Jump to content
  • Hey There!

    Please register to see fewer ads and a better viewing experience:100_Emoji_42x42:

MHS831

Hurnology 101 and Intro to Norvography

Recommended Posts

We are probably approaching this thing the wrong way.  When Marty's job is on the line, he plays for the now.  His job is on the line with the new ownership.  In the past, he has traded away future first rounders for second rounders.  He has gone hard after future stars like QB Jimmy Clausen and wildcat artist Armanti Edwards. While Hurney claims to be a new man, there are signs he could be the same old Marty Hurney.

There are influences at play in Marty's head right now, and one could argue we have addressed every position of immediate need at starting or key rotational positions on defense: CB (Cockrell over Worley), S (Searcy over Coleman),  DL-- (Poe over Star; getting Hall back from IR).  Howver on offense, there are positions that need upgrading that were not satisfactorily addressed: RB, TE, WR, and OL.  But remember we have  a new, veteran OC who needs some toys and I am sure Marty has been told this more than once.   You may not like Cockrell and Bradberry (and Munnerlyn/Corn) but they are not worse than what we usually have.  Who were our CBs in Super Bowl 38?  Who played opposite Norman in SB 50?   Here is an interesting article about Norv written by a Viking reporter a few years ago that  sums up his personnel for success over the years:

http://www.vikings.com/news/article-1/Five-Things-In-A-Norv-Turner-Offense/b2e51c96-a157-4352-858e-99618ae34b0e

Norv's personnel

Bruising RB and a scat back: Look at the RBs he has had to work with: Emmit Smith,  Ricky  Williams, LaDanian Tomlinson, and Adrian Petereson.  Makes CAP seem a bit underwhelming.  The draft has some solid RBs, but Penny stands out when reading the article.  I am not sure whether Norv likes the CMC/CAP duo, but he has to be salivating at the RB position in the draft. Is CAP the bruiser?  Is CMC the "scat back?"  Even though I have said we are fine at RB, we could grab one.  You could argue that have these players on the roster, but I am not sure that we do. 

Back to the Big WR argument: The article states that he likes big WRs and high percentage passes.  We might argue that the big WR experiment did not work, but I beg to differ.  Quicker routes with more options to expand the secondary are now possible.   This should improve Cam's accuracy and keep him standing.   Keep big WR in mind, considering we have Funchess,the rest of the WR corps is suddenly small.  Keep big WR in mind. 

Seam-busting TE:  I would argue that we have this in Olsen.  While the article mentions Gates, we have a pro bowl TE in Olsen. Age is a factor, but there are TEs who can fill this role.  Hurst would be perfect, but watch the day 3 TEs.  I personally like Shultz, but there are some others, including another TE from the U.

OL confusion:  Moton to LG makes the most sense, but I get the feeling RR wanted him competing for the LT job.  Ryan Kalil is ready for his 6 games at C this year, but we just inked Tyler Larsen to a 1-year deal.  Ideally, we would like to find a G/C in the draft.  That way, the G/C could compete at LG and if capable, allow Moton to compete at LT.   The key is grabbing a G/C who can compete.  However, we could draft a G/C and a T to develop.  Who knows, but I imagine there is a lot of campaigning going on about the C-T on the left side situation.

So the offensive situation is much more dire than the defensive side of the ball and Marty has Norv in his ear.  Expect the following:

1.  A potential #1 WR, perhaps a bigger one than DJ Moore.  I am starting  to wonder about Courtland Sutton in the first round.  (Not CB?)

2. A potential starting G/C.  Ragnow makes sense in round 2.  Not only do you find your future center, you fill the immediate need at LG and future C while allowing Moton to compete at LT. (Not CB again?)

3. A running back, but what kind?  The "scat back" could be the answer here, with CAP and CMC sharing RB duties. Ito Smith has been mentioned late, but there are a few others who easily fill that role--one played in Raleigh.  Penny would be an option if a bruiser is more needed.  I am thinking we could  take Smith or a small back in the  fifth-seventh.

4. A TE that is a matchup nightmare:  Is that Olsen?  I am not so sure any more.  Do not expect Carolina to go after the first tier TEs (could be wrong) but they will go after a day 3 TE to groom.  Shultz, Smythe maybe, but I am thinking Herndon, Conklin, or Atkins.  5th or  6th round.

So if you prioritize the offense--something I expect them  to do,  and you are not happy with the WR situation, you go WR in round 1.  If you need a starting  LG/C, you take OL in the second (price, Daniels, Ragnow--solid)   It simply seems as if Norv is shopping on these aisles. 

The third round could be for DBs--

We shall see,  but do not for a second think CB is a bigger need than some of these offensive positions. 

If a top WR is not there in the first round, we may try to trade back in the first and then package some picks to trade up in the second.  I am not sure they are happy about  the LG, WR, RB, TE situations right now, and you could argue that the needs at each is bigger than CB.  I still think SS is the biggest need, fwiw, and we can address that in  the  third round.

Edited by MHS831
  • Pie 2
  • Beer 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Seems to me that we will pick up a running back and WR but I don't think it will be WR early in the draft. Last year our defense failed us more than the offense and that was without Olsen and lots of losses in the WR corps.  I think we  are going DB or TE in the first.  Unless one of the top WRs drops to us or there is an early run on corners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MHS831 said:

The third round could be for DBs--

We shall see,  but do not for a second think CB is a bigger need than some of these offensive positions. 

If a top WR is not there in the first round, we may try to trade back in the first and then package some picks to trade up in the second.  I am not sure they are happy about  the LG, WR, RB, TE situations right now, and you could argue that the needs at each is bigger than CB.  I still think SS is the biggest need, fwiw, and we can address that in  the  third round.

The fact that Hurney went hard after Eric Ebron and Luke Willson tells you were are serious about adding a second TE.

We also went after Allen Hurns and possibly Michael Crabtree.  It's obvius we still want to upgrade our offensive personnel.

Think back to the Saints playoff loss, the main reason we lost was lack of offensive weapons. We had Kaelin Clay, Russell Shepard, Brenton Bersin, and an injured Funchess as our WR in that game. That can't happen again. 

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TheSpecialJuan said:

The fact that Hurney went hard after Eric Ebron and Luke Willson tells you were are serious about adding a second TE.

We also went after Allen Hurns and possibly Michael Crabtree.  It's obvious we still want to upgrade our offensive personnel.

Think back to the Saints playoff loss, the main reason we lost was lack of offensive weapons. We had Kaelin Clay, Russell Shepard, Brenton Bersin, and an injured Funchess as our WR in that game. That can't happen again. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TheSpecialJuan said:

The fact that Hurney went hard after Eric Ebron and Luke Willson tells you were are serious about adding a second TE.

We also went after Allen Hurns and possibly Michael Crabtree.  It's obvius we still want to upgrade our offensive personnel.

Think back to the Saints playoff loss, the main reason we lost was lack of offensive weapons. We had Kaelin Clay, Russell Shepard, Brenton Bersin, and an injured Funchess as our WR in that game. That can't happen again. 

So the fact we couldn't stop them had nothing to do with the loss?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

So the fact we couldn't stop them had nothing to do with the loss?

We stopped them on 4th down. We had a chance to win the game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, WOW!! said:

So the fact we couldn't stop them had nothing to do with the loss?

Exactly. We out gained them and won the time of possession with those backups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TheSpecialJuan said:

We stopped them on 4th down. We had a chance to win the game. 

We lost 31 to 26?? We had more than 1 opportunity to stop them.. Do you think that not holding them under "30" was problem??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They were clearly the better team and we were playing with backup receivers on the road. Its not a travesty to lose by 5 in that situation.

Edited by Moo Daeng

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

Exactly. We out gained them and won the time of possession with those backups.

Maybe I'm mistaken but we are a defensive team with a defensive minded head coach.. We aren't supposed to win shootouts with offensive teams with offensive minded head coach.. The fact we were in that game is due to Cam and the offense.. Philosophy wise the defense let us down...

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm normally the first one to say CAP sucks, but, we haven't run a traditional running scheme in years, running out of the fuging read option drops your RB's YPC, easily proven when we got rid of DLO, and I'm positive JStew will jump his #s back up as well. TBH, We don't know what we have with CAP yet, but I get a feeling he can play a bigger role, not along the lines of what Turner has Worked with in the past, but if given space to run, dude has some skill. Then again, maybe they draft someone in the mold they want and drop CAP all together, we wont know til the season starts 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm fairly certain Norv has always liked classic fullback types. I haven't seen much mentioned about what Armah might mean to this offense.

  • Pie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...I really want a first round WR with talent... the best available. ...then I want a 218lb 5'11" RB...then I want a DE or offensive lineman...then I want TE....but Marty will go CB, LB, T, RB...no one with immediate impact i'm sure...and if he trades, ima blow this mfuker up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      19,290
    • Most Online
      2,867

    Newest Member
    ANTOINE HENDERSON
    Joined
  • Topics

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      140,393
    • Total Posts
      4,467,923
×