KOC

On a scale of 1-10, I have KOC at about a 6.5 right now.  There is a lot I like about him and his philosophies.  I don't know what to believe about KAM, decision making and dysfunction.  I wanted KAM out because his drafting mistakes were obvious and brutal.  I really don't care how much input coaches had -- as GM you own the results and they mostly sucked.  With KOC, we have seen explosive offenses (at times), two seasons with a heap of wins, an admirable willingness to let Flores run wild with the defense... I believe free agents want to come to Minnesota in no small part because of him.  With everything swirling right now, let's not forget that the Vikings have been a gold standard for attractiveness to players, at least according to the NFLPA annual players' surveys (2025: A+; 2024: 2nd in league; 2023: second in league).  As a fan, I think you are always going to quibble with coaching decisions, but overall I find KOC to be balanced in his approach.  Those are the positives.

Where frustration is building for me with KOC is in a few areas.  First, I believe KOC has been too slow to move on from under-performing coaches.  The offensive line coach is the most evident.  I would also suggest our special teams coach has under-performed.  But for Will Reichard, there has not been enough emphasis on making special teams a net positive.  Our punt and kick return units have been bottom of the league for several years now.  Our punter is wildly inconsistent.  Second, I think KOC is too married to his "system" and has not adjusted his approach to fit the talent he has.  Quarterback is the obvious example.  When Cousins went down and an unprepared Josh Dobbs came in, he was just good enough to win a few games.  Once KOC had the bye to prep a game plan that could have been tailored to Dobbs skill set, he instead trotted out the Cousins play book and expected Dobbs to execute it, which he clearly could not do.  In 2025, KOC clearly did not modify his "system" to aid his young (and, it turns out, unprepared) QB.  We could not or would not run the ball effectively.  Third, without knowing the details of who decided what, I do blame KOC for a good chunk of the QB mess we find ourselves in currently.  Did KOC endorse JJM?  Why did he throw him to the wolves in 2025 after all of the preaching about how teams fail young QBs?  If you took KOC at face value in all of his QB pronouncements, you would see that we were in the perfect spot to do what GB did with Rodgers and Love -- keep JJM on the bench for a few years and let him develop.  But he did not.  Again, maybe he is largely blameless in the whole debacle that was Darnold/Jones/Howell/Wentz/Brosmer, but he cannot escape blame altogether.

So, still hopeful, kinda concerned and not ready to pull the plug on KOC.

__PRESENT

I was primarily disappointed in two things:

1). Needs to be better at running the football (situationally, frequency etc.)
2). Took too long to simplify/tailor the offense for JJM

I think he's very bright/smart, high character, can draw-up beautiful pass plays and Ive seen QB's and wide receivers blossom under his hand. He's put up a gaudy won/loss %, now he needs to win in the post-season.

purplefaithful wrote:
I was primarily disappointed in two things:

1). Needs to be better at running the football (situationally, frequency etc.)
2). Took too long to simplify/tailor the offense for JJM

I think he's very bright/smart, high character, can draw-up beautiful pass plays and Ive seen QB's and wide receivers blossom under his hand. He's put up a gaudy won/loss %, now he needs to win in the post-season.

I will add, 3). adjusting his offense, both in game and in season.  He sticks to the deep throws when the defense is tasting blood and coming after the QB.  If he could fix 1 and 3, I think he would be a great coach.

He went 13-4 with a healthy Cousins and 14-3 with Darnold, I am not as concerned with his ability to coach as I am with his ability to evaluate QB talent. There are a lot of conflicting rumors on who wanted to keep Darnold, who wanted JJM, who wanted JJM in the draft over Nix. I am not sure we will ever know the truth of any of that. I would think that being a former QB and QB coach that he would have had the main say unless Kwesi overruled and made the final call.

Without a true GM, I believe he will be the one making the call on any final QB move. We will definitely find out what he really thinks of JJM. I think the Vikes made a bold move for a starter. There is a lot of smoke with Burrows, I do not see Cincy trading him, but just that the rumor is circling among multiple sources makes me think the Vikes are not looking for a backup or someone to come in and compete.

This seems a like triangle of authority part Deux.

Have always wondered why when Goff or Love or Mahomes or Burrow or Allen have a bad game—and there have been plenty—it's a bad game, but if Darnold does, he "implodes" or it's further proof of the prevailing "can't play well in big games" narrative. 

Agree on KOC. I think he's a helluva coach. And an even better designer of offenses. But he obviously has things to work on.

Mattyman wrote:
This seems a like triangle of authority part Deux.

I think until they get a GM in the bldg again? 

That's exactly what it is. 

KAM should not have been extended. A complete about face like this (in such a short time-frame) is hard for me to understand.

Something either really bad happened recently or it reeks of uncertainty (or both.)

MaroonBells wrote:
Have always wondered why when Goff or Love or Mahomes or Burrow or Allen have a bad game—and there have been plenty—it's a bad game, but if Darnold does, he "implodes" or it's further proof of the prevailing "can't play well in big games" narrative. 

Agree on KOC. I think he's a helluva coach. And an even better designer of offenses. But he obviously has things to work on.

For me the difference is history.  Mahomes, Goff, Love, Burrow, Allen have a history of performing.  When Darnold came to the Vikings he had a history of sucking.  So it goes without saying that sitting on the edge of your seat waiting for him to revert back, or implode was always the question.  After those last two biggest games of the season, you can't tell me that everyone was wondering if Darnold was the frog or the prince.

Good on him though, and I am certainly rooting for him to win.

My question isn't so much if KOC isn't a good coach, but more is he a great Head Coach.  Head coaching is much more then game planning and designing.  It's being in charge of development across the team, it's bringing in the right people to manage the roster and players.  It's advising the GM and front office properly.  It's also adjusting when necessary.

Again, I really like KOC and I truly hope that he becomes McVeigh or better.  I just am worried once again.  It's probably a product of being a Vikings fan since the Minneapolis Miracle.

Vikesrock wrote:

For me the difference is history.  Mahomes, Goff, Love, Burrow, Allen have a history of performing.  When Darnold came to the Vikings he had a history of sucking.  So it goes without saying that sitting on the edge of your seat waiting for him to revert back, or implode was always the question.  After those last two biggest games of the season, you can't tell me that everyone was wondering if Darnold was the frog or the prince.

Good on him though, and I am certainly rooting for him to win.

My question isn't so much if KOC isn't a good coach, but more is he a great Head Coach.  Head coaching is much more then game planning and designing.  It's being in charge of development across the team, it's bringing in the right people to manage the roster and players.  It's advising the GM and front office properly.  It's also adjusting when necessary.

Again, I really like KOC and I truly hope that he becomes McVeigh or better.  I just am worried once again.  It's probably a product of being a Vikings fan since the Minneapolis Miracle.

A whole 7 years, huh? :-) Sit down, son, and let me tell you about the push off, the Nelson drop, McNown to Poole, 41-donut, Favre's pick, wide left 1, wide left 2.............................

MaroonBells wrote:

A whole 7 years, huh? :-) Sit down, son, and let me tell you about the push off, the Nelson drop, McNown to Poole, 41-donut, Favre's pick, wide left 1, wide left 2.............................

Lol...

I go back to D. Pearson push-off on what many believe to be the best Viking team ever (1975)

purplefaithful wrote:

Lol...

I go back to D. Pearson push-off on what many believe to be the best Viking team ever (1975)

That was the first in my memory of several tragic, heartbreaking ends to Viking seasons. I think one can make an argument that the two best Vikings teams ('75, '98) maybe even the three best Viking teams (if you include '09) never even made it to the Super Bowl.

MaroonBells wrote:

A whole 7 years, huh? :-) Sit down, son, and let me tell you about the push off, the Nelson drop, McNown to Poole, 41-donut, Favre's pick, wide left 1, wide left 2.............................

It's no coincidence that a lot of us long timers probably have PTSD from years of Viking heartbreak and mental anguish. 

Just one, one, before I die!

supafreak84 wrote:

It's no coincidence that a lot of us long timers probably have PTSD from years of Viking heartbreak and mental anguish. 

Just one, one, before I die!

Mine goes back to the late sixties watching every Sunday on a black and white tv with the roof top antenna that had to be adjusted according to the weather.  The frozen turf at the old Met stadium where it seemed every playoff game had to go through Dallas or the Rams.  You would think with a stretch of 4 Super Bowls they could have at least gotten one win but thanks to the Buffalo Bills at least the Vikings share the futility of never winning in 4 appearances.

Greylock wrote:

Mine goes back to the late sixties watching every Sunday on a black and white tv with the roof top antenna that had to be adjusted according to the weather.  The frozen turf at the old Met stadium where it seemed every playoff game had to go through Dallas or the Rams.  You would think with a stretch of 4 Super Bowls they could have at least gotten one win but thanks to the Buffalo Bills at least the Vikings share the futility of never winning in 4 appearances.

As long as we're reminiscing, I remember sitting out at the olde met watching games in dead of winter...On cold, hard steel benches for 4 hours...

I dont know how the hell I did it -  youth I guess. I mean, it's not like you could go inside to warm-up at that place either. 

The Metrodome seemed like a palace coming from the Met. Least you didnt freeze your nadz off there.

MaroonBells wrote:

A whole 7 years, huh? :-) Sit down, son, and let me tell you about the push off, the Nelson drop, McNown to Poole, 41-donut, Favre's pick, wide left 1, wide left 2.............................

I meant to say Miracle in the Met.  I am 52 years old.  I had the Minneapolis Miracle on my mind as I was looking at the WR1 rankings with Stefon Diggs on it when I typed that out...Freudian slip.  

I remember the 1982 strike season when I absolutely hated John Riggins.  Does that give me enough credence?

The whole Drew Pushovson day was a nightmare. First I saw the "orange" that I thought was a flag.....Then came the whisky bottle at the ref....then the news of Tarkenton's father.

MaroonBells wrote:
Have always wondered why when Goff or Love or Mahomes or Burrow or Allen have a bad game—and there have been plenty—it's a bad game, but if Darnold does, he "implodes" or it's further proof of the prevailing "can't play well in big games" narrative. 

Agree on KOC. I think he's a helluva coach. And an even better designer of offenses. But he obviously has things to work on.

Because when he sucked, he saw ghosts, he was awful.  Allen had a bad rap for that as a young guy, but has also carried the team in ways that Darnold didn't.  Darnold hasn't had any "big games" yet IMO.  He has won big games, but often while being mediocre and relying on their D.  

I haven't seen him step up and carry the team.

greediron wrote:

Because when he sucked, he saw ghosts, he was awful.  Allen had a bad rap for that as a young guy, but has also carried the team in ways that Darnold didn't.  Darnold hasn't had any "big games" yet IMO.  He has won big games, but often while being mediocre and relying on their D.  

I haven't seen him step up and carry the team.

Fair. But I think that's largely a myth. I would argue that it's pretty hard to throw for 8,000 yards, 60 TDs and win 28 games over two seasons without being capable of playing well in important games. If anyone saw ghosts in the playoffs this year it was reigning MVP Josh Allen. 

I'd say last week's NFCC was a big game for Sam. Against the Rams whose rush packages flustered him twice before, he threw for 346 yards, 3 TDs and 0 picks. Who knows, maybe bad Sam shows up in the Super Bowl, but if not he's going to completely rewrite his narrative.

greediron wrote:

Because when he sucked, he saw ghosts, he was awful.  Allen had a bad rap for that as a young guy, but has also carried the team in ways that Darnold didn't.  Darnold hasn't had any "big games" yet IMO.  He has won big games, but often while being mediocre and relying on their D.  

I haven't seen him step up and carry the team.

I think it gets dismissed with others like you mentioned. When the Saints crushed Tampa-era Brady and late-Packers era Rodgers around the same time, both terrible performances were quickly swept under the carpet.

The truth is, and I've never seen any real argument, that any/every QB looks very "mortal" and makes their worst mistakes when they face their least favorite kinds of pressure. Our IOL issues were nightmares for Kirko, and it's not hard to imagine why.