Refocused Vikes-Colts

[dead_poet]

Summary: Yey Havin, Walsh and....Defense?! I guess! Ponder...meh-to-blarg.

Return of the D

The majority of the Vikings’ defense actually played very well in this game. It’s ironic really that in a game in which they were able to do so well, they were undone by a drive in which they couldn’t stop the Colts over 30 seconds at the end. On several occasions they stuffed Colts drives only to concede foolish penalties to keep the clock moving. Jared Allen (+1.2) was furious about a call on a late hit to Andrew Luck as he ran out of bounds, and, while it was very minimal contact, Luck was clearly heading to the sideline a dozen yards shy of the markers on 3rd and long, so the Viking had no reason to dive at him. Kevin Williams (+4.3) was exceptional against the run, on one occasion splitting a double team and making a stop 3 yards deep into the backfield. Linebackers Chad Greenway (+5.2) and Erin Henderson (+4.1) also had fine games, despite Henderson making a mess of his drop deep down the middle of the field for Reggie Wayne’s touchdown just before the half. Only some loose zone coverage undid what was otherwise an excellent showing from the D.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... ts-week-2/

[dead_poet]

Pelissero's take:

Ponder efficient but Vikings lack downfield threat

http://www.1500espn.com/sportswire/Note ... reat091612

[Mothman]

Pelissero's take:

Ponder efficient but Vikings lack downfield threat

http://www.1500espn.com/sportswire/Note ... reat091612

I think that's much better than PFF's take, in which they seemingly penalize Ponder for completing short throws. That's his job when that's what is called and from what I saw, he completed those short throws efficiently, getting the ball to the receivers accurately so they could pick up yardage after the catch.

Jim

[Demi]

Not that he could see any targets down field when his eyes never leave his first read, except to glance at shadows to run from...

[Crax]

Per Elias Sports Bureau, #Colts Andrew Luck is first rookie QB to engineer game-winning 4th qtr drive in Sept. since Archie Manning, 1971.

Yuck. Although that stat seems a little weird. Sounds like it's only counting games in September.

[dead_poet]

Leslie Frazier bothered by Vikings' defensive ineptitude inside 2 minutes

Vikings D has had three series in two games in final 2 min. of half or game. They've allowed 18 points. Not good.

“That’s glaring. We’ve got to do better,” Frazier said. “The way our team is built we’re going to play a lot of close games. We talk about that all along with our guys. And we have to play good 2-minute offense, good 2-minute defense, good red zone defense, good red zone offense. We have to do better in that area.”

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikin ... 61556.html

[Eli]

I'm a little amazed by PFF's positive grade of Jared Allen. The Colts were clearly targeting him in the run game by continually running straight at him. There were a couple of plays where Allen was 5-10 yards into the backfield by the time the running back crossed the LOS. I think the Colts were just letting him come, knowing he'd immediately run himself out of the play. If he's going to completely sell out and abandon the run on so many plays, he should be notching a sack or two and several more pressures per game.

[Lash Man]

Leslie Frazier bothered by Vikings' defensive ineptitude inside 2 minutes
http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikin ... 61556.html

Well Leslie Im bothered by it too and thats the same line you used all last season after loss upon loss " we have to get better " " we will watch film and see what happened " "we need to clean some things up " yadda yadda yadda . I want a complete change of the lame as heck scheme that lets rookie QB's and second year average QB's light us up like they are Montana or Unitas .

[J. Kapp 11]

Erin Henderson made a few good plays, but he also totally biffed on others. On one play, he got juked so bad in the open field by Andrew Luck (not exactly Barry Sanders) that a search and rescue team with bloodhounds couldn't have found his jock. Pretty embarrassing.

The defense may have graded out OK on paper, but it really doesn't matter if they hand over the game in the last minute the way they did yesterday and tried to in Week One.

[Mothman]

Well Leslie Im bothered by it too and thats the same line you used all last season after loss upon loss " we have to get better " " we will watch film and see what happened " "we need to clean some things up " yadda yadda yadda . I want a complete change of the lame as heck scheme that lets rookie QB's and second year average QB's light us up like they are Montana or Unitas .

That desire for a new scheme seems to be popular but I'm wondering: what scheme do people believe this current defense will be able to execute better?

It's easy to blame the scheme and maybe it's a significant part of the problem (I honestly don't know) but no matter what the scheme is, pass rushers have to be able to beat blockers, linebackers have to win battles, secondary players have to cover and everyone has to be able to tackle. What scheme is going to help these players win the battles they lose too often?

I'm not just asking you, Lash Man, and I'm not being sarcastic. I just don't have anything close to the answer. No matter what defense is called, the players will still have to execute it. Can they do that?

[Lash Man]

That desire for a new scheme seems to be popular but I'm wondering: what scheme do people believe this current defense will be able to execute better?

It's easy to blame the scheme and maybe it's a significant part of the problem (I honestly don't know) but no matter what the scheme is, pass rushers have to be able to beat blockers, linebackers have to win battles, secondary players have to cover and everyone has to be able to tackle. What scheme is going to help these players win the battles they lose too often?

I'm not just asking you, Lash Man, and I'm not being sarcastic. I just don't have anything close to the answer. No matter what defense is called, the players will still have to execute it. Can they do that?

I know you arent being sarcastic and what I would like is to bring more heat and cover tighter , Jerry Glannville used to make up for lack of talent with getting hyper aggressive and bringing hats to the ball . I just see this soft cove r2 zone as an epic fail id rather get burnt from time to time then let them march easliy down the field , but lets just say they need to get some more urgency in their coverage instead of being 5 yards off the receiver in the final 30 seconds .

[Mothman]

I know you arent being sarcastic and what I would like is to bring more heat and cover tighter , Jerry Glannville used to make up for lack of talent with getting hyper aggressive and bringing hats to the ball . I just see this soft cove r2 zone as an epic fail id rather get burnt from time to time then let them march easliy down the field , but lets just say they need to get some more urgency in their coverage instead of being 5 yards off the receiver in the final 30 seconds .

I think Frazier would probably agree with that last part.

I don't know if getting hyper-aggressive would help or not. It might work and I'd be interested in seeing them try it to see if it yielded better results. They might just get burned even worse because when you start bringing heat, you leave a lot of single coverage on the back end. If the attacking players don't get to the QB, that can be an ugly situation.

In the long run, I'd like to see them find and develop some good man-to-man corners and get away from playing so much zone. They might even do that this year if Jefferson looks good, Robinson develops and if Cook can get his act together.

I think the system works well when executed but the Vikings, for whatever reason, keep having breakdowns. Sometimes it's a mental error (which is what we saw on Wayne's TD at the end of the first half), and sometimes players just seem unable to get the job done.

One of the biggest frustrations I had on Sunday was watching the defense let golden opportunities turn into near-misses. Winfield and another DB (Cook?) had a shot at a pick 6 and blew it. Robison had a chance to sack Luck for a safety and blew it. Allen had near misses on Luck too. They seem to perpetually miss making the key plays that could literally change losses into wins for them.

[radar55]

That desire for a new scheme seems to be popular but I'm wondering: what scheme do people believe this current defense will be able to execute better?

It's easy to blame the scheme and maybe it's a significant part of the problem (I honestly don't know) but no matter what the scheme is, pass rushers have to be able to beat blockers, linebackers have to win battles, secondary players have to cover and everyone has to be able to tackle. What scheme is going to help these players win the battles they lose too often?

I'm not just asking you, Lash Man, and I'm not being sarcastic. I just don't have anything close to the answer. No matter what defense is called, the players will still have to execute it. Can they do that?

Put the corners out on an island and let them play man to man....at least that way the coaching staff can see who can cover and who cant! With the current cover 2 there is always an excuse of "it was a missed assignment". If they play man on man there is no missed assignment...if they get burned it happened because of the players inability to do his job and THEN MAYBE the coaches will have to actually start coaching up their corners to do their job. Just my opinon

[mondry]

I know you like to give coaches benefit of the doubt Jim and it's a reasonable take. Living in Chicago you should be able to tell the difference between the Vikes Cover2 and the Bears Cover2. They always seem to get after the ball and I think even last game Tillman punched the ball out and created a turnover. It's not a scheme problem or player problem, it's a coaching problem. Look I wish the players were better too, I really do! But as bad as they are, they should still make a play from time to time, we should still see them TRY to make plays, even if it results in a player getting more yardage than they should.

I think it's coaching, I just don't believe that when we suddenly get good players now the coaches will focus more on creating turnovers. No, I think it's a coaching philosophy that puts ZERO emphasis on getting off the field. It's a "hope the d-line can get pressure" and "hope the other team shoots themselves in the foot" kind of mentality. When we had guys like Sharper did they let them make plays? No they forced him to play within the system, so it's not just a "we need better players" argument. This is especially annoying because our offense is a ground and pound / short passing for efficiency kind of offense. We've all seen what happens when AD goes crazy in the 2nd half after defenses start to wear down. Yet it's such a very rare occurrence because our defense is busy "bending" to a 14 play 9 minute drive with the net result being they give up a TD or FG anyway!

I had more to this post but it logged me out and I couldn't get it back after I clicked submit argg! That's the jist of it though...

[Mothman]

I know you like to give coaches benefit of the doubt Jim and it's a reasonable take. Living in Chicago you should be able to tell the difference between the Vikes Cover2 and the Bears Cover2. They always seem to get after the ball and I think even last game Tillman punched the ball out and created a turnover. It's not a scheme problem or player problem, it's a coaching problem. Look I wish the players were better too, I really do! But as bad as they are, they should still make a play from time to time, we should still see them TRY to make plays, even if it results in a player getting more yardage than they should. .

They do make plays and they do try to make plays. Unfortunately, the Vikes don't have a CB as talented as Tillman on their roster.

I think it's coaching, I just don't believe that when we suddenly get good players now the coaches will focus more on creating turnovers. No, I think it's a coaching philosophy that puts ZERO emphasis on getting off the field. It's a "hope the d-line can get pressure" and "hope the other team shoots themselves in the foot" kind of mentality. When we had guys like Sharper did they let them make plays? No they forced him to play within the system, so it's not just a "we need better players" argument. This is especially annoying because our offense is a ground and pound / short passing for efficiency kind of offense. We've all seen what happens when AD goes crazy in the 2nd half after defenses start to wear down. Yet it's such a very rare occurrence because our defense is busy "bending" to a 14 play 9 minute drive with the net result being they give up a TD or FG anyway!

I had more to this post but it logged me out and I couldn't get it back after I clicked submit argg! That's the jist of it though...

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I think the secondary's problems are due primarily to a dearth of talent and experience, not coaching. Sharper made plenty of plays while playing for Frazier and even went to a Pro Bowl. Winfield has been a solid DB and playmaker over the years too. Good players make big plays and all players are asked to play within a system. I just can't buy that Frazier isn't emphasizing that his defense needs to get off the field. He even talks about it to the media!

I think Frazier could be more creative with his defenses at times but whenever things aren't going great, coaches make an easy target. What they do matters but in the end, the players have to get the job done. They have to read, react, get in position to make interceptions, defend passes, sack the QB, etc. and then actually get the job done. That's a given, regardless of the defensive philosophy.

I'm not saying someone like Wade Phillips or Mike Nolan might not be able to do more with the talent the Vikes have on defense but I think even the NFL's best defensive minds would be limited by this personnel.

I'll also add that I think one of the things really missing from the Vikes defense might be leadership. I think they have some of that but I suspect a powerhouse player like Urlacher or Ray Lewis in their prime would make a world of difference.