Vikings Message Board.Com

NextQuestion wrote: So he's already a legend?

LOL.

NextQuestion wrote: So he's already a legend?

I dont know about legend but the guy is talented, the only issue is his durability. He has had 3 injuries, 2 of which was in the same knee. I dont see this guy as a starter right now but if he can show the team he can stay healthy, maybe in a season or two he could compete for a started job. But ONLY if he doesn't get hurt again.

Right now as a 7th rounder, he'll be lucky to make the final roster.

^^ sorry, it's a joke from the Greg Childs thread.

Relevant from today's chat with Pelissero:

Comment From Redking

How much attention did Mike Singletary give to Audie Cole at the Senior Bowl two years ago? Frazier was quoted talking about Cole being faster than you think, and the FO seems to have some smug plan in place. Cole has a year's head start on Mauti and Hodges, and Henderson only has a short-leash contract.

Tom Pelissero: I was at the Senior Bowl that year. Singletary and Pagac both coached the team Cole was on. So, yeah, they worked with him plenty. I told one high-ranking Vikings official a month or so ago I thought Cole was just a strange fit for the position because he's so tall. The official responded to compare Cole's size with Urlacher's. They're both big guys. I think Urlacher moves much better as a converted safety, of course, but point taken. Cole figures to get reps there. Mauti has to show he's healthy. Hodges looks like a will to me. I don't like Henderson there. I don't know. It's still clouded.

http://www.1500espn.com/sportswire/Chat ... sday042913

My vote goes to Mauti. There's just something about the kid that screams leadership. Got to give the kid a lot of credit for staying put at Penn St and rolling with the punches. Hes the type of kid you want in the middle.

Henderson says coaches have made clear they expect him to open OTAs at the mike. That is significant. He apparently is Plan A now. #Vikings

Henderson moving to mike would open door for fourth round pick Gerald Hodges to make a push to start at will, where he's best suited to play

Also could have Larry Dean, among others, competing in that spot. Still unsettled as a group. We'll see what happens in OTAs. #Vikings

One interesting point made by Erin: some of his trouble at WLB has come from abandoning backside B gap. At MLB you can play downhill vs run.

I don't really doubt Henderson can do it against the run, though. I wonder about how he runs and covers if asked to play 70 snaps a game.

Tom Pelissero on Twitter

My issue with this position group is that there really isn't a dynamic playmaker in the bunch. I was interested in Ogletree in this draft as he seemed, of all the guys available, to be the one that could turn into a beast at the position. (from a physical standpoint.) However, I think it is worth asking how many of our current crop really end up making big plays? Brinkley certain didn't do that. Greenway gets a ton of tackles, but we don't see picks, forced fumbles, and all of that. Henderson doesn't show up on the stat sheet much, but i think part of that is his position.

I guess my point is to ask whether the lack of big plays out of this group is intentional via the scheme that the Vikings play or a lack of playmakers on the roster or both? From what I've heard there is an undercurrent that in a 4-3 this position isn't as critical as the front and back 4. I'm not a football X and O expert, but that is what I'm hearing. Any thoughts on this?

Thanks for the info, dead_poet .

mansquatch wrote:My issue with this position group is that there really isn't a dynamic playmaker in the bunch. I was interested in Ogletree in this draft as he seemed, of all the guys available, to be the one that could turn into a beast at the position. (from a physical standpoint.) However, I think it is worth asking how many of our current crop really end up making big plays? Brinkley certain didn't do that. Greenway gets a ton of tackles, but we don't see picks, forced fumbles, and all of that. Henderson doesn't show up on the stat sheet much, but i think part of that is his position.

Brinkley forced 3 fumbles last year so he made some big plays but he's certainly not a "beast". It's hard to find one of those impact LBs. I suspect the Vikings will have their eyes open for one in the next draft.

I guess my point is to ask whether the lack of big plays out of this group is intentional via the scheme that the Vikings play or a lack of playmakers on the roster or both? From what I've heard there is an undercurrent that in a 4-3 this position isn't as critical as the front and back 4. I'm not a football X and O expert, but that is what I'm hearing. Any thoughts on this?

The Vikes definitely place more emphasis on their defensive front but the LBs still play a vital role in run defense (they have gap responsibility) and pass defense. The outside LBs have to cover the short zones and the MLB has to cover the 11-20 yard zone behind the outside LBs. I think the primary role of LBs in the Vikes scheme is just to make tackles and limit yardage but I'm sure the Vikings would like to get more big plays out of their 'backers. The absence of big playmakers at the position is probably more responsible than the scheme for the lack of turnovers created by LBs. They just don't have an impact player at the position.

I think it's quite a bit of both, or I guess that means 50/50 split. IMO, the LB's don't need sacks or int's to be effective. It's much more about good tackling, passes defended / broke up, and forced fumbles. With that said, they could still make a few more plays, but considering the investment there I think they do alright. We have greenway who's a first rounder, but then Erin was undrafted I believe and brinkley was a mid / late rounder.

At this point, it's also pretty clear the big plays are expected to come from the D-line with Jared Allen, Robison, and kwill or on the back end from Harrison smith, cook, or Robinson so I think it's "okay" we don't have a legit stud any where in the LB corp.

That is where I’m at. You look at the front and back 4 and both areas are literally riddled with 1st and 2nd round picks plus a few value guys. The LB group has 1 first round pick, an undrafted player at Will and ???. The position is probably overdue for a talent infusion as the OL was last season. All in time though.

It's all how you evaluate it though. Linebacker is a position where you can get by with someone who is strictly just a solid football player who has instincts and/or relentlessness.

Lots of these type guys always seem to slip into the later rounds because there is nothing flashy about them. Most specifially their measurables from the combine. Only 3 of the top 10 tacklers (the most important aspect of LB's) from this year were drafted in the first round.

It would be awesome to grab once-in-a-generation type guys at LB, but it's not imperative in having an above-average defense.

Edit: Make that 3 out of the top 15.

Looks like Erin will get the nod. Cole better play his heart out or hes going to be gone I bet. Must be something about him the Vikes didn't like, since they spent 2 picks on other LBs.

PurpleKoolaid wrote:Looks like Erin will get the nod. Cole better play his heart out or hes going to be gone I bet. Must be something about him the Vikes didn't like, since they spent 2 picks on other LBs.

Cole was, and always has been a long shot in the first place, doesn't mean they don't like him, I think there is enough evidence out there to show they do, but they probably aren't comfortable with literally one guy, under that label, to hold down the MLB spot.

I just dont have faith in Erin Henderson as a MIKE LB, he wasn't that good of a WILL so why move him to the most critical position on the D. But I guess right now they are just trying him out. I don't think he's any good so I hope he proves me wrong. I rather see Audie Cole or injury prone Mauti start than Henderson.

Good read on our two Nittany Lion LBs:

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikin ... 05191.html