ESPN NFL

Yes, the start of training camps is two months away, but it’s never too early to consider the coming season. A look at the best-case and worst-case scenarios for the Minnesota Vikings in 2012.

Dream scenario (9-7): Quarterback Christian Ponder makes a big leap in his second season, spurred in part by confidence in his new offensive line. Ponder makes good use of his two pass-catching tight ends, Kyle Rudolph and John Carlson, and either Jerome Simpson or Greg Childs provides a legitimate downfield threat. Tailback Adrian Peterson (knee) is back to full strength early in the season, if not in Week 1. The Vikings get a big return on overhauling the middle of their defense and aren't hindered by starting one rookie safety (Harrison Smith) and perhaps two (with Robert Blanton). In a tough division, they're thrilled to finish with a winning record.

Nightmare scenario (3-13): The Vikings show no improvement from 2011, giving them a three-year record of 12-36. Ponder's inconsistency raises questions about his future with the franchise. Peterson returns but isn't a dominant runner any longer. The defense implodes because of its inexperience and lack of playmakers in the back end. It's clear the franchise has another year or more to go before matching the rest of the division.

And you thought we were done with this silliness.

Out of respect to those of you with stadium fatigue, I've stayed out of the anticlimactic (and little-known) final stage of the Minnesota Vikings' stadium approval process. But for the record, we should remind everyone that the final bill must be approved by the Minneapolis City Council, and further, that two-day process began Thursday.

I'll let Minnesota Public Radio explain the details if you're interested. In essence, the council approved the bill in a preliminary vote, an outcome that has been considered inevitable since a majority of council members pledged support in March.

The final vote will take place Friday and is expected to mirror Thursday's 7-6 decision. Design and construction planning will begin immediately afterward.

Related: Grantland.com's Steve Marsh explains the stadium story through the eyes of a Minnesotan.

First in a series of posts on NFC North rookies who have generated some spring buzz.

One of the most consistent suggestions I received in the wake of last week's request was for more discussion about intriguing rookies, who in many ways represent the first stop of hope and excitement for the upcoming season. So let's start with Minnesota Vikings receiver Greg Childs, a fourth-round pick who has just emerged from an 18-month recovery from a serious knee injury.

In October 2010, Childs was projected as one of college football's best NFL receiver prospects before tearing the patella tendon in his right knee. Doctors told him it could take up to a year and a half to recover fully, which would have cost him his final season at Arkansas. Childs decided to play in 2011, but as it turned out, he might have been better off sitting out.

His 21 receptions were less than half of his 2010 total, and he put a season's worth of slow route running and minimal separation on tape for NFL scouts. He wasn't much better at the February scouting combine, running the 40-yard dash in 4.55 seconds, and suddenly one of the best receivers of 2010 was on track to be a mid-round draft choice.

The Vikings were encouraged by a better performance at his pro day; at 6-foot-3 and nearly 220 pounds, Childs ran a 4.41 and hit 41.5 inches on his vertical leap. Many fans are no doubt miffed that the Vikings didn't devote more resources toward upgrading their downfield passing attack, but if Childs is truly recovered from the patella injury, they might well get away with it.

Childs seems quite aware of his opportunity, telling the "Vikings Tonight" radio show that "I definitely have a chip on my shoulder," adding that he wants to "show everyone that I can still be one of the top receivers and that I will be a steal of this draft."

Indeed, draft analyst Matt Waldman -- writing for The New York Times last month -- considered Childs the fifth-best receiver available in the draft. Waldman wrote that Childs' pro day was indicative of a full recovery and "a return to the skills he displayed as a sophomore and junior."

The Vikings really have only one receiver position locked down, and that's wherever Percy Harvin plays. Veteran Michael Jenkins is expected to return from a knee injury, and newcomer Jerome Simpson will add a level of playmaking when he returns from a three-game NFL suspension. But if Childs can run a true 4.4 at his size, it's going to be hard for the Vikings to keep him off the field once he learns the offense.

The Vikings started him off at the traditional "X" receiver spot that Jenkins played last season, but Jenkins is more of a possession receiver and lacks the explosion Childs will have if his recovery is in fact complete.

And listening to Childs, it is.

"I'm not concerned about the knee problem at all," he said. "I'm 100 percent, full throttle, no slowing down."

A committee of ESPN experts -- including Trent Dilfer, Mel Kiper, Gary Horton, Matt Williamson -- assembled this offseason to create a unique version of our traditional Power Rankings.

Naturally, NFC North teams are featured prominently in what amounts to a three-year projection of Power Rankings for the 2015 season . The Green Bay Packers received the top spot as the team best equipped to compete three years from now, while the Detroit Lions were not far behind at No. 6.

The file requires an Insider subscription to read in full, but I can pass along where our four teams ranked and also a glimpse at the methodology used. Here is how the committee evaluated each team and the degree of impact each category had:

• Roster (32.5 percent of total score): Players under 30 emphasized
• Coaching (20 percent): Capability and stability of current staff
• Quarterback (17.5 percent): Where quarterback play would be in three years
• Draft (15 percent): Based on team's 2012 class and how many picks available in next three years.
• Front office (15 percent): Ability to manage roster and market's attraction to free agents.

Now on to the NFC North rankings with comments from me:

1. Green Bay Packers
Seifert comment: The presence of a 28-year-old MVP quarterback and one of the NFL's top general manager-coach combinations puts the Packers on an ideal long-term path.

6. Detroit Lions
Seifert comment: Quarterback Matthew Stafford had a 5,000-yard season before his 24th birthday. That's a nice start. General manager Martin Mayhew has elevated the team's talent level every season of his tenure and most of their key players -- Stafford, receiver Calvin Johnson, tight end Brandon Pettigrew, defensive tackle Ndamukong Suh, safety Louis Delmas and linebacker Stephen Tulloch -- are under 30.

17. Chicago Bears
Seifert comment: Jay Cutler is a legitimate franchise quarterback, but the best players on the Bears' defense are all over 30. That list includes defensive end Julius Peppers, linebackers Brian Urlacher and Lance Briggs, and cornerback Charles Tillman.

31. Minnesota Vikings
Seifert comment: Questions about quarterback Christian Ponder's long-term prospects made it difficult for the committee to project future success. There are also concerns about a lack of young impact players on defense. Defensive end Jared Allen is 30 and linebacker Chad Greenway is 29.

Hi everyone, and thanks for bearing with me Thursday while I attended to some business at, yes, the ESPN mothership. We discussed many important and pressing issues, among them our plans for the one or two days this summer when the NFL news feed slows down.

In reality, it appears I didn't miss too much in the way of news Thursday.

ESPN's Adam Schefter has strengthened his earlier report on the apparent all-clear that Chicago Bears receiver Brandon Marshall has received from the New York City police department. Most notably, however, it appears we might have some clarity on the future of Green Bay Packers receiver Donald Driver.

It's been long speculated that the Packers will release Driver this offseason, even though he has offered to renegotiate his contract to stay with them. Non-committal answers last month from general manager Ted Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy strengthened that possibility, but on Thursday, agent Jordan Woy said he expected Driver to return to the Packers in 2012.

Woy told ESPN's Andrew Brandt: "He'll be back. Just need to work out details when done" with his appearance on "Dancing with the Stars." The reality show will conclude next week.

As we've discussed, there really hasn't been any rush to complete a renegotiated contract. Driver wasn't due any money until the start of training camp. So it's quite possible that Thompson and McCarthy won't commit publicly to Driver's return until the new deal is done. That makes some sense. We'll know soon enough.

Our friends at Football Outsiders have reached the NFC North juncture of their annual post-draft needs series for ESPN.com. You'll need an Insider subscription to read the entire file but I can provide you a snippet of the needs that Outsiders' statistical analysis points to for each of our teams.

Chicago Bears
Need: Offensive line
Excerpt: Left tackle J'Marcus Webb "led the league with 15 offensive penalties in 2011."
Seifert comment: We've been through this before. Outsiders suggests the Bears seek a swing tackle via free agency, but indications are that the team envisions 2008 first-round pick Chris Williams in that role.

Detroit Lions
Need: Cornerback
Excerpt: Free-agent acquisition Jacob Lacey "ranked 81st in success rate against the pass last year and 88th in 2010."
Seifert comment: The Lions prioritize the havoc they can create with a dynamic defensive line over whatever shortcomings they might have in the secondary. Lacey will compete with Aaron Berry and perhaps rookie Dwight Bentley for a starting job.

Green Bay Packers
Need: Backup quarterback
Excerpt: "If any injury causes [Aaron] Rodgers to miss action, the Packers are looking at trotting out either super raw seventh-round rookie B.J. Coleman or undrafted and utterly untested third-year man Graham Harrell."
Seifert comment: In 2008, the Packers set a precedent of using an untested backup in Matt Flynn. There isn't league-wide certainty that Harrell is prepared to be a No. 2 in 2012, but the Packers are more likely to use him in that role than sign a veteran free agent.

Minnesota Vikings
Need: Middle linebacker
Excerpt: "There's no evidence suggesting that [Jasper] Brinkley can handle the full slate of middle linebacker duties."
Seifert comment: All indications are that Brinkley will get the first chance to replace E.J. Henderson. There isn't a notable alternative on the roster, but it's a position where a temporary starter could be signed during training camp. But the Vikings are committed to getting younger and Brinkley is 26.

» NFC pressure points: West | North | South | East
» AFC pressure points: West | North | South | East

Examining who faces the most challenging season for the Minnesota Vikings and why.

As the Vikings' interim coach in 2010, Leslie Frazier won three games and lost three games. Promoted to the permanent job shortly thereafter, Frazier was part of a 3-13 disaster in 2011 that prompted an organizational shift in power to general manager Rick Spielman and a significant overhaul of the roster.

So in sum, Frazier has a 6-16 record, is entering the second year of a three-year contract and will be asked to compete with a roster that is at least a year away from legitimate contention. Playing in arguably the NFL's toughest division, he'll have a second-year quarterback in Christian Ponder, three new starters on the offensive line, a rookie place-kicker and first-time starters down the middle of his defense -- at nose tackle, middle linebacker and possibly both safety positions.

Oh, and Frazier's best player -- tailback Adrian Peterson -- is recovering from a serious knee injury suffered last December. Peterson insists he will be ready for the opening of the season, but the Vikings' medical staff has refused to confirm that timetable.

Frazier is a good person and a good coach, but that's a challenging series of obstacles for someone hoping to make it to a third season. At 6-16, the honeymoon period of his tenure is over. If nothing else, he'll be undermanned as he attempts to steer the team toward more victories.

On Friday, we posted some basic but important questions about the trio of NFC North rookie minicamps held over the weekend. I thought they would help us keep focused amid discussion about dozens of players who probably won't make an NFL team, let alone make an impact on the 2012 season.

Below, I've addressed the questions with updated information culled from a variety of sources. Links are provided when appropriate. In one case, I offered a rarely-seen "bonus" section. Don't say I never do anything for you.

Chicago Bears: What is the conditioning level of receiver Alshon Jeffery?

By all accounts, Jeffery was having a nice opening practice Friday -- "picking peanuts off some guys' heads," according to offensive coordinator Mike Tice -- before leaving with leg cramps.

Cramps are not unusual at rookie camps, where nerves and a lack of familiarity often lead to inadequate hydration and/or eating. Jeffery's pre-draft questions about work ethic and conditioning add a level to this particular departure, but he returned for the weekend practices without incident.

"Most of the guys are a little sore right now, but we see a guy with great hands, a big target that will only get better," Bears coach Lovie Smith said. "He should be in the mix to help us win games this year."

The Bears' initial plan is for Jeffery to learn the "Z" slot position, but it's not out of the question that he could eventually pair with Brandon Marshall as an outside receiver with Devin Hester moving inside.

Bonus: Here's what Tice had to say about criticism of the Bears' depth at tackle, a position they did not draft to: "If we felt that tackle was a dire need for us, I'm sure they would have answered the bell on draft day. With the change in scheme, the change in personality and an offseason and getting some guys healthy, I think we'll make a big jump in the offensive line. It takes time for young guys to play good in all areas. And we have a couple young guys who have played good football in half the scheme, and they need to step it up in the other half. Plus, we have some guys who got hurt, and we need to get those guys back."

Detroit Lions: How many positions is offensive lineman Riley Reiff playing? Also, how much work, if any, is receiver Ryan Broyles doing?

The Lions rotated Reiff between left tackle and right tackle on a per-practice basis, but there were no reports of him seeing time at guard. That doesn't mean he won't eventually get some work there as a possible competitor for right guard Stephen Peterman, but on his first weekend the Lions limited him to the two positions he figured to be most familiar with.

Lions coach Jim Schwartz clearly subscribes to the "less is more" philosophy on drawing conclusions in rookie camp. But here were his early impressions of the Lions' first-round draft choice: "You can tell as much of what we did here today about him as we could outside [of practice.] I mean walkthroughs, meetings and things like that. You can tell that he's an experienced, smart, confident player and he’s going to do well for us."

Broyles, on the other hand, observed but did not participate in any of the practices as he continues to recover from a November knee injury. The question now becomes whether he will be cleared in time for training camp or whether he will open camp on the physically unable to perform (PUP) list.

Schwartz wouldn't commit to a timetable on when Broyles will be able to practice or play a game but said: "[H]e's on a good path. He's had a good rehab so far. He showed it in his pro day and he's shown it here. It depends on what happens between now and then."

Green Bay Packers: How rough does Nick Perry look at outside linebacker? Also, are there any clues that B.J. Coleman will be able to challenge Graham Harrell for the No. 2 quarterback job?

The biggest news on Perry is that the Packers started him off as the left outside linebacker, which is where Clay Matthews played the past two seasons. Coach Mike McCarthy wouldn't say whether that meant Matthews will move to the rights side or if Perry will initially be slotted as a backup. But as Pete Dougherty of the Green Bay Press-Gazette pointed out, most 3-4 teams prefer their biggest outside linebacker to work on the left side to stand up against opponents who are generally right-handed running teams.

Meanwhile, Coleman demonstrated notable arm strength in comparison to fellow quarterback Nick Hill, according to Rob Demovsky of the Press-Gazette. That's a good start. Whether he can challenge Harrell depends on how quickly he can learn the Packers' offense, and according to McCarthy, how long it takes him to adapt to an entirely new set of footwork techniques required at the professional level.

As I suspected, you offered up a number of intelligent and well-articulated responses to a topic that has already gotten a fair amount of discussion both on this blog and nationally. But while discussing whether you would allow your son to play football, your responses brought the conversation to a new ground. Namely: the context of the discussion must be narrowed.

For the vast majority of us, the question isn't whether you would let your son embark on a 25-year run of playing football, thereby subjecting him to the long-term effects of countless blows to the head over an extended period of time. In reality, it's whether you would let him play at the youth or high school level for a few years.

Statistically speaking, most high school players don't play in college and most college players don't play professionally. We might be getting ahead of ourselves by making parental decisions based on a fear of the brain damage and eventual suicides of, say, former Chicago Bears safety Dave Duerson or Philadelphia Eagles defensive back Andre Waters.

With that, let's run through some of the responses that stood out to me. Thanks for your insight and, of course, have an outstanding spring weekend.

Chip001
What gets lost in a lot of this is that these are decisions parents make every day about other things that are much more dangerous without nearly as much drama over them. More kids are hurt driving than any other endeavor I can think of. Parents might rue the day when their child starts to drive, and they might be worried sick every time they go out on the roads, but still the child is allowed to get a drivers license when the time comes in almost all cases. We "take chances" every day with little things -- cell phones can be a distraction, swimming pools, alcohol, driving, speeding, etc -- but we can't limit kids chances of being hurt at every step in life. At some point, never "taking the chance" or the "risk" becomes more of a problem than a benefit.

Racthewiz
I had a concussion in a bike accident before I got in to high school. My doctor did not want me to play football in high school. I convinced my parents to allow me. I know I had several more in high school football. Sometimes I would get my bell rung, and I remember thinking I hope the other team does not throw my way for a while because I didn't remember my assignments. I did not tell anyone when they happened. That being said, with everything we know now, versus then, I would do it all over again. I loved football that much. I can't say if any of these hits have caused any long term effects.

34GummyBear34
I too played football all through high school and loved it dearly. It did wonders for me. I have a son now and I have no idea if he will want to play or not. One thing that he will have that I never did is the knowledge before hand of how damaging the game can be. I never thought I was going to get seriously hurt. Concussions were referred to having your bell rung. I think kids who live in areas that push football will have a harder time than my son. I don't live in the deep south. The west coast likes its sports but he's more likely to want to snowboard or mountain bike than play football

Percrand54ll
I think we're all jumping to the conclusion that these suicides are a direct result of brain damage. The scientific proof is just not there yet, and may never be. There are studies being conducted but no definite answers. I disagree with old players suing the league, I disagree that concussions are going to be the end of the sport, and MILLIONS of people, including myself, are just fine after playing 8 years of football.

I have a son and won't let him play football until 8th grade simply due to the physical toll it will take on his body. There are other sports for young kids, soccer, baseball, basketball, etc, etc, etc....

Curley2808
Correct me if I'm wrong...School buses don't even have seat belts and parents don't seem to have a problem with that. Danger lurks everywhere, don't live life scared.

Machinemanske
Being able to do anything you LOVE to do is one of life's treasures. We face risks everyday whether we choose to step onto a football field, strap into a snowboard or walk to the grocery store. The chances for concussions, brain injuries or worse are exponentially higher for players in any contact sport but consider the fact that they each face potentially life-threatening circumstances in whatever mode of transportation they use just getting to the practice field. I have had the pleasure of getting to do what I love to do almost my whole life and I wish everyone could have that experience. Sure drumming and football are vastly different, but my body has certainly paid the price over the years.

EDEN PRAIRIE, Minn. -- Because none of you have gotten your fill yet on the Minnesota Vikings' stadium story, I made a rare daytime appearance outside of NFC North blog headquarters for a visit with team owners Zygi and Mark Wilf.

I reported to the ESPN.com news desk that Mark Wilf hopes to begin the Super Bowl bidding for Super Bowl LI, which will be played about six months after the new facility opens for the 2016 season. The Wilfs made clear the team will play at least two more seasons, 2012 and 2013, in the Metrodome but that their 2014 plans could take a year to develop. (They will play the 2015 season at TCF Bank Stadium.)

But to me the most intriguing takeaway was what seems like a preference to outfit the stadium with a retractable roof.

The final stadium bill allows for that possibility if the Vikings pay for the upgrade, which could cost an additional $25 million to $100 million. It would enhance the Wilfs' hopes to draw a Major League Soccer team to the facility, but it would also mesh with Zygi Wilf's long-stated desire to capitalize on what he thinks would be the competitive advantage of outdoor games during the Minnesota fall and winter.

(I have no opinion on it as long as the press box is enclosed.)

Neither Wilf would commit to a retractable roof but here's what Mark Wilf said about it: "We're going to try to get the maximum number of features within the budgets that we can make this a facility that is going to be exciting to the fans. We know it's a competitive landscape to attract our fans to the facility and we're going to want to make it something special. To the extent that retractability can get there, we're going to try to do it."

It's worth noting that the Vikings' original plan for the suburban Arden Hills site included a retractable roof, one that would allow for the outdoor experience the Vikings once had at Metropolitan Stadium but also provide the flexibility to host games and events that require a roof, whether it is the Super Bowl or a Final Four or Grave Digger's next performance.

After noting the possibility on Twitter earlier Friday, many of you asked about the rule at Indianapolis' Lucas Oil Field that requires the roof to be closed when outside temperatures are lower than 40 degrees. All I can tell you is that the NFL's official rules on operating retractable roofs has no such requirements, at least not the set forwarded me Friday by the league office. The rules do, however, give the gameday referee the option to close the roof pregame because of precipitation or weather that is otherwise deemed hazardous.

You could have an interesting debate about the better home-field advantage: Really cold weather with the roof open or presumably louder crowd noise with it shut. I don't know where the Vikings will land on that, and I'm not entirely convinced the Wilfs are prepared to kick in additional money for retractability after increasing their initial contribution to $477 million in the final negotiations this week. Just know it's very much on the table moving forward.

More than a decade of memories came flooding back after seeing the Minnesota Vikings' stadium bill pass through the state Senate and head toward the inevitable signature of Gov. Mark Dayton on Thursday, ensuring at least 30 more years of franchise continuity.

I picked up the beat in 2001, when state leaders began years of inattention by insisting the Sept. 11 attacks made for an inappropriate time to discuss stadium subsidies. I remember calling a young state legislator named Tim Pawlenty, who cheerfully suggested the team's top stadium lobbyist secure a straight salary rather than working on commission. "There's just no appetite here for more stadiums," Pawlenty said a few years before he was elected governor.

I took a trip to San Antonio, home of former owner Red McCombs, to scout it out as a potential relocation site. I wrote about an NFL meeting in 2003 in which league officials made a preliminary plan to place the Vikings in the NFC West if they eventually relocated to Los Angeles. I watched plans to share a stadium with the University of Minnesota collapse, as did suburban collaborations in Anoka and Arden Hills.

But most of all, I remember sitting in a converted racquetball court in the Vikings' cramped practice facility on June 16, 2005. On that day, new owner Zygi Wilf made a pledge that astonished all of us and figured to haunt him for the rest of his tenure atop the franchise.

Wilf said he would never move the team, regardless of a revenue deficit that forced McCombs to sell. He acknowledged he would like a new stadium but said: "If we're stuck in the Metrodome, then we'll be stuck in the Metrodome."

Given the years of inaction we had already witnessed, most of us figured the only way the Vikings would secure a new stadium would be by waving a ready-made offer to relocate elsewhere. But here, on one of his first days as an owner, Wilf had cut his leverage out from beneath himself and guaranteed a struggle to upgrade the franchise's home.

So on this day, it's worth noting that Wilf and his staff have agreed to relatively equitable terms on a bill for a new stadium without so much as an indirect or implied threat of relocation -- much less engaging in any substantive discussions with another locale.

Really, the only tense moment came last month when a state committee derailed the bill in a spate of political infighting. NFL commissioner Roger Goodell swooped into St. Paul to add some weight to the Vikings' campaign, and from then on final approval has seemed nearly inevitable. In the context of stadium debates, Wilf and the Vikings kept the tone cordial, amicable and most importantly aboveboard, securing a state legacy for the franchise and the owner himself.

It's been months since Wilf has spoken publicly on the stadium issue, a strategic decision the Vikings made to minimize attention on the "billionaire subsidy" argument and focus it on Dayton and the resulting job creation a stadium would bring. I'm sure there will be plenty of people who can't get past the additional revenues Wilf and his investors will receive in this deal, and I understand that. But in the context of professional sports, I truly think Wilf and his investors deserve some credit for saving the franchise for Minnesota.

Think about it. For years, state leaders fully exercised the leverage they held by virtue of the Metrodome lease and Wilf's publicly stated willingness to continue playing there. When the tables turned, Wilf declined to reciprocate and instead pursued a deal with the same people who wouldn't take the Vikings' phone calls in previous years.

Really, from a cold business standpoint, Wilf would have been better off minimizing his expenses, awaiting the expiration of the lease then shopping the franchise to the highest bidder from around the country. He paid $600 million in 2005 and, six years later, the Jacksonville Jaguars were sold for $760 million with a stadium situation much worse than the Vikings'. Outsiders bidding for the franchise almost certainly would have left the Minnesota legislature to match a much less equitable deal to keep the team, if it had the opportunity at all.

Instead, over the past seven years, Wilf and his partners have funneled the team more than $100 million in personal funds to account for a competitive player payroll, a larger front-office staff and modernization of the practice facility. Wilf aggressively pursued the stadium issue but passed on every opportunity to up the ante or enhance his leverage by turning his attention elsewhere. You might disagree with some of his decisions as a franchise operator, but Wilf and his investors have proved exemplary franchise stewards.

I can't control how you view Wilf and his group of out-of-town investors. But, Vikings fans, you guys lucked out. This could have been ugly and easily might have ended differently. Zygi Wilf made sure it didn't.

Earlier: The first post-approval questions the Vikings must consider.

As we await what are likely the final steps in approving the Minnesota Vikings' new downtown stadium, let's take an early look at some of the questions that will remain after Gov. Mark Dayton presumably signs the bill:

What about the Minneapolis City Council?

Yes, it's true that the majority of the council's 13 members must approve the final bill before construction could begin. But that has been considered a formality since March, when Mayor R.T. Rybak announced that seven members had pledged support. Thursday morning, Rybak told Minnesota Public Radio that the bill contained "every single one of the things we asked for" and added: "I don't anticipate there will be a change [of heart]."

What will the new stadium look like?

The frantic pace of this legislation produced very few details on the design and features of the facility. There have been general terms that include 65,000 seats and 150 luxury boxes, but those are general estimates. The team released three images last month, one of which is reproduced in this post. But those are only concepts and a significant amount of architectural, engineering and design work remains to be done.

Where will the Vikings play during construction?

The team has said it will play in the Metrodome in 2012 and has expressed hope that it will be able to spend at least a portion of the three following years there as well before the new facility opens in 2016. But that timetable is subject to the unfinished work we just discussed. The expectation is that there will be at least one season, and probably a portion of a second, played at the University of Minnesota's TCF Bank Field. That will require a multi-million upgrade at "The Bank" to include, among other things, heating coils for the outdoor field.

What about a retractable roof?

Vikings owner Zygi Wilf has expressed strong interest in playing outdoor games when possible, and a retractable roof would probably help lure an MLS team to the facility as well. The $975 million bill, however, calls for a fixed roof. Legislators said the Vikings would have to cover the additional costs and maintenance of a retractable roof. At one point last year, team officials projected a $25 million difference between a retractable roof and a fixed one. That might be a low estimate, however; the Indianapolis Colts' retractable roof at Lucas Oil Field was estimated to add $75 million to the project. I don't have an updated figure for the Vikings' stadium, but I wouldn't be surprised if Wilf at least considers the upgrade.

Good morning to all. As we suggested late Wednesday night, Minnesota lawmakers did indeed work through the night to continue pushing the Minnesota Vikings' stadium bill to resolution. In the end, it looks like the Vikings will get final resolution on their decade-long quest for a new facility by the end of Thursday.

Here's what happened between the time we signed off and now:

• Critically, the Vikings agreed to increase the private contribution to the project from $427 million to $477 million, a $50 million raise that lawmakers put into the final merged bill. My guess is the Vikings knew all along that this might happen at the final moments and budgeted accordingly, but in the end, as team spokesman Lester Bagley said: "The Vikings and [owning family the] Wilfs have stepped up. The Wilfs have stepped up and made a huge commitment to Minnesota and a huge commitment to Vikings fans."
• The House of Representatives approved the bill after hours of debate at about 4:30 a.m. ET. The final vote was 71-60.

That leaves two final steps, both of which are expected today. The Minnesota Senate will take up debate and voting at some point Thursday morning. If the bill passes, as expected, it will be sent off to Gov. Mark Dayton for his signature and the legislature will adjourn for the year.

"We're not quite there yet, but this was a big day," Bagley said Thursday morning. Referring to the upcoming Senate vote, Bagley said: "We're one step away."

Again, we'll save the grand conclusions and analysis for when this bill is fully completed and executed. But I think it's fair to say that it's very likely the Vikings will get their stadium and will be removed from the NFL's list of relocation candidates for the next 30 years. Stick around for coverage through the day here on the blog. (And then we'll get back to our regular offseason routine of making stuff up.)

OK gang. We're approaching the NFC North blog witching hour, when anything I try to write will come out in some form of primitive English that makes no sense and offers no one any deeper understanding of the issue at hand.

As of this posting, it does not appear there will be an final resolution of the Minnesota Vikings' stadium issue overnight.

The conference committee charged with merging the two stadium bills has yet to formally meet and announce a final bill. Its most recent start time was announced to be 1 a.m. ET, with a cut-off time of 2 a.m. ET. Without the conference committee's official blessing, the bill can't be sent to either the House of Representatives or the Senate for final confirmation. As of late Wednesday evening, the plan was for the House to debate and vote on the bill overnight, with the Senate following on Thursday morning.

Regardless, Thursday would be the final day that voting is allowed by law in the 2012 legislative session.

There was ample evidence, however, that the conference committee had largely negotiated and settled upon a bill during private meetings Wednesday. It was briefly posted on the state web site around 10:30 p.m. ET before being taken down for further revision. Assuming its numbers were accurate, the Vikings' share was pegged at $477 million -- or $50 million more than the team originally committed. The state would pay $348 million and the city of Minneapolis $150 million. The Vikings would also contribute an average of $13.5 million in operating costs over the course of a 30-year lease.

The Vikings have not yet said whether they will agree to raise their commitment. A team spokesman said chief stadium lobbyist Lester Bagley would make "team comments" directly to the conference committee when it convened.

Legislators appear to have backed the Vikings into a corner. Would they really walk away from the deal over $50 million? But even if the Vikings don't immediately agree, House leaders were expecting to take a vote sometime Wednesday night or early Thursday morning.

The Senate would then pick up the bill Thursday morning. So let's reconvene then, shall we?

Good evening, everyone. Just wanted to set the table for you as best we can on what might be another late night of Minnesota Vikings stadium intrigue.

The legislative conference committee is scheduled to open its formal discussions on merging the two stadium bills at 10 p.m. ET. As we noted earlier, there have been private meetings going on for most of the day and it's reasonable to assume much of the heavy lifting has been done already.

Indeed, both the state House of Representatives and Senate are scheduled to convene at 11 p.m. ET, presumably to be in position to approve the merged bill passed out of the conference committee. If that all happens, the final step in the process would be to send the bill to Gov. Mark Dayton for his final signature.

The big question is whether, or how much, the Vikings have agreed to raise their contribution. Both versions of the bill called for a higher total than their original $427 million. The House asked for $532 million and the Senate asked for $452 million. Again, it's reasonable to expect the total to wind up somewhere in between if a deal is to be completed Wednesday night.

I'll keep an eye on it for a while but I'm not committing to sitting it out through the duration. Stay tuned on that.

*Update: The merged bill is complete and has been posted online. It pegs the Vikings' total at $477 million, or $50 million more than they had originally committed. It's not yet clear if the Vikings have agreed to that total.