so, WTF do we do about this vikings game (re: coaching staff)?

Philly, Indy, NE, Pittsburgh do it every year. I don't think it's too much to ask that we get to that level (in the hunt every year), nor is it unrealistic to set that expectation. What we are getting now up/down/up/down isn't good enough.

This is not to take a position on Fox/Hurney, but I take exception to the idea that it's an unrealistic goal.

 

I think the idea that 10% of the league can do it most years suggests it really is unrealistic. I want to contend every year. We should contend every year. Being a dominant team, there have been a few of those in my lifetime.

But I think that's different altogether from being unhappy because this staff hasn't forced us into continued dominance. We have some good players - at our best last year we had four Pro Bowlers, combine that to what you'll see in MN this year, but while our hands have been tied to a point I don't see this as that team in which the league is disappointed we didn't make the playoffs.

 

just a look at records since 2003. philly has 2 more wins (6-10,8-8 years), pitt 6 more wins (6-10, 8-8 years). NE and the Colts are the only teams to do it every year in that span. we are not close to those 2 teams and behind pitt but close to philly. NE and Colts have future HOF QBs and have/had future HOF coaches. that caliber of QB and coach are rarities and you cannot realistically expect to happen on either. also, NE cheats.

pitt is kinda the exception as they didn't have during that span a HOF QB or coach. that organization has probably set the standard in scouting and picking players. its a great football town and club.

philly probably has had an HOF QB during that span and a very good coach. and not done as well as the colts and patriots ... McNabb is not as good as Manning and Brady.

i agree that it isn't an unrealistic goal but it probably is if you don't have that HOF QB. the panthers are close to being in the same league as Philly and Pitt but obviously we don't have a QB that compares to what they have.

i dunno if Fox and Hurney would ever be willing to use a high pick on a QB but if we are to believe that they entertained the thought of drafting Matt Ryan if he'd fallen, my gut is that they would. when Fox got here his first goal was to get the team competitive for which he didn't need to be gambling of drafting a HOF QB (he coulda stuck us with Carr or Harrington in his first draft), and in all actuallity he hasn't ever had a shot at drafting that caliber of QB. he just needed a decent QB and a lot of good players at other positions, especially RB and some LBs to become competitve. now that we have those, if the opportunity ever presented itself to them, i kinda figure that they would take a shot.

 

Have heard a lot of folks say over the years that we were just a QB away from being truly a great team.

 

always discounted the Ryan rumors, but he never would've made it to us (and I kinda enjoy the franchise-building moves they made that round anyway), and it seems like after the fact the statements of want for him have been true.

 

We passed on drafting Rodgers, Big Ben, and Brees.

 

How did they pass on Roethlisberger?

 

huh?

Trgo left because he wasn't offered till the last minute and he considered it an insult.

Moose left because he wanted to. The Panthers salary offer was pretty close to Chicago's.

 

Oh I see now.

 

I'm not in total disagreement with you. Loyalty seems nice, but if guys are past their prime, its time to move on. In a business this high dollar, not winning today could mean millions of dollars and YEARS of not winning.