Vikings Message Board.Com

How Jeff Locke continues to have a starting job is beyond me. Hell, if Jacksonville was willing to release a punter they drafted in the third round, this team should be willing to cut their loses on a sixth round guy.

808vikingsfan wrote:Was it confirmed? I wasn't able to find any hang time stats at all. If true, either Locke doesn't have the ability to kick for hang time and distance, or Zimmer has no confidence in his coverage team. Those fair catch and inside the 20 stats could be the result of stalled drives near midfield. Also, what's the use of minimizing return yardage when the Vikings still rank at the bottom of NET yds

Stalled drives near midfield could also impact average net yards since a punter in that situation is typically more concerned with placement than distance.

I'd certainly use a 5th round pick if either Hackett or Kaser was available. Field position is so important to a team built like this one.

Field position is important to a team built like the Vikings and that's why minimizing return yardage matters even if the Vikings rank poorly in net yards per punt. Minimizing returns helps field position too.

They should bring in competition for Locke but I wouldn't use a 5th round pick on Hackett or Kaser (maybe not even a 6th or 7th). A 5th round pick strikes me as too high for either player and I think the Vikes have bigger fish to fry in this draft. At that point, there will likely be better talent available.

It's a drag to have a punter ranked 30th in net yards per punt but it's a much bigger drag to have a passing game ranked 31st and the Vikes still have some defensive positions to address too.

On Locke, here are a couple of things to keep in mind:

1) The offense was fifth in starting position (29.90 yard line), which helps Locke/ST right away. Couple this with...

2) The offense was forth in offensive TOP per drive, meaning they usually produced yards after receiving the ball, which helped Locke/ST.

So the offense was starting with good field position and producing yards/few 3-and-outs, helping to flip field position without having to rely on max yardage punts.

You could say this in defense of Locke's perceived lack of high net or as an excuse. Also remember he played in a lot of outdoor games that he won't anymore.

Personally I don't think he very frequently hits a ball clean (catches it all) and we can improve on him if he can't. I'm not sure to what degree and if a mid-round pick is warranted. I'd definitely want competition, though. I'm also not that high on his holding, either (Kluwe was pretty good at that).

Stats: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/drivestats

Well if Locke sticks around could we at least get a new holder for Walsh...
And If they don't draft a punter, they at least need to bring in some competition.

dead_poet wrote:On Locke, here are a couple of things to keep in mind:

1) The offense was fifth in starting position (29.90 yard line), which helps Locke/ST right away. Couple this with...

2) The offense was forth in offensive TOP per drive, meaning they usually produced yards after receiving the ball, which helped Locke/ST.

So the offense was starting with good field position and producing yards/few 3-and-outs, helping to flip field position without having to rely on max yardage punts.

You could say this in defense of Locke's perceived lack of high net or as an excuse. Also remember he played in a lot of outdoor games that he won't anymore.

Personally I don't think he very frequently hits a ball clean (catches it all) and we can improve on him if he can't. I'm not sure to what degree and if a mid-round pick is warranted. I'd definitely want competition, though. I'm also not that high on his holding, either (Kluwe was pretty good at that).

Stats: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/drivestats

Yeah, #1 tells a lot basically. I think we were also something like 30th in opponents starting field position (so 3rd best) which tells me Locke is fine, but who knows.

dead_poet wrote:On Locke, here are a couple of things to keep in mind:

1) The offense was fifth in starting position (29.90 yard line), which helps Locke/ST right away. Couple this with...

2) The offense was forth in offensive TOP per drive, meaning they usually produced yards after receiving the ball, which helped Locke/ST.

So the offense was starting with good field position and producing yards/few 3-and-outs, helping to flip field position without having to rely on max yardage punts.

You could say this in defense of Locke's perceived lack of high net or as an excuse. Also remember he played in a lot of outdoor games that he won't anymore.

Personally I don't think he very frequently hits a ball clean (catches it all) and we can improve on him if he can't. I'm not sure to what degree and if a mid-round pick is warranted. I'd definitely want competition, though. I'm also not that high on his holding, either (Kluwe was pretty good at that).

Stats: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/drivestats

I still think he has accuracy, length, and hang time issues but you bring up a good point about kicking outdoors. Stats show he only punted 4 times indoors in 2015.

Concerning Locke I personally don't like making excuses for people...either you get it done or you don't.

The playoff game versus Seattle he had the strings facing the kicker twice. I've watched a lot of football and I've never ever seen that happen.

Mike Zimmer wants to merge some of Pat Shurmur and Tony Sparano's ideas into the #Vikings' current offense:

http://es.pn/1RXfRwX

The comment at the end is very interesting. If true, it says that a lot of the stubborness talk on here may not be entirely accurate. Then again, we saw the games with 7 step drops, so maybe it is "coach talk".

Interesting read.

mansquatch wrote:The comment at the end is very interesting. If true, it says that a lot of the stubborness talk on here may not be entirely accurate. Then again, we saw the games with 7 step drops, so maybe it is "coach talk".

Interesting read.

I found that interesting too. Maybe it isn't so much a question of stubbornness, but rather an issue of being slow to react?

Texas Vike wrote: I found that interesting too. Maybe it isn't so much a question of stubbornness, but rather an issue of being slow to react?

I think it's just a mix of characteristics. After all, people aren't one-dimensional. Norv has tweaked and adapted both his system and his play calling. He made changes as the season moved forward last year and did likewise in 2014. He seems to be adaptable. However, a coach can be flexible in one area (like play design) and stubborn in another (use of personnel, for example).

That said, he has seemed slow to react at times.

We'll never know those answers.

What I'm most interested in is Sparano's influence. If they can achieve a more smashmouth OL and combine it with #28, we could see a monstrous season from the rushing game. That would be fun to watch.

Vikings' WRs and TEs appear to be working out with Teddy Bridgewater this week.

dead_poet wrote:Vikings' WRs and TEs appear to be working out with Teddy Bridgewater this week.

Love that photo, so cool!

In case you were wondering

@stefondiggs:

The guys looking awesome out there. Got one more day of training then I'm on the first flight out.