great question:

its called switching from 1980s style ultra conservative, rely on the defense, special teams, and run game. to a modern day approach of being more aggressive and creative in your offensive playcalling throughout the entire game.

its called using the pass to set up the run and to the run ball when the other team doesn't expect it.

its called not overly running the ball in the first half when the defense is super fresh.

its called not running the ball 3 times (the 3rd time on 3rd and 6 with toby gerhart up the middle with 8 in the box) when you are up by less than 7 points and the other team is going to have over a minute and good field position.

in fraziers press conference he actually slipped and said he expected to run it 3 times and punt and never even gave a thought to getting the first down. then he contradicted himself and said you gotta be able to run the ball when they expect to run the ball. if jenkins doesn't get called for a phantom penalty the strategy would have been sound except for he doesn't even expect to get (or go for) the first down which would win the game.

i could give countless examples of his ultra conservative rely on your tired, untalented defense at the end of games. its not the new nfl, he doesnt understand things have changed and when you line up wide and throw on all 3 or 4 downs its super super hard to stop. and when you start to mix in the run after you have the defense on their heels and tired big things happen.

hope this answers your question, i just wish someone would say it to frazier.

Yes, but don't you have to have the right pieces in place to take advantage of this philosophy? That's what I'm saying. We don't. Not yet. So why force it? I just don't see how doing that has any greater chance of success with the team that Frazier has to work with. The Vikings have identified the issue and drafted a premiere left tackle that excels in pass blocking to protect the QB. They drafted a tall-pass-catching tight end in round 2 of last year. They signed a tall, pass-catching tight end this year in free agency. They spent a couple of fourth round picks on high-upside receivers this year. They aren't oblivious to the fact they need to get better passing the ball. But you must have the horses to do it. Otherwise you're just asking for trouble by attempting to be something you're not.

harvin, rudolph, carlson, peterson, gerhart, jenkins, aroushmadoush, and the 2 other TEs looked good in preseason if carlson cant get healthy. and after one more game we have simpson. yes aroushmadoush is weak but he came up big in week 1 so until he starts dropping balls he stays on the list for 2012. and more than anything we have a QB that has thrived when we take the pass first approach!

better than the current coach

I don't know if you can really lump in Peterson and Gerhart when we're talking about the pass game (particularly the downfield passing game), but they are options I suppose.

Just because we have bodies, doesn't mean they are options if they can't get free

omg you don't like using running backs in the passing game?????? wow??!!!!

and our weapons have proven they can get free,

one of the reasons our pass completion percentage is so high.

Until I'm proven otherwise I just don't think we have the weaponry to be successful in a pass-first approach.

we attempted a pass first approach on the drive of the last 2 mins of the first game, result touchdown.

we attempted a pass first approach with 14 secs to go in first game, result fg.

we attempted a pass first approach in the last two drives of the colts game, result 14 points.

That's not what I'm saying. They are options in the passing game. I'm not sure you want them to be your leading receivers. And when you think about pass-first teams, how many of them target their RBs consistently (or above their receivers)?



Have they now? Aside from Harvin? And consistently? I'd disagree.



When you have a 0-3 yard pass to a guy when the defender is playing three yards off the receiver I sure hope you complete that more often than not.

I'm not sure you want them to be your leading receivers. And when you think about pass-first teams, how many of them target their RBs consistently (or above their receivers)?

really? so your 2 points are harvin is only one who has gotten open and that all of our passes have been 0-3 yard passes to harvin. you are either blind or jaded.

I'm saying that receivers outside of Harvin are having a tough time getting open consistently, especially outside of obvious 2-minute drills when defenses essentially give you the short-intermediate stuff. I'm saying the offensive line has difficulty consistently protecting Ponder outside of 2-minute defense when they generally don't bring added pressure. I"m saying Ponder isn't great at buying himself time and throwing downfield after the pocket collapses. You need these things if you want to find success passing the football.

I'd be curious to see the stats of when Ponder attempts/completes his intermediate to long passes during normal game situations as opposed to when defenses are playing a deeper "prevent" style.

I'm saying I do not believe it's in our best interest to shift to a pass-first offense when we don't have the talent to do so. If we had Green Bay, New England or Atlanta's pass-catchers I'd be all for ripping it open. Until Simpson returns (and produces) I believe we currently field one of the league's weaker receiving corps. It's cool if you feel differently and the only thing we need to do to be successful is just start throwing the ball more. I cannot accept that (yet).

im saying they should be part of the passing game.

to say we don't have enough weapons to pass to is ridiculous.

I agree with you. And they have a combined 7 receptions. That's about on par with most teams' running backs (the Saints excluded) to this point.



I stand by my statement. Bodies do not = talent.

i would guess 3.5 receptions per game for your running backs is very low for the nfl

lol i always

you always what...

Falcons 3rd and 5 up 6 with the game on the line. one first down ends the game. They line up 4 wide in the shotgun and pass the ball. convert the first down and win the game.

Vikings 3rd and 6 up 5 with the game on the line. one first down ends the game. Frazier and Musgrave line up under center in a run formation (dont remember exact formation) and run the ball up the middle into a box of 8 people for no gain and punt.

Playing ultra conservative ball and playing not to lose. vs playing aggressive ball and playing to win.

You're right. I shouldn't have said you were "yearning" for Childress. You simply believe he's a better head coach. We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. At the end of the season I may agree with you. But I cringe at the series of events that would lead me to that conclusion.

...saddled with the same holes, talent-wise, as the current coach. ...judged harshly unless he can immediately deliver a winning season. ...devoured by a long-suffering fan base should he playcall conservatively - or take too many risks. ...compared to Les Steckel or Brad Childress at least once in his first season. ...compared to Bud Grant or Denny Green at least once in his first season. ...vilified for throwing a challenge flag, or not throwing a challenge flag. ...lambasted for being a poor clock manager. ...plucked from the obscurity of the Vikings to win a Super Bowl coaching another team. ... second-guessed on a weekly basis. ...a players coach, or not. ...heard proclaiming any of a number of coaching cliches, including, but not limited to, "We need to execute better","They were just the better team today", and "We have some work to do".

There is no way that I will ever agree a coach is worse than Childress. Frazier could go 1-15 this year and I might agree he'd be just as worthless as Childress, but at least Frazier can handle and relate to people. Childress was an egomanical idiot that is largely responsible for the state the team is in today. It is going to take a while for us to dig out of the hole he dug. The fact that someone thinks Childress is a better coach, is that based on Childress's evaluation of QB talent? (If only we'd given TJ a chance, we might be on our way to the Super Bowl now....)

It might be more interesting to start a thread about the next coach and take odds on how many games he'll get to coach before fans start posting that they want him fired!

BS. Baldy got us wins and 1 int away from a SB.

BS. Baldy got us wins and 1 int away from a SB. Even though I hate him, that was a great erxperience. But as usual, the Vikings let us down.