Vikings 2019 Draft Class Review

[VikingsVictorious]

No you didn't say you want him to fail, but it seems like you take a lot of enjoyment in cutting him down. Not all 7th round picks are created the same. If you base your entire criterion for how well a player will do on the round he is drafted then you obviously aren't thinking for yourself. Last year despite great production and measurables (other than size) Phillip Lindsay went undrafted. According to your round picked logic he shouldn't have made a team. However, he not only made a team, but played great. I couldn't believe that a player with his talent went undrafted and it turned out I was right about him and all 32 NFL teams that didn't draft him were wrong about him. I thought for myself and saw a very good football player. I have a similar view of Mitchell. I think he did fall in the draft due to negative reports on him. Maybe there is something to those negative reports because he got in a ridiculous Twitter war with Akili Smith. However, thinking for myself I can see that he has the talent needed to be better than any WR on the Vikings not named Thielen or Diggs. So I'm taking a stand that despite the round he got drafted he is plenty talented to be an NFL WR and even good enough to get a decent amount of snaps.

As for Butler he has size, speed, and production despite the drops. I personally think all things considered he got drafted where he should have. Do you know he wasn't on the Vikings draft board or was he maybe on our board, but got drafted before he came to the top of our board.

You make good points and obviously did some research which takes time. There have been many undrafted guys that became very good players like our John Randle. I hope the guy sticks and contributes. There is no reason for me not to want that. We need a 3rd guy badly because we are paper thin at WR and don't have a good one at this point for the 3 role. I said on another post that I like our TE Conklin who we drafted in round 5 last year and I very much liked the pick. I felt he could take Rudy's spot. I got slammed some for that. Which is ok because we all have an opinion. In the end you did the research and I appreciate your speculation. I also hope he can step in quickly.

Thank you for considering that I have taken a good look at Mitchell. A lot of times players get overlooked for good reasons. They don't have the measurables or the production that would indicate they can be good. Other times it makes no sense like Phillip Lindsay. Adam Thielen was big, fast, and productive (almost identical stats to Mitchell) coming out of college, but didn't play against the competition level to help the evaluators determine if he could make it at the pro level. John Randle also played at a small school and was considered too small for the NFL game. As for Conklin he seems like a great guy based on interviews last preseason, but he is slow for a move TE. However, he could stick around and improve.

[CharVike]

Blah, they could have easily picked a RB is the 5th-7th better then Mattison, who hasnt seen any Ds worth noting since he started playing college football.

Say it for those in the back rows. Plenty of better rbs were taken in the 5th and 6th rounds. This guy was a reach, plain and simple. Yes we needed to address the position but did we need to do it when we did? is there a huge difference between him and Ryquell Armstead (also a big back)? Was a big back the only way to solve this our problem? Would a scat back work as well? Taking him in the 3rd was a bad pick. We may grow to love the player but spending starter caliber draft picks on a back-up or insurance policy is bad drafting.

Our current starter will miss time. That has already been proven. It's not an insurance policy it's a must have. This Mattison is a guy who can take many carries and keep on ticking. The guy moves people and an arm won't bring him down. Yes we needed a big guy. Get a scat back who will also miss time is stupid.Then we will be playing our 3rd guy. Plus he don't fumble. Are those guys you mentioned battering rams like this guy? Do they play every game and take the hand offs? I'm talking 30+. Do they not fumble? People question his lack of track speed but I don't give a dam about that. This isn't a workout it's football. This guy has football speed and he runs low. He can take a hit and deliver a blow. Obviously we would all like the guy that can do it all like the guy the Giants picked last year. We didn't draft high enough for that and that type of player wasn't in this class. He's a change of pace guy. I'd like to see some 7th round stiff that is so much better than him. There could be a faster guy but that doesn't mean he can play football.

[YikesVikes]

Say it for those in the back rows. Plenty of better rbs were taken in the 5th and 6th rounds. This guy was a reach, plain and simple. Yes we needed to address the position but did we need to do it when we did? is there a huge difference between him and Ryquell Armstead (also a big back)? Was a big back the only way to solve this our problem? Would a scat back work as well? Taking him in the 3rd was a bad pick. We may grow to love the player but spending starter caliber draft picks on a back-up or insurance policy is bad drafting.

Our current starter will miss time. That has already been proven. It's not an insurance policy it's a must have. This Mattison is a guy who can take many carries and keep on ticking. The guy moves people and an arm won't bring him down. Yes we needed a big guy. Get a scat back who will also miss time is stupid.Then we will be playing our 3rd guy. Plus he don't fumble. Are those guys you mentioned battering rams like this guy? Do they play every game and take the hand offs? I'm talking 30+. Do they not fumble? People question his lack of track speed but I don't give a dam about that. This isn't a workout it's football. This guy has football speed and he runs low. He can take a hit and deliver a blow. Obviously we would all like the guy that can do it all like the guy the Giants picked last year. We didn't draft high enough for that and that type of player wasn't in this class. He's a change of pace guy. I'd like to see some 7th round stiff that is so much better than him. There could be a faster guy but that doesn't mean he can play football.

Better bigger backs, against better competition were available. Defending a reach is just homerism. Even if you like him, do you feel he was drafted in the right place? We passed on Damien Harris to draft him. You are also assuming our stater will miss time but forgetting Our starter at WR is also known to miss time and out OT depth is laughable. Addressing RB this high when quality backs are available in the draft and as vets was a poor move and we have been lambasted for it. It's like taking Hughes in the first. Zimmer started to rag on those calling for a guard instead when Hughes had the pick 6, only for us to lose the season because our interior line sucked. Draft CB (RB) depth, but there are positions that needed depth more than RB, OT being one and Wr being another.

[CharVike]

Our current starter will miss time. That has already been proven. It's not an insurance policy it's a must have. This Mattison is a guy who can take many carries and keep on ticking. The guy moves people and an arm won't bring him down. Yes we needed a big guy. Get a scat back who will also miss time is stupid.Then we will be playing our 3rd guy. Plus he don't fumble. Are those guys you mentioned battering rams like this guy? Do they play every game and take the hand offs? I'm talking 30+. Do they not fumble? People question his lack of track speed but I don't give a dam about that. This isn't a workout it's football. This guy has football speed and he runs low. He can take a hit and deliver a blow. Obviously we would all like the guy that can do it all like the guy the Giants picked last year. We didn't draft high enough for that and that type of player wasn't in this class. He's a change of pace guy. I'd like to see some 7th round stiff that is so much better than him. There could be a faster guy but that doesn't mean he can play football.

Better bigger backs, against better competition were available. Defending a reach is just homerism. Even if you like him, do you feel he was drafted in the right place? We passed on Damien Harris to draft him. You are also assuming our stater will miss time but forgetting Our starter at WR is also known to miss time and out OT depth is laughable. Addressing RB this high when quality backs are available in the draft and as vets was a poor move and we have been lambasted for it. It's like taking Hughes in the first. Zimmer started to rag on those calling for a guard instead when Hughes had the pick 6, only for us to lose the season because our interior line sucked. Draft CB (RB) depth, but there are positions that needed depth more than RB, OT being one and Wr being another.

I'm not forgetting Diggs misses time. He will miss time again. That is old news. Cook will also miss time. Again old news. But a rookie WR won't help. They take time to develop. More so than a RB. I have stated many times that this draft class is weak. Many felt Butler was the WR to take. He can't catch a football. How will that help? Maybe in time he will have hands of glue but right now he can't catch at an NFL level. Couldn't catch at a college level. I know Mattison blows. Its 3 yards and a cloud of dust. Zero burst. I pointed out the positives. There was nothing else available. Damien Harris who you feel is so much better can't handle a full load. He weighs 216 and can only run between the tackles. That won't work. He averaged 11 ypc vs the mighty Citadel. That's great competition. He already has maxed out size wise. He's 23 and Mattison is 20. Yes he is a much better back. As for Hughes we needed help at CB. Our secondary was smoked in the playoffs. At least he made a play. He also got abused. You like the Denny Green style were you play a WR as your 4th CB. I've seen how that works. Unfortunately I don't see Hughes back this year. Yes he will suite up but will be a shell of himself. Same goes for Hill. He's done. And Rhodes ahh forget it. And Waynes can't pick off passes. Sorry he had one. That don't cut it. We are a 500 team and are paper thin across the board. Don't even have a backup QB. As for my homerism here you go. We don't have a chance to win the division. The Bears are a much better team than ours. There D plays D. They get TOs. We will be lucky to score against them. Especially with this 2 headed OC. How do you set it up like that? As usual Rodgers will shred our secondary. The only positive is the Lions will lay down for us and take the beating. We may get a wildcard berth and then hit the road and get destroyed. That's what I see. I want a Super Bowl but we don't have a chance of making that game. Is that better.

[StumpHunter]

Better bigger backs, against better competition were available. Defending a reach is just homerism. Even if you like him, do you feel he was drafted in the right place? We passed on Damien Harris to draft him. You are also assuming our stater will miss time but forgetting Our starter at WR is also known to miss time and out OT depth is laughable. Addressing RB this high when quality backs are available in the draft and as vets was a poor move and we have been lambasted for it. It's like taking Hughes in the first. Zimmer started to rag on those calling for a guard instead when Hughes had the pick 6, only for us to lose the season because our interior line sucked. Draft CB (RB) depth, but there are positions that needed depth more than RB, OT being one and Wr being another.

I'm not forgetting Diggs misses time. He will miss time again. That is old news. Cook will also miss time. Again old news. But a rookie WR won't help. They take time to develop. More so than a RB. I have stated many times that this draft class is weak. Many felt Butler was the WR to take. He can't catch a football. How will that help? Maybe in time he will have hands of glue but right now he can't catch at an NFL level. Couldn't catch at a college level. I know Mattison blows. Its 3 yards and a cloud of dust. Zero burst. I pointed out the positives. There was nothing else available. Damien Harris who you feel is so much better can't handle a full load. He weighs 216 and can only run between the tackles. That won't work. He averaged 11 ypc vs the mighty Citadel. That's great competition. He already has maxed out size wise. He's 23 and Mattison is 20. Yes he is a much better back. As for Hughes we needed help at CB. Our secondary was smoked in the playoffs. At least he made a play. He also got abused. You like the Denny Green style were you play a WR as your 4th CB. I've seen how that works. Unfortunately I don't see Hughes back this year. Yes he will suite up but will be a shell of himself. Same goes for Hill. He's done. And Rhodes ahh forget it. And Waynes can't pick off passes. Sorry he had one. That don't cut it. We are a 500 team and are paper thin across the board. Don't even have a backup QB. As for my homerism here you go. We don't have a chance to win the division. The Bears are a much better team than ours. There D plays D. They get TOs. We will be lucky to score against them. Especially with this 2 headed OC. How do you set it up like that? As usual Rodgers will shred our secondary. The only positive is the Lions will lay down for us and take the beating. We may get a wildcard berth and then hit the road and get destroyed. That's what I see. I want a Super Bowl but we don't have a chance of making that game. Is that better.

There are countless examples of rookie WRs who contributed their rookie season.

Not sure why you continue to rip on a secondary that was arguably the best in the NFL, and undeniably top 5. Giving up the fewest passing TDs in the NFL and top 3 in yards given up makes all your arguments about the secondary pretty moot.

You want turnovers and they do help teams win, but they require a number factors outside of ball hawking CBs. A lot of times they require the opposition to take chances because they are down big, something that doesn't happen when your offense sucks, which ours did. They also require a lot of luck.

[CharVike]

I'm not forgetting Diggs misses time. He will miss time again. That is old news. Cook will also miss time. Again old news. But a rookie WR won't help. They take time to develop. More so than a RB. I have stated many times that this draft class is weak. Many felt Butler was the WR to take. He can't catch a football. How will that help? Maybe in time he will have hands of glue but right now he can't catch at an NFL level. Couldn't catch at a college level. I know Mattison blows. Its 3 yards and a cloud of dust. Zero burst. I pointed out the positives. There was nothing else available. Damien Harris who you feel is so much better can't handle a full load. He weighs 216 and can only run between the tackles. That won't work. He averaged 11 ypc vs the mighty Citadel. That's great competition. He already has maxed out size wise. He's 23 and Mattison is 20. Yes he is a much better back. As for Hughes we needed help at CB. Our secondary was smoked in the playoffs. At least he made a play. He also got abused. You like the Denny Green style were you play a WR as your 4th CB. I've seen how that works. Unfortunately I don't see Hughes back this year. Yes he will suite up but will be a shell of himself. Same goes for Hill. He's done. And Rhodes ahh forget it. And Waynes can't pick off passes. Sorry he had one. That don't cut it. We are a 500 team and are paper thin across the board. Don't even have a backup QB. As for my homerism here you go. We don't have a chance to win the division. The Bears are a much better team than ours. There D plays D. They get TOs. We will be lucky to score against them. Especially with this 2 headed OC. How do you set it up like that? As usual Rodgers will shred our secondary. The only positive is the Lions will lay down for us and take the beating. We may get a wildcard berth and then hit the road and get destroyed. That's what I see. I want a Super Bowl but we don't have a chance of making that game. Is that better.

There are countless examples of rookie WRs who contributed their rookie season.

Not sure why you continue to rip on a secondary that was arguably the best in the NFL, and undeniably top 5. Giving up the fewest passing TDs in the NFL and top 3 in yards given up makes all your arguments about the secondary pretty moot.

You want turnovers and they do help teams win, but they require a number factors outside of ball hawking CBs. A lot of times they require the opposition to take chances because they are down big, something that doesn't happen when your offense sucks, which ours did. They also require a lot of luck.

IMO TOs are very important. Winning the TO battle is key. Everything that is done in football requires a number of factors. I don't even know what you mean by contribute. Treadwell made a contribution his rookie year. He's one of the countless examples. But we decline the 5th year option. Here's an example of the best secondary in the NFL from last year. This was against the Rams who are a top team. Goff finished the game having completed 26 of 33 passes for 465 yards and five touchdowns with no interceptions. Do you have any idea how bad that is. His rating was 158. I didn't know it could be that high. 3 receivers had over 100 yards.That's getting destroyed. So I don't buy the best secondary BS. Our suck #### O scored 31 points. A top D doesn't get beat when the O scores 31. But this will be explained away as one bad game. Or our secondary had an off week. I don't buy that. Pick Goff off 3 times and we win easy IMO.

[CharVike]

Now an example of great play. The QB stat line read 18-32, 116 YDS 0 Tds 0 Ints. No ints of course but the guy averaged under 4 yards an attempt. This was against a cream puff and only helped the rankings. In other words zero value.

[StumpHunter]

Now an example of great play. The QB stat line read 18-32, 116 YDS 0 Tds 0 Ints. No ints of course but the guy averaged under 4 yards an attempt. This was against a cream puff and only helped the rankings. In other words zero value.

Matt Stafford is a cream puff? He is a bit overrated, but the guy is a top 16 QB.

[StumpHunter]

There are countless examples of rookie WRs who contributed their rookie season.

Not sure why you continue to rip on a secondary that was arguably the best in the NFL, and undeniably top 5. Giving up the fewest passing TDs in the NFL and top 3 in yards given up makes all your arguments about the secondary pretty moot.

You want turnovers and they do help teams win, but they require a number factors outside of ball hawking CBs. A lot of times they require the opposition to take chances because they are down big, something that doesn't happen when your offense sucks, which ours did. They also require a lot of luck.

IMO TOs are very important. Winning the TO battle is key. Everything that is done in football requires a number of factors. I don't even know what you mean by contribute. Treadwell made a contribution his rookie year. He's one of the countless examples. But we decline the 5th year option. Here's an example of the best secondary in the NFL from last year. This was against the Rams who are a top team. Goff finished the game having completed 26 of 33 passes for 465 yards and five touchdowns with no interceptions. Do you have any idea how bad that is. His rating was 158. I didn't know it could be that high. 3 receivers had over 100 yards.That's getting destroyed. So I don't buy the best secondary BS. Our suck #### O scored 31 points. A top D doesn't get beat when the O scores 31. But this will be explained away as one bad game. Or our secondary had an off week. I don't buy that. Pick Goff off 3 times and we win easy IMO.

I don't think the Vikings defense was a top D in the first quarter of the season. That wasn't just one bad game, it was the last of a series of 4 games where they struggled to stop anyone. So yea, they struggled quite a bit early, but ended the season with some very good games against some good offenses.

It was almost like the leader of the defense was struggling with a very serious mental health issue, and after he got some help, stopped being a distraction and started helping put pressure on the QB, something that didn't happen at all in that particular Rams game.

Even with that slow start, the defense ended top 3 in scoring, so again, how are they the problem?

[CharVike]

IMO TOs are very important. Winning the TO battle is key. Everything that is done in football requires a number of factors. I don't even know what you mean by contribute. Treadwell made a contribution his rookie year. He's one of the countless examples. But we decline the 5th year option. Here's an example of the best secondary in the NFL from last year. This was against the Rams who are a top team. Goff finished the game having completed 26 of 33 passes for 465 yards and five touchdowns with no interceptions. Do you have any idea how bad that is. His rating was 158. I didn't know it could be that high. 3 receivers had over 100 yards.That's getting destroyed. So I don't buy the best secondary BS. Our suck #### O scored 31 points. A top D doesn't get beat when the O scores 31. But this will be explained away as one bad game. Or our secondary had an off week. I don't buy that. Pick Goff off 3 times and we win easy IMO.

I don't think the Vikings defense was a top D in the first quarter of the season. That wasn't just one bad game, it was the last of a series of 4 games where they struggled to stop anyone. So yea, they struggled quite a bit early, but ended the season with some very good games against some good offenses.

It was almost like the leader of the defense was struggling with a very serious mental health issue, and after he got some help, stopped being a distraction and started helping put pressure on the QB, something that didn't happen at all in that particular Rams game.

Even with that slow start, the defense ended top 3 in scoring, so again, how are they the problem?

Last game with the playoffs on the line the Bears ran the ball down our throats at home. 169 yards and 3 TDs. Dominated time of possession. We didn't create a TO. We even got some home cooking in the penalty stat 11 to 3 in our favor but gave up 24 points. In the first game we gave up 25. That's not an improvement IMO and is a problem. Didn't get a sack and no pressure.That's a problem. We were at home. Hold them in check and make the playoffs. Of course we held the Lions down same as before. They managed 9 points in both games. Again no improvement. We held the Phins in check. But they don't have an offense. The Seahawks on the road had 214 yards rushing against us. You can't let that happen. Of course only 60 yards passing so yes the secondary did their job. We also had an int and a sack. But a good D doesn't let a team pound the rock down their throats. You say no more. I don't see a major improvement in those last 4 games.

[StumpHunter]

I don't think the Vikings defense was a top D in the first quarter of the season. That wasn't just one bad game, it was the last of a series of 4 games where they struggled to stop anyone. So yea, they struggled quite a bit early, but ended the season with some very good games against some good offenses.

It was almost like the leader of the defense was struggling with a very serious mental health issue, and after he got some help, stopped being a distraction and started helping put pressure on the QB, something that didn't happen at all in that particular Rams game.

Even with that slow start, the defense ended top 3 in scoring, so again, how are they the problem?

Last game with the playoffs on the line the Bears ran the ball down our throats at home. 169 yards and 3 TDs. Dominated time of possession. We didn't create a TO. We even got some home cooking in the penalty stat 11 to 3 in our favor but gave up 24 points. In the first game we gave up 25. That's not an improvement IMO and is a problem. Didn't get a sack and no pressure.That's a problem. We were at home. Hold them in check and make the playoffs. Of course we held the Lions down same as before. They managed 9 points in both games. Again no improvement. We held the Phins in check. But they don't have an offense. The Seahawks on the road had 214 yards rushing against us. You can't let that happen. Of course only 60 yards passing so yes the secondary did their job. We also had an int and a sack. But a good D doesn't let a team pound the rock down their throats. You say no more. I don't see a major improvement in those last 4 games.

When your offense struggles to get first downs your defense will eventually get tired and break down. That is basic football 101. 4 3 and outs to start a game and you rip on the D? Interesting...

Could the D have played better? Sure. Did they do enough that even a functioning offense could have still won that game? Absolutely.

This game gets back to what I said about it being tough to turn the ball over when there is no pressure on the opposition to take chances. Where were the opportunities for picks with all the 2 yard dump offs?

[YikesVikes]

I'm not forgetting Diggs misses time. He will miss time again. That is old news. Cook will also miss time. Again old news. But a rookie WR won't help. They take time to develop. More so than a RB. I have stated many times that this draft class is weak. Many felt Butler was the WR to take. He can't catch a football. How will that help? Maybe in time he will have hands of glue but right now he can't catch at an NFL level. Couldn't catch at a college level. I know Mattison blows. Its 3 yards and a cloud of dust. Zero burst. I pointed out the positives. There was nothing else available. Damien Harris who you feel is so much better can't handle a full load. He weighs 216 and can only run between the tackles. That won't work. He averaged 11 ypc vs the mighty Citadel. That's great competition. He already has maxed out size wise. He's 23 and Mattison is 20. Yes he is a much better back. As for Hughes we needed help at CB. Our secondary was smoked in the playoffs. At least he made a play. He also got abused. You like the Denny Green style were you play a WR as your 4th CB. I've seen how that works. Unfortunately I don't see Hughes back this year. Yes he will suite up but will be a shell of himself. Same goes for Hill. He's done. And Rhodes ahh forget it. And Waynes can't pick off passes. Sorry he had one. That don't cut it. We are a 500 team and are paper thin across the board. Don't even have a backup QB. As for my homerism here you go. We don't have a chance to win the division. The Bears are a much better team than ours. There D plays D. They get TOs. We will be lucky to score against them. Especially with this 2 headed OC. How do you set it up like that? As usual Rodgers will shred our secondary. The only positive is the Lions will lay down for us and take the beating. We may get a wildcard berth and then hit the road and get destroyed. That's what I see. I want a Super Bowl but we don't have a chance of making that game. Is that better.

There are countless examples of rookie WRs who contributed their rookie season.

Not sure why you continue to rip on a secondary that was arguably the best in the NFL, and undeniably top 5. Giving up the fewest passing TDs in the NFL and top 3 in yards given up makes all your arguments about the secondary pretty moot.

You want turnovers and they do help teams win, but they require a number factors outside of ball hawking CBs. A lot of times they require the opposition to take chances because they are down big, something that doesn't happen when your offense sucks, which ours did. They also require a lot of luck.

Thanks. You saved me about 30 mins.

[VikingsVictorious]

Better bigger backs, against better competition were available. Defending a reach is just homerism. Even if you like him, do you feel he was drafted in the right place? We passed on Damien Harris to draft him. You are also assuming our stater will miss time but forgetting Our starter at WR is also known to miss time and out OT depth is laughable. Addressing RB this high when quality backs are available in the draft and as vets was a poor move and we have been lambasted for it. It's like taking Hughes in the first. Zimmer started to rag on those calling for a guard instead when Hughes had the pick 6, only for us to lose the season because our interior line sucked. Draft CB (RB) depth, but there are positions that needed depth more than RB, OT being one and Wr being another.

I'm not forgetting Diggs misses time. He will miss time again. That is old news. Cook will also miss time. Again old news. But a rookie WR won't help. They take time to develop. More so than a RB. I have stated many times that this draft class is weak. Many felt Butler was the WR to take. He can't catch a football. How will that help? Maybe in time he will have hands of glue but right now he can't catch at an NFL level. Couldn't catch at a college level. I know Mattison blows. Its 3 yards and a cloud of dust. Zero burst. I pointed out the positives. There was nothing else available. Damien Harris who you feel is so much better can't handle a full load. He weighs 216 and can only run between the tackles. That won't work. He averaged 11 ypc vs the mighty Citadel. That's great competition. He already has maxed out size wise. He's 23 and Mattison is 20. Yes he is a much better back. As for Hughes we needed help at CB. Our secondary was smoked in the playoffs. At least he made a play. He also got abused. You like the Denny Green style were you play a WR as your 4th CB. I've seen how that works. Unfortunately I don't see Hughes back this year. Yes he will suite up but will be a shell of himself. Same goes for Hill. He's done. And Rhodes ahh forget it. And Waynes can't pick off passes. Sorry he had one. That don't cut it. We are a 500 team and are paper thin across the board. Don't even have a backup QB. As for my homerism here you go. We don't have a chance to win the division. The Bears are a much better team than ours. There D plays D. They get TOs. We will be lucky to score against them. Especially with this 2 headed OC. How do you set it up like that? As usual Rodgers will shred our secondary. The only positive is the Lions will lay down for us and take the beating. We may get a wildcard berth and then hit the road and get destroyed. That's what I see. I want a Super Bowl but we don't have a chance of making that game. Is that better.

The Bears are not the same team they were last year and neither are we. To think you know we can't beat them is strange. I'm extremely confident we improved more from the draft than they did. I like the Kubiak offense. I think we will consistently be able to run and with that established the passing game will be even better than last year which was pretty good. As for the Packers we have been kicking their weak a$$es for years. Call me a homer wearing Purple Shades, but that is what I believe.

[PurpleKoolaid]

I'm not forgetting Diggs misses time. He will miss time again. That is old news. Cook will also miss time. Again old news. But a rookie WR won't help. They take time to develop. More so than a RB. I have stated many times that this draft class is weak. Many felt Butler was the WR to take. He can't catch a football. How will that help? Maybe in time he will have hands of glue but right now he can't catch at an NFL level. Couldn't catch at a college level. I know Mattison blows. Its 3 yards and a cloud of dust. Zero burst. I pointed out the positives. There was nothing else available. Damien Harris who you feel is so much better can't handle a full load. He weighs 216 and can only run between the tackles. That won't work. He averaged 11 ypc vs the mighty Citadel. That's great competition. He already has maxed out size wise. He's 23 and Mattison is 20. Yes he is a much better back. As for Hughes we needed help at CB. Our secondary was smoked in the playoffs. At least he made a play. He also got abused. You like the Denny Green style were you play a WR as your 4th CB. I've seen how that works. Unfortunately I don't see Hughes back this year. Yes he will suite up but will be a shell of himself. Same goes for Hill. He's done. And Rhodes ahh forget it. And Waynes can't pick off passes. Sorry he had one. That don't cut it. We are a 500 team and are paper thin across the board. Don't even have a backup QB. As for my homerism here you go. We don't have a chance to win the division. The Bears are a much better team than ours. There D plays D. They get TOs. We will be lucky to score against them. Especially with this 2 headed OC. How do you set it up like that? As usual Rodgers will shred our secondary. The only positive is the Lions will lay down for us and take the beating. We may get a wildcard berth and then hit the road and get destroyed. That's what I see. I want a Super Bowl but we don't have a chance of making that game. Is that better.

The Bears are not the same team they were last year and neither are we. To think you know we can't beat them is strange. I'm extremely confident we improved more from the draft than they did. I like the Kubiak offense. I think we will consistently be able to run and with that established the passing game will be even better than last year which was pretty good. As for the Packers we have been kicking their weak a$$es for years. Call me a homer wearing Purple Shades, but that is what I believe.

You are a homer. You think that makes you a better fan?

[VikingsVictorious]

The Bears are not the same team they were last year and neither are we. To think you know we can't beat them is strange. I'm extremely confident we improved more from the draft than they did. I like the Kubiak offense. I think we will consistently be able to run and with that established the passing game will be even better than last year which was pretty good. As for the Packers we have been kicking their weak a$$es for years. Call me a homer wearing Purple Shades, but that is what I believe.

You are a homer. You think that makes you a better fan?

I admit I tend to look at the positive more than the negative. I don't think I'm sticking my neck out liking the Vikings draft over the Bears. Just the year before last we were 13-3. That my have been a fluke. I think last season was a fluke that we didn't do better. I expect our horrific deficiency in the O Line to be better. Nothing of that should seem unreasonable. My conclusion that we can kick Puker #### and hang with the Bears should seem reasonable. Vegas agrees with me despite much more gamblers in Chicago than Minnesota. Doesn't make me a better fan just a less cranky fan,