA's report cards out again, it's astonishing how short-sighted some teams are. There is no salary cap on treating families well, having nice facilities, and good coaching and training staffs. Providing good, balanced food is even more obvious. These expenses are tiny compared to player salaries. Teams should work to gain an advantage in these areas, good for the Wilfs in doing so.

Expand full comment
Ron Rubin's avatar

Great article Mathew as usual 👏 If I was doing a pie chart for blame it would be 50% for Sam 50% Oline. It will be awful disappointing if they don't come away with 2 guards in free agency day 1. They have always waited for the 1st batch to sign then grabbed what's left.

Expand full comment
andrew stead's avatar

It's been a minute since Hutch and Herrera, or no. 64 and Dixon--no question.

But, how many day 1 UFA signings actually work out? How many times did Snyder's DC teams "win" free agency? The goal is to feel great in January and god forbid February, not mid-March.

The problem isn't the resources the Vikings have allocated to OL, it's that they've done so on the wrong interior players.

Expand full comment
Robert G's avatar

I don't think KO said anything more, other than respecting Sam's position as a UFA, and not wanting to say anything to impact the market, his right to free agency, to paraphrase him. But I've expected the Vikings to move on from Sam if nothing else than that's the path of least resistance. I'm fully anticipating he signs a big contact elsewhere.

Expand full comment
Josh Smith's avatar

This was a great breakdown, Matt.

I see nothing in the tea leaves to sway me from believing they’re straying from the plan to play JJ in 2025. The injury was a wrench. But it sounds like they like where he is with his “Latin” lessons or whatever and they like where he is in his recovery. They loved his physical traits coming out, so if he’s fully healed, it’s go time. He should have the full offseason to get his legs back under him in the offense. And a tag and trade with Darnold simply makes too much sense, especially with the huge salary cap bump and especially with Wall Street Kwesi pulling strings.

Expand full comment
Matt Dee's avatar

I still say I’d rather play on the tag if I’m Darnold. Cap is going to keep going up like crazy and I’d rather sign my big contract next year. Difference in guarantees between the tag and a 3 year deal is not going to be that big unless I’m completely misjudging his market. Worst case, he gets injured or plays poorly and signs another 12-15m backup/bridge deal the next year. Add that to the 41m on the tag and you’re basically at the guarantees he’d get on a 3 year deal now. Another team isn’t going to trade for him if he won’t sign a longer deal, so probably a moot point if the Vikes are moving on. But if Kirk taught us anything, it’s that a QB shouldn’t be afraid of the tag.

Expand full comment
TheDude's avatar

I wonder if any of the potential acquiring teams drop hints they are confident about getting the QB they want...

For sure we are offering.

Expand full comment