May 6, 2026 • 46 mins
Dan Barreiro opens the show discussing the Wild problems after losing both games to start the Avs series: Gus Bus wasn't good, what to do now? Alec Lewis joins from The Athletic to give us the latest he's hearing in the Vikings general manager search.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Basis.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
Yu're there's a reason they call them special teams. Leader
Fan Fan Radio Network. Well you know what, and k
fa N dot Com. One minute and fifty six seconds
past the hour of three o'clock Central daylight time, and
welcome you back to a midweek edition of the Bumper
(00:26):
to Bumper program.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
My name's Dan Barrero.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
I am the host of the program we a fictionally
refer to as occasionally the Beast, uh sometimes the Ardvark
Afternoon Ardvark always hosted by the a hole in the afternoon.
That would be me Guards. He's the producer of the
program as well. I wish the news was better on
(00:50):
the hockey front. Yeah, but it's it's dogs and cats
living together right now. It's mass hysteria. The second guessing
officially has begun. We make the goaltender change, and whether
it had eighty percent to do with the game two
(01:12):
loss or ten percent to do the game two loss,
it inevitably becomes a talking point. It seems fairly clear
that Russo Radio, a five h two guest today, has
made his decision. He has gone as scorched earth as
I remember Russo going two games into a series. The
(01:33):
honeymoon is over whatever rap Proschman had existed between Bill
Garren and Russo.
Speaker 1 (01:40):
I think it's over after what he wrote today. Did
you read the.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
Right story or is it like yesterday they tweed out
the wrong story.
Speaker 4 (01:46):
Oh?
Speaker 1 (01:46):
I read it.
Speaker 2 (01:47):
Yeah, I read pretty much all of it, and it
was it was pretty frontal and very very direct. We'll
talk about that with him, as I said, and more
at five oh two. I'm convinced as tempting as it
is for those of us who kind of said, give
the kid one more game, it's easy to say, told
(02:10):
you so because we all are in this business to
look like geniuses.
Speaker 1 (02:15):
Let's be honest about it.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
It's all ego gratification, and when we have the chance,
most of us will not rise above.
Speaker 1 (02:21):
No, we just won't.
Speaker 2 (02:23):
I mean, I'm just trying to be honest about it.
I mean, maybe I'll just speak for myself. I don't
want to throw anybody else under the bus. But it's
just true. So it's tempting, and I don't like it.
Was it two goals and two shots. I don't even
think i'd gotten in my car yet. And the third
goal I hated, like Russo did, that was allowed. But
(02:45):
I don't want to just make this for me about that,
because while I mentioned off the top of the program,
there's a reason they call them the special teams.
Speaker 1 (02:54):
Leader, I know who we don't have in.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
This series, and I know that's affecting our deen. But
the power play is supposed to be a weapon for
a team. It's when you're on it, you're supposed to
have an advantage that might lead to an extra goal
or two. We don't use it that way. We have
(03:20):
not used it that way, and we didn't use it
again that way yesterday did we?
Speaker 1 (03:23):
Last night did not?
Speaker 2 (03:25):
Did not, and we kind of now In fairness to
the special teams discussion, I think we have one short
handed goal when we were on the penalty kill.
Speaker 1 (03:35):
It was a nice moment with the Fino, actually was,
but we and we got away with it.
Speaker 2 (03:41):
One could say because we were so dominant five on
five that it didn't matter in the naw series. But
we ain't Playned Dallas anymore. We ain't playing the Stars anymore.
We're playing quite possibly the best team in hockey, correct,
the Colorado Avs. I still don't know why it's Avs
instead of av Did you ever get an explanation on that?
Speaker 3 (03:59):
I did. I didn't look too much fortant, I didn't
spend too much time. No, maybe today I'll find it. Well,
I just need somebody from the hockey community to explain
it to me. Do you want to shorten it? Just
make it ast Isn't it just the grammar community?
Speaker 1 (04:12):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (04:13):
Is it the grammar community? But why it's not? How
is it a point of grammar? I'm not sure if
your nickname is an entity, an avalanche is a thing.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
It's a singular thing, correct, unless it's the hockey team,
then they make it plural.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
Yeah, but then why don't you call them the avalanches
in the beginning?
Speaker 1 (04:31):
It's a great question.
Speaker 4 (04:32):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
Somebody will get to the bottom of it. It's the
least of the Wild's problems right now, let's face it.
But in any case, I just think I can see
it coming.
Speaker 4 (04:44):
Well.
Speaker 2 (04:44):
Our two best defensive players, one forward one defenseman are.
Speaker 1 (04:49):
Out, and it's just not fair.
Speaker 2 (04:51):
It's setting up that way, and there's I'm not saying
there's some truth to it, but I think that's still
a little bit too easy. When you're on the power
play with other people. We have enough other people on
the power play at least that we should be able
to score more often than we do, and maybe that
would have even taken the pressure off the goalie.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
I'm not exactly sure, but it's not They're called special
teams for a reason. They are specialties that in any
sport matter, and you could say maybe in hockey more
than any other sport, the special teams are important, right,
whether you're talking about the power play or.
Speaker 1 (05:33):
The penalty kill.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
They ain't a lot of sports in which you might
be at a one man advantage or disadvantage, correct, right?
Speaker 1 (05:42):
Are there any.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
Basketball can't happen unless it's a Gene Hackman movie?
Speaker 1 (05:45):
Well as users.
Speaker 3 (05:46):
I was just talking with one of my kids about that,
that it's the only sport that they'll take somebody out.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
I think maybe in lacrosse they do it, do they?
I think?
Speaker 4 (05:53):
So?
Speaker 1 (05:53):
What about soccer? Soccer?
Speaker 2 (05:56):
I think if you get a red card, I don't
think you can replace that guy. Although red cards pretty rare,
is it not? Yes, So there's a couple.
Speaker 3 (06:04):
But out of the main sports, the Big four, the
core four, hockey's the one where they'll let you have
a man or even two man advantage for two to
four to five minutes. Yes, it's a nice little feather
to have if you can use it the right way.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
You have to take advantage of it at some point,
and we haven't. Now this is series number two. It's
almost like it's almost like we've written it off. And
that's too easy, because that is part of how you
ascend and part of how you excel in the postseason.
Speaker 1 (06:38):
I just look, series doesn't have to be over.
Speaker 2 (06:41):
We haven't played a home game yet. Who's to say
where it's going. It doesn't look particularly promising at this point.
I'm going to be very curious to find out whether
we keep Gus Buss in net.
Speaker 1 (06:53):
For Game three or whether we go back to Volstett again.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
Russo, our five o'clock guest indicates they're both annoyed right now,
and that's never a good sign in terms of their
clipped off answers, body language.
Speaker 1 (07:10):
Et cetera. This goalies got to buck up at well,
it's to a certain extent. It's the nature of it. Yeah,
I have to this is what happens, is it?
Speaker 2 (07:16):
Yeah?
Speaker 1 (07:17):
Well, which I think so? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (07:18):
Well, but if it's not then you lose anyway, if
you for some reason, they're pouting, and I don't know
that they are, but that would seem that was the
implication of the of the piece that I that I read.
I cannot replace the red card. They play short the
rest of the game, and the player that gets the
red card can't play the next game, but the team
doesn't play short the next game.
Speaker 1 (07:37):
That's one of our soccer suggesting. So again, I.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
All, I'm trying to throw out there now. I'm trying
to get ahead of the excuses because they're already being
thrown out. Basically as this series isn't looking good, but
we're going to mitigate the loss because it's Colorado, they're
really good. And secondly, we're missing two really important players
(08:06):
in Rodein and is it ericson X at the other Yeah,
and neither is expected back. I don't think in this
series at all. Right, it may even be longer than that.
For Dan, it sounds like for sure. Yeah, ecky, there's
this open ended maybe let's see. But I don't think
it sounds good either. Yeah, I don't know. I'm just
I don't want it reduced to just the injuries. I
(08:28):
don't even necessarily want it reduced to the goaltender I
want is it too much to ask that somewhere along
the road that our special teams become special? It's been,
let's face it, to varying degrees, and I'm going issue
forever here.
Speaker 1 (08:41):
That's what I was going to say.
Speaker 3 (08:42):
You mentioned the two series, I would say, how about
the last decade?
Speaker 4 (08:45):
Yes?
Speaker 3 (08:46):
And even Russo tweeted about that today when given the
numbers that the Wild special teams have been bad. I
think his response was, every year, it's something we talk
about every year. How many how many different times have
we talked about it? In the season ending press conference?
I can probably find the Dean Evison Maybe I'll find
it with it. I mean, we brought in like Yo,
(09:08):
if anybody any other coaches we've it's become an issue.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
Boudreaux was an issue.
Speaker 3 (09:12):
Do we need to apologize to Zach Parisi? Maybe we
do for bringing in his own power play specials.
Speaker 1 (09:17):
Yeah that's true.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
Maybe he was that desperate. May's that was the plea
for you to him as possible. Let's get to the
most pressing matter, right Tendo out of Minneapolis. Can you
get Larry Mindella guy on the air to explain his
honest sports take yesterday? His fellow listeners are still concerned. Yeah, Carries, Yeah,
we haven't had an explanation. Larry Mandella Guy offered what
(09:41):
seemed to be an earnest sports observation yesterday, and it
just threw me off. I wasn't ready for it. And
then I thought, well, maybe I'm missing a really good
Maybe he's so clever in that unch line that I've
missed it.
Speaker 3 (09:54):
He does that a lot in Doctor Dan's inbox too.
I have to think about it, and there's some I
don't read because I know it's too deep in two layered.
Speaker 1 (10:02):
Why is it the.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
Toronto maple leafs not the maple leaves?
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Is it with an f.
Speaker 3 (10:10):
F s?
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Why is it not maple leaves? And there's so many
of these hockey.
Speaker 1 (10:14):
Say it's quirky. It's a quirky game. Who know? Who knew?
You don't have to get analytical with everything?
Speaker 4 (10:21):
Dan?
Speaker 1 (10:21):
Just call them the avs. I don't want to call them.
Speaker 2 (10:23):
I want to call them the av I want to
shorten it to I want to start a revolution.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
The only thing I'm seeing online yes is like a
Reddit thread for when you say av.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
Why don't you spell it a ve like avenue? But
you're spelling it like ave. No one's really tackled. I
think you're the first to nobody. Nobody's gonna nobody's gonna
conf if you If you bring it up in the
context of after a hockey game, people are gonna think
you're talking about the avenue or they're gonna talk about.
Speaker 1 (10:51):
The hockey team, just saying what's online? All right?
Speaker 2 (10:54):
Yeah, the lanch i. We have used lanch before. That's
very true. Throwing stones from a glass house. Aren't you
ann making fun of the Avs? Isn't your favorite hockey
team named after a freaking adjective?
Speaker 4 (11:09):
Up?
Speaker 2 (11:09):
Hashtag up two oh hashtag go Avs go? That is
from six five to one guy?
Speaker 1 (11:17):
Huh? Interesting?
Speaker 2 (11:19):
Rest of the guest lineup today, pretty deep and distinguished.
Kessler five thirty in studio I mentioned Russo at five
oh two. Doctor Robbie Seka, formerly of the Wolves, although
maybe he'll clarify if he's still got some official or
unofficial connection with the team he used.
Speaker 1 (11:36):
To work with on all On. I think his fancy
title is like VP.
Speaker 2 (11:40):
Yeah, he's big time, big time, and we're gonna chat
with him about the Anthony Edwards recovery. He was involved
in a video that made the rounds yesterday that you
brought to my attention that sort of laid out the
Anthony Edwards history. And it'll be a good opportunity to
get into the ongoing issue of the the the never
ending paranoia about what any kind of calf injuries.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
Yes, right, absolutely so.
Speaker 2 (12:05):
For example, Well, if if I was worried about his
calf leading to an achilles, my assumption was there was
a chance he might not play at all this series. Well,
it turns out now he's back exactly upgraded to available tonight.
So what distinguishes not all calf injuries I assume can
be alike. He'll be able to answer all those kinds
(12:26):
of questions because that is one of his specialties.
Speaker 1 (12:30):
Five oh seven.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
I wants to know why it is the Minnesota wild
and not the Minnesota Mild. He would if we don't
come back in one game too, he wouldn't be saying no,
he wouldn't be. But we didn't win two and now
particularly close. We're down two games to nil coming back home.
We got is it four days off?
Speaker 1 (12:47):
Five? We play Saturdays? Whatever that math is Bagnerian opera
in between, right, and what's the reason it's arena availability,
isn't it? And that have something to do with the schedule.
Speaker 3 (12:56):
The cross play here, I know, tomorrow night and then
there's something else on Friday.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
I think Frost complaining about injuries. I don't think so
about that overtime game. That's all they do. One ton
they lost, I know, but it was I see that's
old school hockey. I love a low scoring game. So
a triple overtime hockey game, zero zero, the only goal
of the game wins it. I almost got in my
(13:21):
car and I think that game was in Montreal, wasn't it?
Speaker 1 (13:23):
It was.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
Drive What do we got the fandom? Big deck dot com. Yes,
they want to give you a shot to win bonus bucks.
It is our national cash contest. First keyword of the
afternoon is win. W I n go to kfan dot
com and enter the keyword win. A quick closer going
to chat Abbott.
Speaker 1 (13:39):
It wasn't me.
Speaker 4 (14:03):
Like the way that we were playing the game.
Speaker 5 (14:06):
You know, obviously going in and as Billy said, we
as a coaching staff are extremely frustrated with as you
guys have just talked about the same things that happened
last year with our power play and our penalty kill. Yeah,
we were much improved during the regular season, and we
put a huge emphasis on that when we got to
(14:27):
the spot where we needed it to be better than
it was obviously last year, and then obviously through the
regular season.
Speaker 4 (14:34):
It was not.
Speaker 2 (14:40):
Interesting SoundBite that Guargie has uncovered. I'll leave it to
the audience to identify that voice and if you're really
intrepid the year that particular observation was offered up by
said coach brat Jahn Bryant camfan text line is open
at six four six eight six uh nine four nine
(15:05):
Guy Rights, I'm sorry for being mean you guys. Seriously, though,
why can't we talk about being undisciplined. We have no
problems dripping special teams, but why not say why we
need our penalty kills so much? We get stupid penalties,
especially Hartman. Didn't we have a spade of penalties in
period three?
Speaker 1 (15:22):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (15:23):
Yeah, the Welmber bad luck like Apriesoff just smoked the
guy in the face. Yeah, you know, working for the puck, right,
but then there's others that are just bad. Well that
and that's not a subject we've ignored over the period
of time that this team has struggled in a certainly postseason,
and even a warning during the last series after the
penalties early in that series as well against the Dallas Stars.
Speaker 1 (15:46):
So yeah, it's all. It's all part of it.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
I just am not ready to put it all on
the goaltending, even though, like I said, I probably would
not have made the switch. I think it just becomes
too easy.
Speaker 1 (16:04):
To make it all about about that. I you know, in.
Speaker 2 (16:08):
All honesty, I leaned keeping Volstead, but Louis and I
talked about this yesterday and we both and Louis was
in favor of the change, yep, but we both said
the same thing on the debate team I can I
can argue either side of it.
Speaker 1 (16:26):
I really can't.
Speaker 2 (16:27):
It's not I mean, we gave up nine goals, well eight, Yeah,
if you factor in the empty night, that's it. That's
a lot of goals. I mean that that so ordinarily,
just doing that one time in a playoff series against
a really good team is often enough. If you feel
(16:48):
like you have another goaltender to make a switch. It's
not that radical a change. I mean when I've been
down on radical changes in the past. It's when when
when you know we've got a guy who in well,
was it the game?
Speaker 1 (17:02):
One game was a twenty three?
Speaker 2 (17:05):
A guy gets fifty five saves and saves us in
double overtime, and you go with flower next game, right,
or even at the end of the season, one goaltender
is going.
Speaker 1 (17:16):
That goes back to the Talbot days.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
Right, So I think it if I'm being fair, as
easy as it is to want it to be, as
tempting as it is to say, yeah, the whole goaltending
vibe got screwed up.
Speaker 1 (17:30):
Terrible decision, Look what happened. They lost another game.
Speaker 2 (17:34):
I think if you're honest about it, all bets can
be off after one performance like that, especially if you
believe in your heart that you've got a guy go
now what he was that was seven straven?
Speaker 1 (17:48):
It makes sense, so, you.
Speaker 2 (17:50):
Know, don't I just don't think it's out it's defensive.
It's definitely defensible. It's not outlandish, I would say, And
I just think there's more going on right now, and
if we had a better power play, maybe that tilts
it too, you know, back in the other direction where
we're not, you're at least having a better chance to win.
There is also the out outside possibility that there's a
(18:11):
reason they won I think regular season nine more games
than we did.
Speaker 1 (18:14):
They're really good. They're they're they're probably they would.
Speaker 2 (18:17):
I mean, the the odds makers have them as they
had them at the as the favorite before the playoffs started,
right to.
Speaker 1 (18:23):
Win the cup the opponent.
Speaker 3 (18:25):
The opponent has a say too, like the opponent just
straight up has to say and the wilder up against it.
And I don't know if one decision is obviously, last
night was not great. I mean we mentioned two shots,
two goals, and one of them I don't even think
one of them was on the their power play. I
don't even know if Joe O'Donnell had like finished announcing
(18:46):
the penalty and they'd already scored. It was that quick
right yes after the while that's correct, got back yes
right away to tie it to one one.
Speaker 1 (18:53):
Things were happening fast.
Speaker 3 (18:55):
Yeah, the Avs are really really good and but but
everything is magnified decision to make. In fact, the special
teams are magnified. That's why they put so much pressure
on you in the Wild. For whatever the reason, it
just we also are aware the the the Wild's power
play this regular season has been was better that it's been,
but it just has to when Quinnesota got here. That's true,
(19:15):
it just hasn't translated obviously at all to the to
the postseason. Tony writes that the Buffalo Sabers are intentionally
misspelled to ingratiate themselves to French Canadian fans directed from
the owner when the team was formed. It's the French
spelling of the word sabers that's kind of interesting. And
the Toronto maple Leafs are not named after the leaves
(19:39):
they are not is not at all related to a tree.
I'll leave that there because there there is more to
the story. But I don't want to get too far
behind schedule, but we will, we will. Indeed, I think
it's it's like a military unit, if I'm not mistaken,
So I don't think it's it's not related to the
(20:00):
So if we got into the issue.
Speaker 1 (20:01):
Of leaf, I leave leaf. You know they're called the
maple leafs, yeah, rather than the maple leaves.
Speaker 2 (20:07):
I actually absolutely do not know. I'm just we're learning
so much. We also have learned that Iodasumu has been
upgraded to available tonight for the Wolves. I haven't heard
any update on who starts, whether we go at the
same formula we did for Game one in San Antonio,
Davy and keep Anthony Edwards off the bench. I think
(20:29):
that would probably be the prudent thing to two, But
I don't know how they decide how many minutes he
might be available. The word going into the game one
was twenty five minutes, So I would say, hang with that.
I'm never gonna want to concede a game. Okay, no
on the road, never, not in the playoffs. But I
(20:51):
will also say, you got a game on the road already.
So I want to do everything in my power to
make sure Anthony Edwards is the best he can be
for this entire series. Now that it looks like there's
a good chance that it is going to be a
long series as well, has anybody now determined that all
twelve block shots should have been called goaltending for the
(21:13):
The number keeps going up. First it was three, Yeah,
then it was four. Yeah, Now I'm hearing six or seven.
Speaker 3 (21:20):
But also, don't forget, we're not even we're not even
talking about the goaltends.
Speaker 1 (21:24):
Some of them are fouls too.
Speaker 2 (21:25):
That's if you take all twelve, you can find something
wrong with all with all twelve of the Wenby blocks. Well,
I get you know, I say this all the time.
You got no credibility if you whine in a loss.
The advantage the Wolves and Finchy have is they won
the game, So it's I think it's easier to listen
to him whining. Yeah, after a victory. It sounds better
(21:47):
than when you do it after a setback.
Speaker 3 (21:50):
It should have been a route if you listen to Finchy,
we should have won by twenty four points. Think about
if we got all the goaltends and we made just
like sixty percent of our free games, we would have
been when even had to play the fourth quarter.
Speaker 2 (22:01):
It might have been double digits. Yeah, is what it
might have been. That's for sure. Yeah, here's Wally should
have played last night and penalties are killing us. Okay, yeah,
I get it. We'll get into that in more detail
with Russo at five h two. Much more on the
Minnesota Timberwolves. Have you seen the results of the latest
anonymous NBA player's poll. No, it's going to drive you insane.
(22:26):
Oh no, it's fascinating and it is the latest reminder
that when it comes to evaluation of players, nobody is
less qualified to.
Speaker 1 (22:39):
Do so than other players.
Speaker 2 (22:40):
It's astounding, or better way to put it is, players
are less likely to rise above their own petty jealousies
and biases than media members would in voting for various categories.
Speaker 1 (22:54):
There's some really good stuff for us to discuss there
as well.
Speaker 2 (22:57):
How about some football I didn't think we were, but
Alex Lewis is back with one of those you guessed it?
Speaker 1 (23:02):
What I learned?
Speaker 2 (23:04):
What I'm hearing stories this time having to do with
the possibility. Dare I call it probability that the Vikings
are on the verge of bringing back an old reliable,
an old favorite. The triangle of authority will have Alec
Lewis explain when we return, keep your drinks and your
(23:39):
phones away from the equipment. That's a very important radio
mantra or mantraze. I guess it would be a plural
in this case that I have learned over the decades.
Brumbert of Bumper is the name of the program The
Afternoon Ardvark, hosted by me the A Hole in the Afternoon.
We have an outstanding bevy of guests today, Kessler in
(24:00):
studio at five thirty Russo Radio five oh two, Doctor
Robbie Sinka, Sika, I should say at four two, formerly
of the Wolves but still closely aligned with Anthony Edwards
and Alex lewis kind of enough to join us now
via the kinnecticot Water Systems hotline. I had intended originally
(24:21):
to just take a break from any Vikings stuff, and
then you send out one of these. I assume it's
a directive from the top at the Athletic what I'm hearing,
and then it's you know, what I'm hearing about a
possible trade, or what I'm hearing about the quarterback situation,
or what I'm hearing in this case about the Viking
search for a new general manager.
Speaker 1 (24:42):
And it sucked me right in again.
Speaker 2 (24:43):
So is that the new bit that you have to
start the headline with what I'm hearing?
Speaker 4 (24:49):
Absolutely, I mean it got you, so obviously the directive
is paying off. But no, the Athletic goes in these
phases where I think years ago was like this three
pronged headline. You do three interesting words and then a
toll in and then a headline. So yeah, it's it's uh.
I just I just go with with uh. You know
(25:11):
what they tell me. Guys like John and Russo and gleaming.
They can probably be more creative. I'm just I just
don't have that, you know, cachet. Yet I would say,
all right.
Speaker 2 (25:20):
You did not use the term, even though you alluded
to the very construction it represents once upon a time,
the vikings, I guess you could say managerial approach at
the top when it comes to you know, power centers.
Was I guess what we would say unofficially referred to
(25:43):
and sometimes derisively referred to as the triangle of authority
round among three different people. This goes back obviously to
the to the Spielman era. So you allude to it
as among the possibilities. Did you throw it in there
just to get people going, or do you go did
you throw it out there because you think on the
basis of what you've reported and heard of this what
(26:05):
you've heard, all right, you are hearing to this point
that it's actually a possibility.
Speaker 4 (26:11):
Yeah, I definitely didn't throw it in there to you know,
frustrate people on a Wednesday where they're excited about what
the wolves are doing. More so for me, I mean,
it was a device to I think, try to explain
where this thing could go from a search perspective, and
I'll just say, like from the top around the league,
(26:34):
there is a lot of intrigue and what the Vikings
are going to do here. I think some of that
intrigue is more of a question of, you know, what
is what is the timeline of this process that was
delayed after the draft that is now a week plus
removed from the draft and just beginning interviews, Like I
(26:55):
think there are just people within the league that have
a lot of questions about the timeline involved. But the
best way that I know I knew how to describe
where I think one path of this thing could go
is where you do have multiple types of leaders essentially
where Rob Razinski's expertise is unquestionable in terms of his
(27:18):
negotiator cap, you know, just wits about him, and then
you'd have a personnel type of executive slash leader and
those two would probably be working in tandem with a
coaching staff that has garnered Morseway in recent years. So
that was the thought behind kind of referring to that
(27:39):
previous structure that the Wolfs had in place.
Speaker 1 (27:42):
Is there?
Speaker 2 (27:43):
And you I think to explore this one of the
obvious concerns and this just did come up back in
the triangle days. I think to a certain extent, is
I who breaks the ties? Who's in charge? How do
we know who is the person that is responsible for everything?
Speaker 1 (27:58):
And do these sorts of I guess you could say approach.
Speaker 2 (28:02):
Does this sort of approach contribute to the notion that
the answer is.
Speaker 1 (28:07):
We don't know?
Speaker 4 (28:09):
Yeah? I mean I think that's the biggest and it's
it's everything.
Speaker 6 (28:13):
It is which which staff reports to whom?
Speaker 4 (28:15):
Yes, it is which which executive makes decision on whether
to retain or bring in different staffers? It is you know,
does does the president of.
Speaker 6 (28:26):
Football operations type of person control the coaching staff? I
mean all of those questions, which, frankly, we've asked a
lot of these questions in recent years about where the
Vikings organization is. Like the they remain cloudy and murky,
and so part of what is is also interesting, quoth
to me and people within the league, is how I
(28:48):
would say non transparent the Vikings ownership has been and
is being on this specific process. And so I think
the more kind of I don't know murc key nature
in terms of where they land with this structure, the
more questions I think they're gonna have to answer from
people internally and externally about how they believe this then
(29:10):
leads to a result that obviously they have not been
able to obtain in their two decades of ownership.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
What is Turnkey z RG.
Speaker 4 (29:21):
Yeah, it's a search firm that is really widely used
in college sports and in college athletics. It's been huge
in the college football space. And the primary executive who
is involved with this cert with this search and a
lot of them in college football is a guy named
(29:43):
Chad Shatlows. He participated, for example, in the hiring process
that Indiana had with Kurse Signetti. He worked with Texas
on Steve Sarkeesian believe he was one of the primary
people involved in the Big Twelve making a big missioner
higher uh plucking an executive from Rock Nation the agency.
(30:04):
So they haven't worked as much within the NFL space.
Atlanta did work with them, the Falcons did recently this
past spring, and so I mean there are a lot
of perspectives on what their role is here with with
this Viking search. I think there are some people within
the league who think it's more of an interference to
(30:25):
what the Vikings actually want to get done. I think
other people believe that they can be an objective voice
and ownerships here when at a time where this organization
probably doesn't have a lot of objective football voices in
the front office.
Speaker 2 (30:39):
How much concern So it is pretty rare for the
for pro teams to use this, this this idea of
a search a turnkey ZRG for example, It is do
we know why the wilsh felt this was needed, that
they didn't have enough trust and faith and you know,
(31:00):
their own ability to put some things together.
Speaker 1 (31:04):
Why we why do we need this.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
When a lot of other NFL teams have made I
think you could say in some cases successful hires not
always without going through this part of the process.
Speaker 4 (31:15):
It's a great question, and you're correct, it is not.
It has not been crazy prevalent within the NFL space.
I mean, first and foremost, it comes across when it's
like you're working with the search firm, like you have
a distinct strategy in place. So there is a perception
part of that as well. And I also say, I mean,
(31:36):
the argument can definitely be made and I can understand
it of as NFL owners, you're making this lead executive
football higher or you hope to be like I mean,
once or twice a decade, potentially three times a decade,
and so your expertise of who is within the space,
the agents within the space pales in comparison to those
(31:57):
like the search firm Turnkeys RG, which is working in
the space day to day. But I mean there are
a lot of people who will who will you know?
And people have talked to stakeholders involved who were like,
is this absolutely necessary when a lot of the the
candidates are pretty widely known and easy to access.
Speaker 2 (32:17):
Is there any reason to believe now? Of course, these
are valuable jobs. They don't come around all the time.
And to a certain extent, one assumes that if you
have a chance to run a football an NFL football operation,
you're gonna take it, because you know, you don't know
if you're gonna have a second shot. There are some
assets here. But is there any reason to believe that
(32:41):
there might be some hesitation on the part of a
couple of would be candidates, let's say, from outside the building,
who might even have other options, not maybe now the
same year, but maybe down the road they go.
Speaker 1 (32:55):
You know, I like a lot of what they do.
Speaker 2 (32:59):
There's certain the cupboard's not bear, But I'm not sure
I'm gonna be able to run it because I keep
hearing over and over and over again for media jackals
like Alec Lewis and others that there is no organization
in football where the head coach has more influence and
maybe even the defensive coordinator has more influence.
Speaker 1 (33:20):
So are these.
Speaker 2 (33:21):
Guys gonna accept me being the boss in a way
that could end up make me making me say, you know,
I'm not quite so sure.
Speaker 1 (33:30):
Is that gonna enter into any of this? Do you believe? Yeah?
Speaker 4 (33:34):
I mean absolutely, it's it's already come up for me
with agents in the coaching space who are very aware
of the dynamic. It's part of their job. But as
they are conferring with their clients on what the potential
opportunities are and specifically this opportunity, like you know, it's
(33:55):
part of the just direct look at what this job offers.
I wrote this today. But it's like the Vikings organization
has a fund to like that ownership has made a
lot of investments. The coaching staff is widely respected within
the NFL. You have a superstar and Justin Jefferson, and
all of that is is valid and and well and good.
(34:16):
And when you're offering someone a title bump and a
pay bump, you know, typically they're gonna be very willing
to listen. But there are the dynamics that you just referenced,
Dan that are are in the minds of people when
it comes to how much way will I really have?
Will I be able to put my stamp on this
front office or not? How much is this you just
(34:37):
title and and and kind of optics as opposed to
legitimate potential to instill a vision like those are the
questions that ownership's gonna have to answer within this process.
Those are questions that Andrew Miller, the CEO, is gonna
have to answer throughout this process. Those are questions that
Turnkey is gonna have to answer throughout this process. And
(34:57):
the fact that it doesn't feel, at least in my
conversations like there is clarity within those answers, I think
just creates more need for, I don't know, for ownership
to make it abundantly clear.
Speaker 2 (35:12):
Towards the end of the piece we're chatting with Alec
Lewis covers the NFL and the vikings for the Athletic.
You write the following Chief Operating Officer Andrew Miller featured
prominently in the Adolpha Mensa hire and extension. The Vikings
said they would support the process with a small internal
advisory committee, and he figures to be in that group.
On the football side, you write the Vikings are in
(35:34):
more of a pickle Brazinski. Rob Brazinski typically participates in
these decisions. His candidacy not only affects his sway, but
also as the potential to cloud the judgment of other
senior football officials. To me, it's obvious he can't be
on what it's self evident. He can't be on the
committee if he's a candidate and wants to be a candidate.
(35:55):
The objectivity problem is pretty clear. The question that intre
me is you mentioned O'Connell, as you know that his
perspective should matter. I thought somebody already said the internal
committee or somebody already wrote that O'Connell's going to be
on that committee. So I'll ask you the question. And
(36:16):
maybe I am being naive because I get as you right,
you got to have a good relationship between the head
coach and whoever you hire, right, there's got to be
some kind of meeting of the minds.
Speaker 1 (36:27):
But again, there's still part of.
Speaker 2 (36:29):
Me that says, well, wait a minute, how if he's
in the evaluation process again, how does that look to
the guy who is interviewing for the for the job.
I almost feel like you I would rather have. I mean,
is is Kaos going to be governed by the right
things in terms of how he evaluates or is he
(36:51):
going to say, well, I think with this guy, I'm
gonna have a lot more sway than with this other guy.
So you tell me what the rule is in the
league in this situation like this, how much power do
you want to grant the coach even if he's grandfathered
in and obviously continues to be the head coach of
the team when it comes to the hardcore evaluate personnel
evaluation necessary.
Speaker 4 (37:13):
Yeah, I mean, I think this conversation is one that
I mean, we talked about and I think it's I
think it's really important for where this team is and
where this team wants to go. I mean, typically you
read anything, you go back and read Bill Walsh's books,
and and just like history of the league and former executives,
(37:34):
you're going to hear a lot of the same things
of the coach is typically a short term oriented thinker,
and you often need the general manager to have a
perspective on the long term, but you also need I
mean the word that the phrase whatever the alignment is important.
That doesn't always mean that they have to agree on everything,
(37:56):
but when there are disagreements, they have to be work
through and expectfully from both sides. And that obviously did
not exist with former GM quasi do fo mensa. And
getting to a place regardless where that does exist, I
think is the central challenge. I was saying this to
somebody earlier day, like it is a fine needle to
(38:16):
thread in a lot of ways with this situation, and
you know, I threading needles is not the place you
probably want to live in all the time and anything.
And so I do think it's a really interesting conversation
of how much sway should Ken O'Connell have with this
decision if you if you don't, you know, give him
(38:37):
license to have a say does the marriage eventually? You know,
is there less probability that it works? And if it's
not him, then who internally is going to be the
voice that ownership trust on the football side. There's not
a clear answer to that. When you remove Robert Zinski
from the equation.
Speaker 1 (38:53):
Yeah, that's it. That is what makes it interesting.
Speaker 2 (38:55):
So my concern, and it might be ill advised you're
around there every day, I'm obviously not. My concern is
the country club mentality a little bit. It's it's how
I used to refer to the wolves in the Kevin O.
Kale and Flip Saunders days when they were routinely getting
to the playoffs and then losing first.
Speaker 1 (39:16):
Round and seem kinda just like stuck in mud.
Speaker 2 (39:19):
And they briefly brought in a coach outside the country
club named Dwayne Casey, but almost as quickly as he
was here, the handwriting was on the wall because he
wasn't with these guys all the time.
Speaker 1 (39:30):
He was on the outside looking in. He wasn't going
to have a chance.
Speaker 2 (39:33):
And in fact, midway through one of his seasons, in
fact they were five hundred team, they fired him and
brought in another member of the country club, a guy
named Randy Whipman. And it left me with the feeling
that there are times if you're all in it together right,
there is the concern that you're gonna sort of reinforce
(39:54):
each other because you've all got your places of power
and you love it, and it's good to be in
that position forever and ever, and you're not going to
turn on each other because hey, it's a country club.
We're all you know, we all still got good jobs.
And it makes me wonder whether this is a perfect
situation in which what the Vikings need right now more
than anything else is a voice from the outside. It
(40:15):
doesn't even have to be a rip at Brazinski, but
a belief that is it gotten too cozy with let's
face it, good regular season results every other year, but
no postseason.
Speaker 1 (40:27):
Success to speak of.
Speaker 2 (40:28):
And is it possible that what you need more than
anything else is somebody who's got very few ties outside
the country club who comes in with a fresh look
at pretty much everything.
Speaker 1 (40:41):
What do you think about that?
Speaker 4 (40:44):
Yeah, I mean I just as you were talking, like,
part of my mind just goes to, like what Tim
Connolly has been able to do. And obviously he was accomplished, Yes,
had been a GM and you know, had experience, but
I think like the injection of a different way of
thinking has benefited that organization at a level that is
(41:05):
I'm astronomical and I'm I mean, one of my fascinations
in doing this job is like, what are the best doing,
how are the best thinking about it? What is leading
to the maximumount of success throughout the league? And I
think if you look around and you look at an
organization like Seattle that has done a great job, well
what have they done? They have a GM who has
(41:28):
a lot of scouting connections and experience, but also a
ton of feel and awareness and leadership to be able
to really just direct the organization at an optimal level.
You look at the Eagles and Howie Roseman like that
is a GM centric organization of a guy who who
you know, is very sharp and knows how to seek
(41:50):
different realms of thought. And so like those organizations and
the structure they have is not I mean, it is
not a coaching drink of an operation. So uh, I
think the the perspective that a lot of people have
of bringing in somebody with a different level of experience
and different exposure totally makes sense to me. I also
(42:13):
can understand the perspective of to navigate this specific situation.
Having someone like Rob Razinski who understands the dynamic dynamics
better than anybody else gives it the best, you know,
probability of being able to work in the long haul.
So I mean I I can see it both ways.
I typically I think me personally, I love outside thought
(42:36):
that is very sharp and intelligent. But how they go
about this, I don't think it's clear in terms of
whether they will stay with the perspective that they've had
internally or well whether they will shift. You know.
Speaker 2 (42:48):
Maybe the one upside of using the one of these committees,
which I tend to not like or search firms, is
that they might be having a heart they being the
Wolfs especially, might be having a hard time because of
their their current you know, an ongoing relationship with Brazinski
having a hard time saying well, we actually we love them,
(43:11):
but we want to go rob a different direction. Maybe
that becomes easier if the guidance they get from you know,
this particular operation that they've hired says, well, here's what
we recommend. Ultimately, they have to make the call, but
I'm wondering if that helps in that regard.
Speaker 1 (43:27):
I guess we will.
Speaker 2 (43:28):
See timetable any clue you want to take any stab
at that, Yeah, I.
Speaker 4 (43:34):
Would say it sounds to me like the end of
this week and early next week a lot of these
formal interviews will start to happen like I don't think
any of them have happened to this point. It's been
a lot of filtering out, process feeling out. But I
expect things to really ramp at the end of this
week early next week, and then we'll see about when
they finalize that decision. But it feels like they are
(43:57):
finally starting to get to the place where the process
that is truly beginning.
Speaker 1 (44:02):
Good job on the story today. We appreciate the time.
As always, we'll be in touch. Thank you always. Thank
alec Lewis the athletic.
Speaker 2 (44:10):
On the coaching, I should say the no, we have
a coach, the GM search or President of Football Operations
search or wherever this thing has to be. I'm a
purist man, I'm a traditionalist on this. I don't believe
in triangles of authority. I think you can have if
you're at your best. The best organizations have lots of
(44:31):
different people right who are good at their jobs and
and but you got to have somebody who brings them
all together and says I'm going to listen to you.
We're going to get in the boardroom, we're going to
talk about this stuff. But then ultimately, you know, I
have to make the call, and that to me is
the way it needs to be.
Speaker 1 (44:49):
And I lean as without coming up with names.
Speaker 2 (44:53):
I lean with somebody outside this bubble, because I do
think that everybody needs to be challenged a little bit,
including the head coach, and I think that's easier to
do if you come in from the outside. So we'll
see where that goes, because it's obviously a very critical decision,
and how you set up the pecking order is also
(45:15):
an important part of that story too. Top of the
hour pause, Now remember Russo in about an hour on
the current state of Minnesota. Whild now down two games
to nil. In addition, Kessler at five thirty Wolves are
back in action tonight. Of course, it's game number two
in San Antonio, Dave, I've already its confirmed that Iodsumu
(45:38):
is back and available to the Wolves tonight. Anthony Edwards
will play tonight, we don't yet know. I don't believe
whether he will start. But a guy who knows Anthony well,
worked with Anthony forever, is going to join us next
next with the medical expertise that we have been looking
for on the Anthony Edwards saga this time around, and
(45:59):
we'll have some other injury related questions for him, Doctor
Robbie seeka kind enough to join us.
Speaker 1 (46:04):
After a very short top of the hour pause, Don't
Go
Basis.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
Yu're there's a reason they call them special teams. Leader
Fan Fan Radio Network. Well you know what, and k
fa N dot Com. One minute and fifty six seconds
past the hour of three o'clock Central daylight time, and
welcome you back to a midweek edition of the Bumper
(00:26):
to Bumper program.
Speaker 1 (00:28):
My name's Dan Barrero.
Speaker 2 (00:30):
I am the host of the program we a fictionally
refer to as occasionally the Beast, uh sometimes the Ardvark
Afternoon Ardvark always hosted by the a hole in the afternoon.
That would be me Guards. He's the producer of the
program as well. I wish the news was better on
(00:50):
the hockey front. Yeah, but it's it's dogs and cats
living together right now. It's mass hysteria. The second guessing
officially has begun. We make the goaltender change, and whether
it had eighty percent to do with the game two
(01:12):
loss or ten percent to do the game two loss,
it inevitably becomes a talking point. It seems fairly clear
that Russo Radio, a five h two guest today, has
made his decision. He has gone as scorched earth as
I remember Russo going two games into a series. The
(01:33):
honeymoon is over whatever rap Proschman had existed between Bill
Garren and Russo.
Speaker 1 (01:40):
I think it's over after what he wrote today. Did
you read the.
Speaker 3 (01:43):
Right story or is it like yesterday they tweed out
the wrong story.
Speaker 4 (01:46):
Oh?
Speaker 1 (01:46):
I read it.
Speaker 2 (01:47):
Yeah, I read pretty much all of it, and it
was it was pretty frontal and very very direct. We'll
talk about that with him, as I said, and more
at five oh two. I'm convinced as tempting as it
is for those of us who kind of said, give
the kid one more game, it's easy to say, told
(02:10):
you so because we all are in this business to
look like geniuses.
Speaker 1 (02:15):
Let's be honest about it.
Speaker 2 (02:16):
It's all ego gratification, and when we have the chance,
most of us will not rise above.
Speaker 1 (02:21):
No, we just won't.
Speaker 2 (02:23):
I mean, I'm just trying to be honest about it.
I mean, maybe I'll just speak for myself. I don't
want to throw anybody else under the bus. But it's
just true. So it's tempting, and I don't like it.
Was it two goals and two shots. I don't even
think i'd gotten in my car yet. And the third
goal I hated, like Russo did, that was allowed. But
(02:45):
I don't want to just make this for me about that,
because while I mentioned off the top of the program,
there's a reason they call them the special teams.
Speaker 1 (02:54):
Leader, I know who we don't have in.
Speaker 2 (02:58):
This series, and I know that's affecting our deen. But
the power play is supposed to be a weapon for
a team. It's when you're on it, you're supposed to
have an advantage that might lead to an extra goal
or two. We don't use it that way. We have
(03:20):
not used it that way, and we didn't use it
again that way yesterday did we?
Speaker 1 (03:23):
Last night did not?
Speaker 2 (03:25):
Did not, and we kind of now In fairness to
the special teams discussion, I think we have one short
handed goal when we were on the penalty kill.
Speaker 1 (03:35):
It was a nice moment with the Fino, actually was,
but we and we got away with it.
Speaker 2 (03:41):
One could say because we were so dominant five on
five that it didn't matter in the naw series. But
we ain't Playned Dallas anymore. We ain't playing the Stars anymore.
We're playing quite possibly the best team in hockey, correct,
the Colorado Avs. I still don't know why it's Avs
instead of av Did you ever get an explanation on that?
Speaker 3 (03:59):
I did. I didn't look too much fortant, I didn't
spend too much time. No, maybe today I'll find it. Well,
I just need somebody from the hockey community to explain
it to me. Do you want to shorten it? Just
make it ast Isn't it just the grammar community?
Speaker 1 (04:12):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (04:13):
Is it the grammar community? But why it's not? How
is it a point of grammar? I'm not sure if
your nickname is an entity, an avalanche is a thing.
Speaker 3 (04:22):
It's a singular thing, correct, unless it's the hockey team,
then they make it plural.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
Yeah, but then why don't you call them the avalanches
in the beginning?
Speaker 1 (04:31):
It's a great question.
Speaker 4 (04:32):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
Somebody will get to the bottom of it. It's the
least of the Wild's problems right now, let's face it.
But in any case, I just think I can see
it coming.
Speaker 4 (04:44):
Well.
Speaker 2 (04:44):
Our two best defensive players, one forward one defenseman are.
Speaker 1 (04:49):
Out, and it's just not fair.
Speaker 2 (04:51):
It's setting up that way, and there's I'm not saying
there's some truth to it, but I think that's still
a little bit too easy. When you're on the power
play with other people. We have enough other people on
the power play at least that we should be able
to score more often than we do, and maybe that
would have even taken the pressure off the goalie.
Speaker 1 (05:13):
I don't know.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
I'm not exactly sure, but it's not They're called special
teams for a reason. They are specialties that in any
sport matter, and you could say maybe in hockey more
than any other sport, the special teams are important, right,
whether you're talking about the power play or.
Speaker 1 (05:33):
The penalty kill.
Speaker 2 (05:34):
They ain't a lot of sports in which you might
be at a one man advantage or disadvantage, correct, right?
Speaker 1 (05:42):
Are there any.
Speaker 2 (05:43):
Basketball can't happen unless it's a Gene Hackman movie?
Speaker 1 (05:45):
Well as users.
Speaker 3 (05:46):
I was just talking with one of my kids about that,
that it's the only sport that they'll take somebody out.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
I think maybe in lacrosse they do it, do they?
I think?
Speaker 4 (05:53):
So?
Speaker 1 (05:53):
What about soccer? Soccer?
Speaker 2 (05:56):
I think if you get a red card, I don't
think you can replace that guy. Although red cards pretty rare,
is it not? Yes, So there's a couple.
Speaker 3 (06:04):
But out of the main sports, the Big four, the
core four, hockey's the one where they'll let you have
a man or even two man advantage for two to
four to five minutes. Yes, it's a nice little feather
to have if you can use it the right way.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
You have to take advantage of it at some point,
and we haven't. Now this is series number two. It's
almost like it's almost like we've written it off. And
that's too easy, because that is part of how you
ascend and part of how you excel in the postseason.
Speaker 1 (06:38):
I just look, series doesn't have to be over.
Speaker 2 (06:41):
We haven't played a home game yet. Who's to say
where it's going. It doesn't look particularly promising at this point.
I'm going to be very curious to find out whether
we keep Gus Buss in net.
Speaker 1 (06:53):
For Game three or whether we go back to Volstett again.
Speaker 2 (06:59):
Russo, our five o'clock guest indicates they're both annoyed right now,
and that's never a good sign in terms of their
clipped off answers, body language.
Speaker 1 (07:10):
Et cetera. This goalies got to buck up at well,
it's to a certain extent. It's the nature of it. Yeah,
I have to this is what happens, is it?
Speaker 2 (07:16):
Yeah?
Speaker 1 (07:17):
Well, which I think so? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (07:18):
Well, but if it's not then you lose anyway, if
you for some reason, they're pouting, and I don't know
that they are, but that would seem that was the
implication of the of the piece that I that I read.
I cannot replace the red card. They play short the
rest of the game, and the player that gets the
red card can't play the next game, but the team
doesn't play short the next game.
Speaker 1 (07:37):
That's one of our soccer suggesting. So again, I.
Speaker 2 (07:45):
All, I'm trying to throw out there now. I'm trying
to get ahead of the excuses because they're already being
thrown out. Basically as this series isn't looking good, but
we're going to mitigate the loss because it's Colorado, they're
really good. And secondly, we're missing two really important players
(08:06):
in Rodein and is it ericson X at the other Yeah,
and neither is expected back. I don't think in this
series at all. Right, it may even be longer than that.
For Dan, it sounds like for sure. Yeah, ecky, there's
this open ended maybe let's see. But I don't think
it sounds good either. Yeah, I don't know. I'm just
I don't want it reduced to just the injuries. I
(08:28):
don't even necessarily want it reduced to the goaltender I
want is it too much to ask that somewhere along
the road that our special teams become special? It's been,
let's face it, to varying degrees, and I'm going issue
forever here.
Speaker 1 (08:41):
That's what I was going to say.
Speaker 3 (08:42):
You mentioned the two series, I would say, how about
the last decade?
Speaker 4 (08:45):
Yes?
Speaker 3 (08:46):
And even Russo tweeted about that today when given the
numbers that the Wild special teams have been bad. I
think his response was, every year, it's something we talk
about every year. How many how many different times have
we talked about it? In the season ending press conference?
I can probably find the Dean Evison Maybe I'll find
it with it. I mean, we brought in like Yo,
(09:08):
if anybody any other coaches we've it's become an issue.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
Boudreaux was an issue.
Speaker 3 (09:12):
Do we need to apologize to Zach Parisi? Maybe we
do for bringing in his own power play specials.
Speaker 1 (09:17):
Yeah that's true.
Speaker 2 (09:18):
Maybe he was that desperate. May's that was the plea
for you to him as possible. Let's get to the
most pressing matter, right Tendo out of Minneapolis. Can you
get Larry Mindella guy on the air to explain his
honest sports take yesterday? His fellow listeners are still concerned. Yeah, Carries, Yeah,
we haven't had an explanation. Larry Mandella Guy offered what
(09:41):
seemed to be an earnest sports observation yesterday, and it
just threw me off. I wasn't ready for it. And
then I thought, well, maybe I'm missing a really good
Maybe he's so clever in that unch line that I've
missed it.
Speaker 3 (09:54):
He does that a lot in Doctor Dan's inbox too.
I have to think about it, and there's some I
don't read because I know it's too deep in two layered.
Speaker 1 (10:02):
Why is it the.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
Toronto maple leafs not the maple leaves?
Speaker 1 (10:07):
Is it with an f.
Speaker 3 (10:10):
F s?
Speaker 2 (10:10):
Why is it not maple leaves? And there's so many
of these hockey.
Speaker 1 (10:14):
Say it's quirky. It's a quirky game. Who know? Who knew?
You don't have to get analytical with everything?
Speaker 4 (10:21):
Dan?
Speaker 1 (10:21):
Just call them the avs. I don't want to call them.
Speaker 2 (10:23):
I want to call them the av I want to
shorten it to I want to start a revolution.
Speaker 3 (10:28):
The only thing I'm seeing online yes is like a
Reddit thread for when you say av.
Speaker 2 (10:34):
Why don't you spell it a ve like avenue? But
you're spelling it like ave. No one's really tackled. I
think you're the first to nobody. Nobody's gonna nobody's gonna
conf if you If you bring it up in the
context of after a hockey game, people are gonna think
you're talking about the avenue or they're gonna talk about.
Speaker 1 (10:51):
The hockey team, just saying what's online? All right?
Speaker 2 (10:54):
Yeah, the lanch i. We have used lanch before. That's
very true. Throwing stones from a glass house. Aren't you
ann making fun of the Avs? Isn't your favorite hockey
team named after a freaking adjective?
Speaker 4 (11:09):
Up?
Speaker 2 (11:09):
Hashtag up two oh hashtag go Avs go? That is
from six five to one guy?
Speaker 1 (11:17):
Huh? Interesting?
Speaker 2 (11:19):
Rest of the guest lineup today, pretty deep and distinguished.
Kessler five thirty in studio I mentioned Russo at five
oh two. Doctor Robbie Seka, formerly of the Wolves, although
maybe he'll clarify if he's still got some official or
unofficial connection with the team he used.
Speaker 1 (11:36):
To work with on all On. I think his fancy
title is like VP.
Speaker 2 (11:40):
Yeah, he's big time, big time, and we're gonna chat
with him about the Anthony Edwards recovery. He was involved
in a video that made the rounds yesterday that you
brought to my attention that sort of laid out the
Anthony Edwards history. And it'll be a good opportunity to
get into the ongoing issue of the the the never
ending paranoia about what any kind of calf injuries.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
Yes, right, absolutely so.
Speaker 2 (12:05):
For example, Well, if if I was worried about his
calf leading to an achilles, my assumption was there was
a chance he might not play at all this series. Well,
it turns out now he's back exactly upgraded to available tonight.
So what distinguishes not all calf injuries I assume can
be alike. He'll be able to answer all those kinds
(12:26):
of questions because that is one of his specialties.
Speaker 1 (12:30):
Five oh seven.
Speaker 2 (12:31):
I wants to know why it is the Minnesota wild
and not the Minnesota Mild. He would if we don't
come back in one game too, he wouldn't be saying no,
he wouldn't be. But we didn't win two and now
particularly close. We're down two games to nil coming back home.
We got is it four days off?
Speaker 1 (12:47):
Five? We play Saturdays? Whatever that math is Bagnerian opera
in between, right, and what's the reason it's arena availability,
isn't it? And that have something to do with the schedule.
Speaker 3 (12:56):
The cross play here, I know, tomorrow night and then
there's something else on Friday.
Speaker 2 (13:00):
I think Frost complaining about injuries. I don't think so
about that overtime game. That's all they do. One ton
they lost, I know, but it was I see that's
old school hockey. I love a low scoring game. So
a triple overtime hockey game, zero zero, the only goal
of the game wins it. I almost got in my
(13:21):
car and I think that game was in Montreal, wasn't it?
Speaker 1 (13:23):
It was.
Speaker 3 (13:25):
Drive What do we got the fandom? Big deck dot com. Yes,
they want to give you a shot to win bonus bucks.
It is our national cash contest. First keyword of the
afternoon is win. W I n go to kfan dot
com and enter the keyword win. A quick closer going
to chat Abbott.
Speaker 1 (13:39):
It wasn't me.
Speaker 4 (14:03):
Like the way that we were playing the game.
Speaker 5 (14:06):
You know, obviously going in and as Billy said, we
as a coaching staff are extremely frustrated with as you
guys have just talked about the same things that happened
last year with our power play and our penalty kill. Yeah,
we were much improved during the regular season, and we
put a huge emphasis on that when we got to
(14:27):
the spot where we needed it to be better than
it was obviously last year, and then obviously through the
regular season.
Speaker 4 (14:34):
It was not.
Speaker 2 (14:40):
Interesting SoundBite that Guargie has uncovered. I'll leave it to
the audience to identify that voice and if you're really
intrepid the year that particular observation was offered up by
said coach brat Jahn Bryant camfan text line is open
at six four six eight six uh nine four nine
(15:05):
Guy Rights, I'm sorry for being mean you guys. Seriously, though,
why can't we talk about being undisciplined. We have no
problems dripping special teams, but why not say why we
need our penalty kills so much? We get stupid penalties,
especially Hartman. Didn't we have a spade of penalties in
period three?
Speaker 1 (15:22):
Yeah?
Speaker 3 (15:23):
Yeah, the Welmber bad luck like Apriesoff just smoked the
guy in the face. Yeah, you know, working for the puck, right,
but then there's others that are just bad. Well that
and that's not a subject we've ignored over the period
of time that this team has struggled in a certainly postseason,
and even a warning during the last series after the
penalties early in that series as well against the Dallas Stars.
Speaker 1 (15:46):
So yeah, it's all. It's all part of it.
Speaker 2 (15:49):
I just am not ready to put it all on
the goaltending, even though, like I said, I probably would
not have made the switch. I think it just becomes
too easy.
Speaker 1 (16:04):
To make it all about about that. I you know, in.
Speaker 2 (16:08):
All honesty, I leaned keeping Volstead, but Louis and I
talked about this yesterday and we both and Louis was
in favor of the change, yep, but we both said
the same thing on the debate team I can I
can argue either side of it.
Speaker 1 (16:26):
I really can't.
Speaker 2 (16:27):
It's not I mean, we gave up nine goals, well eight, Yeah,
if you factor in the empty night, that's it. That's
a lot of goals. I mean that that so ordinarily,
just doing that one time in a playoff series against
a really good team is often enough. If you feel
(16:48):
like you have another goaltender to make a switch. It's
not that radical a change. I mean when I've been
down on radical changes in the past. It's when when
when you know we've got a guy who in well,
was it the game?
Speaker 1 (17:02):
One game was a twenty three?
Speaker 2 (17:05):
A guy gets fifty five saves and saves us in
double overtime, and you go with flower next game, right,
or even at the end of the season, one goaltender
is going.
Speaker 1 (17:16):
That goes back to the Talbot days.
Speaker 2 (17:17):
Right, So I think it if I'm being fair, as
easy as it is to want it to be, as
tempting as it is to say, yeah, the whole goaltending
vibe got screwed up.
Speaker 1 (17:30):
Terrible decision, Look what happened. They lost another game.
Speaker 2 (17:34):
I think if you're honest about it, all bets can
be off after one performance like that, especially if you
believe in your heart that you've got a guy go
now what he was that was seven straven?
Speaker 1 (17:48):
It makes sense, so, you.
Speaker 2 (17:50):
Know, don't I just don't think it's out it's defensive.
It's definitely defensible. It's not outlandish, I would say, And
I just think there's more going on right now, and
if we had a better power play, maybe that tilts
it too, you know, back in the other direction where
we're not, you're at least having a better chance to win.
There is also the out outside possibility that there's a
(18:11):
reason they won I think regular season nine more games
than we did.
Speaker 1 (18:14):
They're really good. They're they're they're probably they would.
Speaker 2 (18:17):
I mean, the the odds makers have them as they
had them at the as the favorite before the playoffs started,
right to.
Speaker 1 (18:23):
Win the cup the opponent.
Speaker 3 (18:25):
The opponent has a say too, like the opponent just
straight up has to say and the wilder up against it.
And I don't know if one decision is obviously, last
night was not great. I mean we mentioned two shots,
two goals, and one of them I don't even think
one of them was on the their power play. I
don't even know if Joe O'Donnell had like finished announcing
(18:46):
the penalty and they'd already scored. It was that quick
right yes after the while that's correct, got back yes
right away to tie it to one one.
Speaker 1 (18:53):
Things were happening fast.
Speaker 3 (18:55):
Yeah, the Avs are really really good and but but
everything is magnified decision to make. In fact, the special
teams are magnified. That's why they put so much pressure
on you in the Wild. For whatever the reason, it
just we also are aware the the the Wild's power
play this regular season has been was better that it's been,
but it just has to when Quinnesota got here. That's true,
(19:15):
it just hasn't translated obviously at all to the to
the postseason. Tony writes that the Buffalo Sabers are intentionally
misspelled to ingratiate themselves to French Canadian fans directed from
the owner when the team was formed. It's the French
spelling of the word sabers that's kind of interesting. And
the Toronto maple Leafs are not named after the leaves
(19:39):
they are not is not at all related to a tree.
I'll leave that there because there there is more to
the story. But I don't want to get too far
behind schedule, but we will, we will. Indeed, I think
it's it's like a military unit, if I'm not mistaken,
So I don't think it's it's not related to the
(20:00):
So if we got into the issue.
Speaker 1 (20:01):
Of leaf, I leave leaf. You know they're called the
maple leafs, yeah, rather than the maple leaves.
Speaker 2 (20:07):
I actually absolutely do not know. I'm just we're learning
so much. We also have learned that Iodasumu has been
upgraded to available tonight for the Wolves. I haven't heard
any update on who starts, whether we go at the
same formula we did for Game one in San Antonio,
Davy and keep Anthony Edwards off the bench. I think
(20:29):
that would probably be the prudent thing to two, But
I don't know how they decide how many minutes he
might be available. The word going into the game one
was twenty five minutes, So I would say, hang with that.
I'm never gonna want to concede a game. Okay, no
on the road, never, not in the playoffs. But I
(20:51):
will also say, you got a game on the road already.
So I want to do everything in my power to
make sure Anthony Edwards is the best he can be
for this entire series. Now that it looks like there's
a good chance that it is going to be a
long series as well, has anybody now determined that all
twelve block shots should have been called goaltending for the
(21:13):
The number keeps going up. First it was three, Yeah,
then it was four. Yeah, Now I'm hearing six or seven.
Speaker 3 (21:20):
But also, don't forget, we're not even we're not even
talking about the goaltends.
Speaker 1 (21:24):
Some of them are fouls too.
Speaker 2 (21:25):
That's if you take all twelve, you can find something
wrong with all with all twelve of the Wenby blocks. Well,
I get you know, I say this all the time.
You got no credibility if you whine in a loss.
The advantage the Wolves and Finchy have is they won
the game, So it's I think it's easier to listen
to him whining. Yeah, after a victory. It sounds better
(21:47):
than when you do it after a setback.
Speaker 3 (21:50):
It should have been a route if you listen to Finchy,
we should have won by twenty four points. Think about
if we got all the goaltends and we made just
like sixty percent of our free games, we would have
been when even had to play the fourth quarter.
Speaker 2 (22:01):
It might have been double digits. Yeah, is what it
might have been. That's for sure. Yeah, here's Wally should
have played last night and penalties are killing us. Okay, yeah,
I get it. We'll get into that in more detail
with Russo at five h two. Much more on the
Minnesota Timberwolves. Have you seen the results of the latest
anonymous NBA player's poll. No, it's going to drive you insane.
(22:26):
Oh no, it's fascinating and it is the latest reminder
that when it comes to evaluation of players, nobody is
less qualified to.
Speaker 1 (22:39):
Do so than other players.
Speaker 2 (22:40):
It's astounding, or better way to put it is, players
are less likely to rise above their own petty jealousies
and biases than media members would in voting for various categories.
Speaker 1 (22:54):
There's some really good stuff for us to discuss there
as well.
Speaker 2 (22:57):
How about some football I didn't think we were, but
Alex Lewis is back with one of those you guessed it?
Speaker 1 (23:02):
What I learned?
Speaker 2 (23:04):
What I'm hearing stories this time having to do with
the possibility. Dare I call it probability that the Vikings
are on the verge of bringing back an old reliable,
an old favorite. The triangle of authority will have Alec
Lewis explain when we return, keep your drinks and your
(23:39):
phones away from the equipment. That's a very important radio
mantra or mantraze. I guess it would be a plural
in this case that I have learned over the decades.
Brumbert of Bumper is the name of the program The
Afternoon Ardvark, hosted by me the A Hole in the Afternoon.
We have an outstanding bevy of guests today, Kessler in
(24:00):
studio at five thirty Russo Radio five oh two, Doctor
Robbie Sinka, Sika, I should say at four two, formerly
of the Wolves but still closely aligned with Anthony Edwards
and Alex lewis kind of enough to join us now
via the kinnecticot Water Systems hotline. I had intended originally
(24:21):
to just take a break from any Vikings stuff, and
then you send out one of these. I assume it's
a directive from the top at the Athletic what I'm hearing,
and then it's you know, what I'm hearing about a
possible trade, or what I'm hearing about the quarterback situation,
or what I'm hearing in this case about the Viking
search for a new general manager.
Speaker 1 (24:42):
And it sucked me right in again.
Speaker 2 (24:43):
So is that the new bit that you have to
start the headline with what I'm hearing?
Speaker 4 (24:49):
Absolutely, I mean it got you, so obviously the directive
is paying off. But no, the Athletic goes in these
phases where I think years ago was like this three
pronged headline. You do three interesting words and then a
toll in and then a headline. So yeah, it's it's uh.
I just I just go with with uh. You know
(25:11):
what they tell me. Guys like John and Russo and gleaming.
They can probably be more creative. I'm just I just
don't have that, you know, cachet. Yet I would say,
all right.
Speaker 2 (25:20):
You did not use the term, even though you alluded
to the very construction it represents once upon a time,
the vikings, I guess you could say managerial approach at
the top when it comes to you know, power centers.
Was I guess what we would say unofficially referred to
(25:43):
and sometimes derisively referred to as the triangle of authority
round among three different people. This goes back obviously to
the to the Spielman era. So you allude to it
as among the possibilities. Did you throw it in there
just to get people going, or do you go did
you throw it out there because you think on the
basis of what you've reported and heard of this what
(26:05):
you've heard, all right, you are hearing to this point
that it's actually a possibility.
Speaker 4 (26:11):
Yeah, I definitely didn't throw it in there to you know,
frustrate people on a Wednesday where they're excited about what
the wolves are doing. More so for me, I mean,
it was a device to I think, try to explain
where this thing could go from a search perspective, and
I'll just say, like from the top around the league,
(26:34):
there is a lot of intrigue and what the Vikings
are going to do here. I think some of that
intrigue is more of a question of, you know, what
is what is the timeline of this process that was
delayed after the draft that is now a week plus
removed from the draft and just beginning interviews, Like I
(26:55):
think there are just people within the league that have
a lot of questions about the timeline involved. But the
best way that I know I knew how to describe
where I think one path of this thing could go
is where you do have multiple types of leaders essentially
where Rob Razinski's expertise is unquestionable in terms of his
(27:18):
negotiator cap, you know, just wits about him, and then
you'd have a personnel type of executive slash leader and
those two would probably be working in tandem with a
coaching staff that has garnered Morseway in recent years. So
that was the thought behind kind of referring to that
(27:39):
previous structure that the Wolfs had in place.
Speaker 1 (27:42):
Is there?
Speaker 2 (27:43):
And you I think to explore this one of the
obvious concerns and this just did come up back in
the triangle days. I think to a certain extent, is
I who breaks the ties? Who's in charge? How do
we know who is the person that is responsible for everything?
Speaker 1 (27:58):
And do these sorts of I guess you could say approach.
Speaker 2 (28:02):
Does this sort of approach contribute to the notion that
the answer is.
Speaker 1 (28:07):
We don't know?
Speaker 4 (28:09):
Yeah? I mean I think that's the biggest and it's
it's everything.
Speaker 6 (28:13):
It is which which staff reports to whom?
Speaker 4 (28:15):
Yes, it is which which executive makes decision on whether
to retain or bring in different staffers? It is you know,
does does the president of.
Speaker 6 (28:26):
Football operations type of person control the coaching staff? I
mean all of those questions, which, frankly, we've asked a
lot of these questions in recent years about where the
Vikings organization is. Like the they remain cloudy and murky,
and so part of what is is also interesting, quoth
to me and people within the league, is how I
(28:48):
would say non transparent the Vikings ownership has been and
is being on this specific process. And so I think
the more kind of I don't know murc key nature
in terms of where they land with this structure, the
more questions I think they're gonna have to answer from
people internally and externally about how they believe this then
(29:10):
leads to a result that obviously they have not been
able to obtain in their two decades of ownership.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
What is Turnkey z RG.
Speaker 4 (29:21):
Yeah, it's a search firm that is really widely used
in college sports and in college athletics. It's been huge
in the college football space. And the primary executive who
is involved with this cert with this search and a
lot of them in college football is a guy named
(29:43):
Chad Shatlows. He participated, for example, in the hiring process
that Indiana had with Kurse Signetti. He worked with Texas
on Steve Sarkeesian believe he was one of the primary
people involved in the Big Twelve making a big missioner
higher uh plucking an executive from Rock Nation the agency.
(30:04):
So they haven't worked as much within the NFL space.
Atlanta did work with them, the Falcons did recently this
past spring, and so I mean there are a lot
of perspectives on what their role is here with with
this Viking search. I think there are some people within
the league who think it's more of an interference to
(30:25):
what the Vikings actually want to get done. I think
other people believe that they can be an objective voice
and ownerships here when at a time where this organization
probably doesn't have a lot of objective football voices in
the front office.
Speaker 2 (30:39):
How much concern So it is pretty rare for the
for pro teams to use this, this this idea of
a search a turnkey ZRG for example, It is do
we know why the wilsh felt this was needed, that
they didn't have enough trust and faith and you know,
(31:00):
their own ability to put some things together.
Speaker 1 (31:04):
Why we why do we need this.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
When a lot of other NFL teams have made I
think you could say in some cases successful hires not
always without going through this part of the process.
Speaker 4 (31:15):
It's a great question, and you're correct, it is not.
It has not been crazy prevalent within the NFL space.
I mean, first and foremost, it comes across when it's
like you're working with the search firm, like you have
a distinct strategy in place. So there is a perception
part of that as well. And I also say, I mean,
(31:36):
the argument can definitely be made and I can understand
it of as NFL owners, you're making this lead executive
football higher or you hope to be like I mean,
once or twice a decade, potentially three times a decade,
and so your expertise of who is within the space,
the agents within the space pales in comparison to those
(31:57):
like the search firm Turnkeys RG, which is working in
the space day to day. But I mean there are
a lot of people who will who will you know?
And people have talked to stakeholders involved who were like,
is this absolutely necessary when a lot of the the
candidates are pretty widely known and easy to access.
Speaker 2 (32:17):
Is there any reason to believe now? Of course, these
are valuable jobs. They don't come around all the time.
And to a certain extent, one assumes that if you
have a chance to run a football an NFL football operation,
you're gonna take it, because you know, you don't know
if you're gonna have a second shot. There are some
assets here. But is there any reason to believe that
(32:41):
there might be some hesitation on the part of a
couple of would be candidates, let's say, from outside the building,
who might even have other options, not maybe now the
same year, but maybe down the road they go.
Speaker 1 (32:55):
You know, I like a lot of what they do.
Speaker 2 (32:59):
There's certain the cupboard's not bear, But I'm not sure
I'm gonna be able to run it because I keep
hearing over and over and over again for media jackals
like Alec Lewis and others that there is no organization
in football where the head coach has more influence and
maybe even the defensive coordinator has more influence.
Speaker 1 (33:20):
So are these.
Speaker 2 (33:21):
Guys gonna accept me being the boss in a way
that could end up make me making me say, you know,
I'm not quite so sure.
Speaker 1 (33:30):
Is that gonna enter into any of this? Do you believe? Yeah?
Speaker 4 (33:34):
I mean absolutely, it's it's already come up for me
with agents in the coaching space who are very aware
of the dynamic. It's part of their job. But as
they are conferring with their clients on what the potential
opportunities are and specifically this opportunity, like you know, it's
(33:55):
part of the just direct look at what this job offers.
I wrote this today. But it's like the Vikings organization
has a fund to like that ownership has made a
lot of investments. The coaching staff is widely respected within
the NFL. You have a superstar and Justin Jefferson, and
all of that is is valid and and well and good.
(34:16):
And when you're offering someone a title bump and a
pay bump, you know, typically they're gonna be very willing
to listen. But there are the dynamics that you just referenced,
Dan that are are in the minds of people when
it comes to how much way will I really have?
Will I be able to put my stamp on this
front office or not? How much is this you just
(34:37):
title and and and kind of optics as opposed to
legitimate potential to instill a vision like those are the
questions that ownership's gonna have to answer within this process.
Those are questions that Andrew Miller, the CEO, is gonna
have to answer throughout this process. Those are questions that
Turnkey is gonna have to answer throughout this process. And
(34:57):
the fact that it doesn't feel, at least in my
conversations like there is clarity within those answers, I think
just creates more need for, I don't know, for ownership
to make it abundantly clear.
Speaker 2 (35:12):
Towards the end of the piece we're chatting with Alec
Lewis covers the NFL and the vikings for the Athletic.
You write the following Chief Operating Officer Andrew Miller featured
prominently in the Adolpha Mensa hire and extension. The Vikings
said they would support the process with a small internal
advisory committee, and he figures to be in that group.
On the football side, you write the Vikings are in
(35:34):
more of a pickle Brazinski. Rob Brazinski typically participates in
these decisions. His candidacy not only affects his sway, but
also as the potential to cloud the judgment of other
senior football officials. To me, it's obvious he can't be
on what it's self evident. He can't be on the
committee if he's a candidate and wants to be a candidate.
(35:55):
The objectivity problem is pretty clear. The question that intre
me is you mentioned O'Connell, as you know that his
perspective should matter. I thought somebody already said the internal
committee or somebody already wrote that O'Connell's going to be
on that committee. So I'll ask you the question. And
(36:16):
maybe I am being naive because I get as you right,
you got to have a good relationship between the head
coach and whoever you hire, right, there's got to be
some kind of meeting of the minds.
Speaker 1 (36:27):
But again, there's still part of.
Speaker 2 (36:29):
Me that says, well, wait a minute, how if he's
in the evaluation process again, how does that look to
the guy who is interviewing for the for the job.
I almost feel like you I would rather have. I mean,
is is Kaos going to be governed by the right
things in terms of how he evaluates or is he
(36:51):
going to say, well, I think with this guy, I'm
gonna have a lot more sway than with this other guy.
So you tell me what the rule is in the
league in this situation like this, how much power do
you want to grant the coach even if he's grandfathered
in and obviously continues to be the head coach of
the team when it comes to the hardcore evaluate personnel
evaluation necessary.
Speaker 4 (37:13):
Yeah, I mean, I think this conversation is one that
I mean, we talked about and I think it's I
think it's really important for where this team is and
where this team wants to go. I mean, typically you
read anything, you go back and read Bill Walsh's books,
and and just like history of the league and former executives,
(37:34):
you're going to hear a lot of the same things
of the coach is typically a short term oriented thinker,
and you often need the general manager to have a
perspective on the long term, but you also need I
mean the word that the phrase whatever the alignment is important.
That doesn't always mean that they have to agree on everything,
(37:56):
but when there are disagreements, they have to be work
through and expectfully from both sides. And that obviously did
not exist with former GM quasi do fo mensa. And
getting to a place regardless where that does exist, I
think is the central challenge. I was saying this to
somebody earlier day, like it is a fine needle to
(38:16):
thread in a lot of ways with this situation, and
you know, I threading needles is not the place you
probably want to live in all the time and anything.
And so I do think it's a really interesting conversation
of how much sway should Ken O'Connell have with this
decision if you if you don't, you know, give him
(38:37):
license to have a say does the marriage eventually? You know,
is there less probability that it works? And if it's
not him, then who internally is going to be the
voice that ownership trust on the football side. There's not
a clear answer to that. When you remove Robert Zinski
from the equation.
Speaker 1 (38:53):
Yeah, that's it. That is what makes it interesting.
Speaker 2 (38:55):
So my concern, and it might be ill advised you're
around there every day, I'm obviously not. My concern is
the country club mentality a little bit. It's it's how
I used to refer to the wolves in the Kevin O.
Kale and Flip Saunders days when they were routinely getting
to the playoffs and then losing first.
Speaker 1 (39:16):
Round and seem kinda just like stuck in mud.
Speaker 2 (39:19):
And they briefly brought in a coach outside the country
club named Dwayne Casey, but almost as quickly as he
was here, the handwriting was on the wall because he
wasn't with these guys all the time.
Speaker 1 (39:30):
He was on the outside looking in. He wasn't going
to have a chance.
Speaker 2 (39:33):
And in fact, midway through one of his seasons, in
fact they were five hundred team, they fired him and
brought in another member of the country club, a guy
named Randy Whipman. And it left me with the feeling
that there are times if you're all in it together right,
there is the concern that you're gonna sort of reinforce
(39:54):
each other because you've all got your places of power
and you love it, and it's good to be in
that position forever and ever, and you're not going to
turn on each other because hey, it's a country club.
We're all you know, we all still got good jobs.
And it makes me wonder whether this is a perfect
situation in which what the Vikings need right now more
than anything else is a voice from the outside. It
(40:15):
doesn't even have to be a rip at Brazinski, but
a belief that is it gotten too cozy with let's
face it, good regular season results every other year, but
no postseason.
Speaker 1 (40:27):
Success to speak of.
Speaker 2 (40:28):
And is it possible that what you need more than
anything else is somebody who's got very few ties outside
the country club who comes in with a fresh look
at pretty much everything.
Speaker 1 (40:41):
What do you think about that?
Speaker 4 (40:44):
Yeah, I mean I just as you were talking, like,
part of my mind just goes to, like what Tim
Connolly has been able to do. And obviously he was accomplished, Yes,
had been a GM and you know, had experience, but
I think like the injection of a different way of
thinking has benefited that organization at a level that is
(41:05):
I'm astronomical and I'm I mean, one of my fascinations
in doing this job is like, what are the best doing,
how are the best thinking about it? What is leading
to the maximumount of success throughout the league? And I
think if you look around and you look at an
organization like Seattle that has done a great job, well
what have they done? They have a GM who has
(41:28):
a lot of scouting connections and experience, but also a
ton of feel and awareness and leadership to be able
to really just direct the organization at an optimal level.
You look at the Eagles and Howie Roseman like that
is a GM centric organization of a guy who who
you know, is very sharp and knows how to seek
(41:50):
different realms of thought. And so like those organizations and
the structure they have is not I mean, it is
not a coaching drink of an operation. So uh, I
think the the perspective that a lot of people have
of bringing in somebody with a different level of experience
and different exposure totally makes sense to me. I also
(42:13):
can understand the perspective of to navigate this specific situation.
Having someone like Rob Razinski who understands the dynamic dynamics
better than anybody else gives it the best, you know,
probability of being able to work in the long haul.
So I mean I I can see it both ways.
I typically I think me personally, I love outside thought
(42:36):
that is very sharp and intelligent. But how they go
about this, I don't think it's clear in terms of
whether they will stay with the perspective that they've had
internally or well whether they will shift. You know.
Speaker 2 (42:48):
Maybe the one upside of using the one of these committees,
which I tend to not like or search firms, is
that they might be having a heart they being the
Wolfs especially, might be having a hard time because of
their their current you know, an ongoing relationship with Brazinski
having a hard time saying well, we actually we love them,
(43:11):
but we want to go rob a different direction. Maybe
that becomes easier if the guidance they get from you know,
this particular operation that they've hired says, well, here's what
we recommend. Ultimately, they have to make the call, but
I'm wondering if that helps in that regard.
Speaker 1 (43:27):
I guess we will.
Speaker 2 (43:28):
See timetable any clue you want to take any stab
at that, Yeah, I.
Speaker 4 (43:34):
Would say it sounds to me like the end of
this week and early next week a lot of these
formal interviews will start to happen like I don't think
any of them have happened to this point. It's been
a lot of filtering out, process feeling out. But I
expect things to really ramp at the end of this
week early next week, and then we'll see about when
they finalize that decision. But it feels like they are
(43:57):
finally starting to get to the place where the process
that is truly beginning.
Speaker 1 (44:02):
Good job on the story today. We appreciate the time.
As always, we'll be in touch. Thank you always. Thank
alec Lewis the athletic.
Speaker 2 (44:10):
On the coaching, I should say the no, we have
a coach, the GM search or President of Football Operations
search or wherever this thing has to be. I'm a
purist man, I'm a traditionalist on this. I don't believe
in triangles of authority. I think you can have if
you're at your best. The best organizations have lots of
(44:31):
different people right who are good at their jobs and
and but you got to have somebody who brings them
all together and says I'm going to listen to you.
We're going to get in the boardroom, we're going to
talk about this stuff. But then ultimately, you know, I
have to make the call, and that to me is
the way it needs to be.
Speaker 1 (44:49):
And I lean as without coming up with names.
Speaker 2 (44:53):
I lean with somebody outside this bubble, because I do
think that everybody needs to be challenged a little bit,
including the head coach, and I think that's easier to
do if you come in from the outside. So we'll
see where that goes, because it's obviously a very critical decision,
and how you set up the pecking order is also
(45:15):
an important part of that story too. Top of the
hour pause, Now remember Russo in about an hour on
the current state of Minnesota. Whild now down two games
to nil. In addition, Kessler at five thirty Wolves are
back in action tonight. Of course, it's game number two
in San Antonio, Dave, I've already its confirmed that Iodsumu
(45:38):
is back and available to the Wolves tonight. Anthony Edwards
will play tonight, we don't yet know. I don't believe
whether he will start. But a guy who knows Anthony well,
worked with Anthony forever, is going to join us next
next with the medical expertise that we have been looking
for on the Anthony Edwards saga this time around, and
(45:59):
we'll have some other injury related questions for him, Doctor
Robbie seeka kind enough to join us.
Speaker 1 (46:04):
After a very short top of the hour pause, Don't
Go
Popular Podcasts
Joy 101 with Hoda Kotb
Joy is essential. And it's also elusive. You can't order it, borrow it, or simply hope it into life. But now, there's a new and exciting way to start your journey toward a more joyful existence: The Joy 101 Podcast with Hoda! Best known for her Emmy-winning work and co-anchoring Today, Hoda Kotb infuses her authenticity, curiosity, and warmth into conversations with the world’s most fascinating people. Entertainment legends, sport icons, wellness experts, and everyday folks will share how they find, allow, and experience joy. Hoda will offer her own tips and takes on seeking a more balanced, harmonious life. If you're craving inspiration, support, and useful tools to maximize your joy, tune in to these candid, uplifting, and moving on-air chats. Joy after a breakup, joy as an empty-nester, joy after loss, joy as a caretaker — Hoda's new podcast will speak to you. Joy 101 with Hoda Kotb, an iHeartPodcast.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com