Let me start by saying Ponder deserves his fair share of the blame for this continual lack of successful offense. We've seen now that he visually misses the open man from time to time or makes a poor decision. It's his second year and for all intents and purposes he's our QB and all we can do is hope for improvement.

With that said, I don't think Musgrave is the guy we need. Conceptually he may be "working with what he has" but ultimately I think that's simply a poor excuse overshadowing his ineptitude. So where is my proof, well it's hard to find, if someone could point me to a way to watch the game film i'd gladly do it, but for now it's just what I've noticed watching the games like anyone else.

Cliff mentioned in another thread "well the offense took a bunch of shots down field, everybody happy now?" I'm not trying to pick on cliff, but my answer would absolutely be Hell no! There is much more to taking a shot down field then just having Simpson run a go route 6 inches off the sideline. You could say it's Simpson or ponder's fault but ultimately this is what they've tried to do since Simpson's return. That imo, makes it a coaching thing, that must be how MUSGRAVE want's that play ran or undoubtedly we would notice a difference from game to game. Needless to say, it's a very low percentage play but it SHOULDN'T be the only way we operate when we want to "take a shot."

The problem is there is NOTHING creative about this, it's simply a childress / bevell style "be better than the guy covering you." On top of that, Musgrave shrinks the field down by about 50%. Look it'd be nice to have randy moss in his prime running those go routes but we don't. Simpson is physically gifted and has great speed, but you have to let him do other things. As good as speed is for running something vertical it's equally as good for running horizontal to the intermediate area's of the field. I don't need 60 yard bombs but I WOULD like to see a 15 yard completion over the middle of the field now and then.

Elaborating on what I said earlier about shrinking the field and chiliball, guys like Jenkins are serviceable, however, not under these circumstances. He's an "okay" nfl possession WR who isn't going to smoke a lot of DB's, but when you condense the field like Musgrave has, you're just making the job easier on the defense. Obviously there is way more too it than this but there are typically 9 heavily used routes in the NFL. Flat, Slant, comeback, curl, out, dig, corner, post, fade. For Musgrave's offense if your name isn't Simpson we can pretty much take out 5 of them, all the routes that develop 10-15 yards down field. This leaves us with Flat, Slant, Comeback, and Curl routes. Now let's say the QB bootlegs out to the right and the WR is on the left. This eliminates the flat and comeback because the QB is never going to be capable of making that throw, not even Favre would attempt something like that. It also eliminates the slant because for the most part that is a quick hitting timing throw. That leaves one route left for Jenkins in this very specific scenario and any DB with any kind of experience at all is going to understand how to defend it. Jenkins being who he is, isn't going to make a flashy play or get wide open in this scenario.

Obviously I picked the most dramatic scenario for my example with the WR only having one real option in his route but I do believe these circumstances have come up and if you only have the choice between 1-3 routes on any given play as a guy like Jenkins, defenders aren't going to have a hard time shutting you down when they only have to cover half the field.

The TD to Harvin was a good example that it IS POSSIBLE to make the intermediate passes effective, it just seems like musgrave is content to let star power like Harvin make him look good until we're behind enough or the game is close enough to ending to do differently. I am actually amazed that the 0 yard passes to Harvin on the bubble screen even net positive yardage at this point, but I guess Harvin really is that good...

My other problem with Musgrave is that he doesn't seem to understand the dynamics offered by such a good run game. When Peterson is ripping off runs of 6+ yards like he was, just let the guy run the ball for crying out loud. That's how you set up play action and that's when you can have a higher chance of success going down field. Would also like to see them try and set simpson up. What I mean by that is, have him run other routes, particularly the comebacks and short stuff into the flat. When the DB get's a little antsy on those call a double move and let him go deep. I still see no reason this can't be done with Harvin as well. Face it, most teams are gonna have 8 in the box, so if you have Simpson wide left and Harvin wide right in a running formation, that's 1 safety to deal with both of them. Otherwise that safety comes out of the box and we audible to feeding Peterson some more. Perhaps I'm getting to "madden" but I just don't get it.

Also, I can't stand bunch formations, specifically ones that keep the tight end in to block on passing plays. Rudolph should be our third big threat to deal with yet most of the time he's completely nullified to being a blocker. Look I get it, if julius peppers is just going insane on your O-line and dominating then fine, make the adjustment and put an extra guy to chip on him, whatever. But I don't like the idea of just once again condensing the field and limiting our options. Again, that just makes it easier on the defense when Rudolph should be causing mismatches. Pretend you're the defender responsible for covering Rudolph, a difficult task. Then the ball is snapped and you see him just stay in there and block, phew!

anyway, that's my opinion, thoughts?

I think they just wanted to keep the same offense so the transition wasn't hard. We shouldn't have expected much difference when both our previous coach and this one run a very similar system that have a lot of similarities when it comes right down to it.

And nothing drives me crazier then watching them on obvious passing downs keeping 7 guys in to block and expecting anyone to get open. He narrows the field all the time, and Chili/puppet guy did the same thing regularly. But this is what they want. You play safe short offense to match up with your non-blitzing soft zone defense and just pray. It's what we've been doing for 7 years. And we're expecting different results? We draft half-mobile QBs with questionable down field abilities to run this offense, and we wonder why they struggle throwing the ball?

They needed a clean sweep before. And this soft schedule is going to buy them at least another year. And nothing meaningful is going to change until that happens. Musgrave had no experience calling plays, and is just handed the responsibilities. Dysfunctional from the owner down.

Mondry, I think you made some good points (especially about capitalizing on the running game) but my question is: are you generalizing when you make statements like "I don't need 60 yard bombs but I WOULD like to see a 15 yard completion over the middle of the field now and then" or "For Musgrave's offense if your name isn't Simpson we can pretty much take out 5 of them, all the routes that develop 10-15 yards down field"? I assume so because we've been seeing these intermediate routes and completions all season long. People comment as if they don't happen at all and I tend to assume that's just frustration at not seeing as much of them as they'd like but sometimes I wonder if this stuff even registers or if fans are seeing red and missing it.

Anyway, I'm questioning some of the choices Musgrave makes and some of the play designs he uses but he's been resourceful in finding ways to use motion to reveal coverage, ways to get Harvin open, etc. so I can't help wondering to what degree personnel limitations dictate his decisions. Of course, it's also possible that he's worrying too much about player limitations at times and not giving them enough chance to perform. I understand his use of bunch formations and why he keeps his TEs in to block as often as he does. By handling that as he does, and by both running and passing out of those formations, he makes it more difficult for the defense to diagnose run or pass based solely on personnel and formation. Add in some of the struggles the team has been experiencing in pass protection and Ponder's current insecurity in the pocket and I can see why he wants extra blockers on some of these plays.

With the offense struggling, I think everyone needs to be scrutinized, including the OC, but I'm not yet convinced Musgrave is a significant problem.

This is the chicken or the egg thing to me. Does Musgrave suck as OC because he have Ponder, or vica versa? I think his hands are tied because, as he tries to open things up, Ponder is getting worse. But we would replace both, run the same type of O, and be better off IMO.

I don't think it's chicken or egg. I think the WR's are running deeper routes and getting open on them, but the QB is not patient enough or confident enough (or both) to stay in the pocket and let things develop. Ponder is flushing out and panicking from what I can see. He's in no position to pull the trigger on anything beyond the loft-bombs down the sideline, most of which are thrown well in advance of whether the receiver has actually beaten his man (witness Simpson breaking off his route *after* Ponder lofted it). No matter who is at fault there, for any in-route changes to be viable the QB has to be more patient, and Ponder seems eager to either get the ball out of his hand or leave the pocket as soon as he has any excuse.

So how does Musgrave respond? He responds by dialing it down and giving Ponder easier throws, many of which he is still failing to execute.

I continue to think the issue is with the QB more than the OC, OL, or WRs. I think a QB has to bring something to the table, especially one drafted at #12. No team is going to be perfect, but that's where a playmaker makes plays, and Ponder is not doing that. Everything is an excuse for his performance and he's being given a pass by many solely because the other aspects of the team involved in the passing game have some warts. But the way I see it, Ponder isn't doing much of anything to combat that. I'm waiting to see him step up in the pocket and deliver a strike one of these times, or sidestep a defender coming at him, set his feet, and fire an accurate pass. I'm waiting to see him scramble to buy time rather than looking like he's already made up his mind to run. IMHO, the only way things get back on track with the offense is if Ponder finally starts to make some defenses pay for blitzing him. If that isn't going to happen with this OL, these WRs, and this OC, then Ponder ain't going to make it. I think it's as simple as that, even if Ponder himself is not "at fault" for what is happening.

Got to get more aggressive in terms of mindset. Got to think "dictate to the defense" rather than "I'm getting the h*ll out of here!"

If it helps I suppose I should have said "on a consistent basis" instead of "now and then" Going off the play by play on NFL.com I see 9 attempted passes classified as "deep" there from the Vikings. Deep from what I can see looks to be about 15 yards in the air or more. Of those 9, 6 were completed, granted 3 of them were in what I'll call garbage time. Either way, they don't seem to be as bad at intermediate passing as it seems. It just seems like they need to do it more and be smarter about how they do it, which is the major point I wanted to get across in my original post. Admittedly I haven't checked out other teams but a gut feeling tells me they ATTEMPT more than 9 passes of 15 yards or greater through the air.

As for the other quote, 5 of the 9 from what I can tell of the passes labeled "deep" were to Simpson, 1 to Harvin (his TD) and 3 actually did go to Jenkins with the earliest being 6 minutes left in the 4th quarter. (the garbage time catches mentioned earlier) Take that how you will but to me it says for 3 and a half quarters they didn't try to get anyone else involved. It doesn't say they TRIED and are just BAD at it, it says they didn't even bother until the game was out of reach.

You're right in that he's done a good job getting Harvin opportunities, and don't get me wrong he has done some interesting things and deserves credit. Another thing you said is ringing pretty loud to me though, "Of course, it's also possible that he's worrying too much about player limitations at times and not giving them enough chance to perform." Another concern is it almost feels like the randy ratio to some extent, gotta get harvin this many touches and "force" this many deep shots to simpson.

On the bright side, after one of those failed deep balls to Simpson, Peterson ran for a 62 yard touchdown so who knows, I just hope they figure it out...

I'm not as down on Musgrave as some are, at least not if one figures in the entire season. Still, the deep shots to Simpson seemed a bit forced to me, particularly because the routes looked fairly redundant. The long shots down field can still occasionally be there but one shouldn't be able to set his or her watch to it. The Vikings need to somehow mix it up better. Regarding Harvin, I'm actually happy that Musgrave is trying to involve him as much as possible. Percy is a stud.

Just my point of view but I think the Vikings might have to review what was working more consistently for Ponder and the passing game earlier in the season. If the Vikings are an efficient short to medium pass team with a heck of a running game, I don't think that's bad at all as long as it's done in an aggressive and imaginative manner. Both Harvin and Simpson can turn something small into something big in a hurry, so neither one should be limited to running fly outs down the sidelines. Use them in crossing patterns, quick hits, slants, or anything that gets the ball to them quickly and allows them the chance to use their best weapons, which is their speed and athleticism.

Has Ponder thrown a back shoulder fade?

Here are my thoughts........you just took 10 paragraphs to say what everyone who's watching already knows; Musgrave SUCKS!

PS Ponder also sucks.

It's goes both ways. I absolutely despise Musgrave and hated the signing from the word go, but Ponder really isn't running this offense in any great way either. But anyway how come Week1-4 was just fine? Well it's not working because the playcalls are the same, and Musgrave doesn't seem like he's changing it.

No. But we also have no one to run that play too unless you split Rudolph out wide or something.

I think what it comes down to is that the offense has been exposed a bit. What's the difference in weeks 1-4, well it was still fresh. Teams still played with 2 safeties deep, still respected the idea that we might be willing and able to attack the deep parts of the field. Now it's just key on percy and peterson and bring pressure through charlie johnson. Musgrave's answer is keeping the tight ends and rb's in to block so the receiving options are extremely limited.

Thanks for clarifying what you meant. I apologize if it seemed like a silly question.

It definitely seems like the Vikings attempt fewer intermediate passes than many other teams. I don't know if it's true but it seems that way. Regarding your last paragraph: I can't quite reach your conclusion yet but I definitely se how you got there. I'd like to watch the game again and get more of a feel for the routes that were actually run because I don't think attempted passes and their targets tell enough of the story to determine that the Vikings didn't even bother trying to get someone else involved downfield (besides Harvin and Simpson). It's possible that they did try, really are just that bad at it, and those throws weren't even attempted because players didn't get open and Ponder didn't trust them as much as he trusts Simpson and Harvin. Do you see what I mean? If Musgrave is running players on intermediate and deep routes and they aren't getting open, that's a different problem than not trying to run those routes and get those players involved.

It's hard to know how much of the team's offensive problems right now are attributable to Musgrave and how much is simply the result of poor execution.



I don't mind the forced deep shots because they're intended to open up the field and that needs to happen. I don't want them to go to that well too often because it's a low percentage play that can kill drives but I'm fine with them doing it. I also think feeding the ball to Harvin is a good idea too but they need to get a little more creative about it. It's all okay if they can avoid the negative plays and do a better job of extending and sustaining drives. It's a lot harder to get everyone involved when you keep going 3 and out and aren't running that many offensive plays in a game. The problem with playing it smart and throwing the ball away when there's nothing there is that it results in a wasted play for no gain (although it's still a good idea, don't get me wrong). A deep pass that falls incomplete is a zero gain play. Sacks and penalties are even worse. As we've said all season, this is an offense with a slim margin for error. When they've been successful, it's usually been because they used efficient plays. punctuated by a big gain from Harvin or Peterson, to sustain drives. When they try almost anything else, they seem to struggle.



I hope so too! If I have to watch the kind of offense we've seen in the last 2 weeks for another 8 games, I might go mad.

It may not get much easier against Seattle. Their defense is tough and their crowd is loud. What's the over/under on false starts by the Vikings o-line in that game?

Jim

Good point. I'd have to agree with you about that.

The problems on this offense don't seem to be easily fixable. I guess I was hoping the team could rediscover its identity and that would get their momentum going again.

It might still happen, Craig, but I think we both agree that the team needs to add more talent and, of course, young players need to develop. I think Musgrave and Ponder, the two biggest lightning rods for criticism of the offense, both need to do a better job but I still believe what I've always believed: success on offense starts up front. The o-line has been awful in pass protection the past two weeks and if that doesn't change, I wouldn't expect much improvement elsewhere on offense either. I'm not saying the line is completely to blame for the offensive problems (they're not) but there is simply no way for an offense to be consistent when the blocking is so inconsistent. Fixing that needs to be step 1.

Mondry's right. The offense has been exposed a bit. Let's see how they adjust with 10 days to prepare for a very good defense on the road.

This is true. Up until farve started throwing chilli the bird and calling his own stuff.

I haven't been alive as long as alot of you. I started following the vikings young when they have a monster defense back in the early 80's. Now one thing I do have is an eye for when something is off, it applies to my everyday wanderings as well. I can tell you that the playcalling is limited and the REASON is the QB. Ponder was an average college QB regardless of his stats, might be "smart" but smart doesn't equal ability. Defenses can figure this kid out very easily. Pressure him AT ALL and he runs right and loses his bearings. He runs even when he doesn't need to. If he runs left, and I wish i had a stat for this, good luck getting a completion, and he doesn't do it very often. All an opposing defense has to do is blitz him like crazy to get under his skin fast because he is almost incapable of going to his reads, and even more importantly, making a hot read and completing a pass under pressure in a tight window. It's just not there at all. He doesn't sidestep it and let his blockers do their job, and on alot of occasions he takes off and actually makes it worse for himself, beating his own blockers and giving defenders an angle to either get a leg or just flat out catch him.

As S197 said in the other ponder post :


The issue with this is the QB is the most important player on the team, hands down. Elite QB's make other players look way better. Average QB's are good enough to get the job done. We have 3 offensive weapons that would be bonafide guaranteed starters on almost any other team in the nfl, Rudolf (arguably), Harvin and Adrian would be starters on any other team. There are teams who have less around their QB and put up better numbers. But there are times when this offense starts hitting on all cylinders. So the question is why? Why at times they can put up a mean drive and score easily, looking like a bully and then go out for 2 quarters straight and look like a pop warner team? Musgraves playcalling is limited, the routes are the same, whats different? They have a few of these drives a game usually, so you can't blame it on adjustments on the defense. If you adjust once logic dictates, and we all know this, that a rather stubborn OC who doesn't change his gameplan, will not succeed later on and still manages to call drives that result in points.

To be honest I don't think its the OC who's the issue. Its the QB. Musgrave's offense is built on timing ( ponder is horrible at it), a running game (ponder has no control over this thankfully), and getting the ball to your tight ends, in which rudolph is a MISMATCH for almost any LB and DB in the nfl with his size and he rarely gets him the ball in a pinch.Even the announcers say it constantly. One in particular, Tim Ryan, said it best...."With Rudolph, the word covered has a new meaning, it doesn't apply to this guy". That alone should sum up what the issue with this offense is. How many times have you seen Brady hit the overrated Gronk and Aaron Hernandez with high throws over smaller LB's and DB's? ALOT. And alot of the time, he doesn't have much time. New England doesn't run a quick strike 2 second throw timing offense either, and Brady manages to buy himself time by not overreacting to defenders being around him. I know its Brady whos a future hall of famer but here's why I make this comparison, he runs like my grandmother. If an immobile tree, who runs an offense similar to ours, can score 40 points at times and look dominant, with in recent years almost NO running game, and similar but OLDER offensive talent, why can't we do the same? Im convinced with the way the rest of the team is playing that Joe Webb would be a way better option at QB, period.

And what stings the most is they're developing a brick and wasting the time and talent of three remarkable players in the process.

Bah! Nevermind.

I agree 100% Boon! Does anyone remember in December of 2010 when Webb beat the Eagles in Philly 24-14? And the game did mean something for Philly. I remember because I was impressed with how many good passes he made downfield with some ZIP on the ball. And when their was nothing open the guy could run. RG3 like. WEBB TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bingo. Boon for President.

Exactly the same thing they did with Tjoke. People forget he was called a good game manager. He had a good rollout. He ran well. Plus he actually had a strong arm. But he was inacurracte and had a jump pass. Bevelle brought him to Seattle, I dont know where he is now, but im betting at best hes a backup QB, just like Ponder should be. But dont listen to me, Im just a Ponder hater. Let me know how many years we have to waste, err give, Ponder to see if he might work out.

Purplekoolaid -Vice President, Demi-Secretary of State.

Purplehaze- Head of CIA

I know people call me insane for this, but we shouldn't be on the second season of Ponder. We should be on the third season of Sage Rosenfels. Nobody has ever made a good argument to me why we insisted on Tarvaris Jackson, Joe Webb and Christian Ponder over him.

Because the coaching staff invested in Jackson and felt they could get him to an acceptable level. And didn't want competition for their pet project. (Remember what happened with Gus, they only played him when they had to, and never even gave him a sniff otherwise). Same thing with Sage. No matter how bad Ponder looks, they wouldn't even give him a shot at the backup job. What does that tell you? Is Joe Webb really a better quarterback than Sage Rosenfels? Give me a break. They didn't want anything to affect Ponder's confidence. And now we've got a GM who invested his career in the guy, and not a single competent quarterbacking option on the roster anymore.

I only hope Ponder doesn't get hurt, or we'll see Webb and Ponder will have slithered his way into another year as the unquestioned starter for this team. And that hopefully will be unacceptable by the end of this year...if he's given the entire year to get that silly "body of work" we had to hear so much about with TJoke.

I was just repeating stuff I've posted too often so I bailed.

Judging a coach is really simple. Did the team (or position) play better at the end of the year. Yes = good coach, keep going. No = find out the problem and make a change. It's not an absolute rule, sometimes injuries affect a team, sometimes a defense gets beaten up by trying to hold up a bad offense. And it's not about wins. A team may get some cheap wins early on but actually be playing tougher (but getting beaten) later in the season. I don't see Ponder improving, he's getting worse. That would be laid at the doorstep of Musgrave, especially if it continues.

There have been some improvements in the team but they've been offseason moves. Drafting some really good players, getting the stadium situation figured out. That goes to the GM and owner. The play of the team and offense in the last half of the season (against a tough schedule) will show if Musgrave (and Fraizer, if he lets a bad situation continue) should be fired.

Short of losing out, I don't see any way Zygi makes a change. They'll have likely at least doubled their win total (against a cupcake schedule) so he'll get another year. Hopefully, HOPEFULLY, this time Zygi isn't stupid enough to extend him instead of letting him play out his final year.

i don't think you are insane. i just never understood why people think that rosenfels was good. he was pretty awful. he played for about 5 teams and the vikes actually gave hime TWO looks. he just didn't impress. and the guy isn't even in the league anymore. i have a hard time believing that a guy not even good enough to be a third stringer for the other 31 teams in the nfl should be our starter!

I understand, Jim. Sometimes, it really does feel like this... or this... doesn't it?