From: bob@uh.msc.edu (Robert Hanson)
Subject: Re: Vikes future
Organization: Minnesota Supercomputer Center, Minneapolis, MN
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 00:32:20 GMT

In article <C0AwJo.9x6@news.iastate.edu> jbhuber@iastate.edu (Joseph B Huber) writes:
>Dennis Green did a good job with the Vikes, but IMO he made a bad mistake by
>replacing Gannon. This was the year to find out whether Gannon is capable of
>being a quality QB. Rich started out well, then fell into a slump. Instead
>of seeing whether Gannon could work himself out of the slump, Green benched
>Gannon for a couple of games, then threw him back in, and then benched him
>again. I don't think the Vikes can accurately evaluate Gannon's potential
>because of the way he was jerked in and out of the line-up. 
>

I completely agree with this.  I think Green always intended for Gannon to be
the #1 QB.  He made a decision to bench Gannon just like Kotite did with
Cunningham.  He wanted to send a message to Rich, letting him know that poor
perforamnce would not be tolerated.  Unforntunately it back-fired on him.  Rich
lost all of his confidence and Green was left with no choice but to go with
Salisbury or admit he made a bad decision.  He chose the former.  Rich Gannon
was 8-3 before being benched, with only a couple of poor performances, he did
not deserve to be benched by Green.  This IMO was the only bad coaching
decision that Green made all year.  The problem now is that Green has to find
another QB or really come up with a good excuse for keeping either Gannon or
Salisbury, and whos to say that Gannon will even want to stay with the team.

>The Vikes cannot afford to waste a draft pick/trade on a QB if they have one
>on the current roster who can do the job.  Had Green stuck with Gannon for the
>entire year, the Vikes might not have won 11 games, but the question of
>Gannon's ability to lead the Vikings would be definitively answered.
>
>I don't think that Salisbury can be a starting QB. He might be able to make
>better reads with some experience, but I think his lack of mobility hurts his
>chances of becoming a playoff/superbowl caliber QB.
>

Salisbury's lack of mobility definitely killed him during the Washington game.
However, in his defense, I don't think the "great" offensive line did a very
good job of pass blocking.  But I also think that in order for a QB to succeed
in the NFL, he must be able to escape the pash rush.  Sean seems to trip over
his own feet!  If only we could combine Sean's pass reading ability, and
accuracy with Rich's mobility and the zip he puts on the ball, then MN would
have a decent QB.  Oh well, maybe they'll get one in the draft or from free 
agency. 

>
>>What I believe they should pick up is an offensive
>>tackle, Irwin and Zimmerman are both getting on in years. Another
>>priority might be a wide receiver to help out or another RB to go with
>>Allen. They could also look for a tightend to replace Jordan in the
>>future. The good news is, finally there is a reason to look forward
>>to the draught as they have high round draught picks this year.
>
>This is a nice wish list, but because of the Walker deal, the Vikes are going
>to have to essentially make due with what they have. Perhaps they can make
>some aquisitions via free-agency.

I don't know what you mean here.  The Walker deal won't hurt them anymore.  I
also think that it may be time to replace Irwin.  I used to think they need a
new WR but watching Joe Johnson put the moves on during a kickoff return and
on a end around vs. Green Bay, and seeing Jake Reed run down Mitchll from behind
during Mitchell's punt return that would have been a touchdown, I'm not sure if
WR is what they need.

>
>-- 
>Joe Huber 
>(jbhuber@iastate.edu)        | Capt. James T. Kirk on the 2nd law of thermo: 
>Dept. of Mech. Egr.          |  "It's not a hundred percent efficient,
>Iowa State University        |   but nothing ever is."



-Bob-
PROUD of the 92 Vikings.
Can't wait til next year and a much improved NFC Central
 (except for Chicago, of course :^) 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro