dead_poet wrote:
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.
yes we do! we have plenty of people to pass the ball to:
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!
yesmanfan wrote: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!
Just because we have bodies, doesn't mean they are options if they can't get free. But I see. Outside of Harvin and Rudolph (as receivers) you think FAR more of Ponder's supporting cast than I do. 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. Until I'm proven otherwise I just don't think we have the weaponry to be successful in a pass-first approach.
Last edited by dead_poet on Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
dead_poet wrote:
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.
omg you don't like using running backs in the passing game?????? wow??!!!!
you would fit right in on this coaching staff.
dead_poet wrote: Just because we have bodies, doesn't mean they are options if they can't get free
and our weapons have proven they can get free, one of the reasons our pass completion percentage is so high. the problem with this team has nothing to do with the yardage per catch average and everything to do with frazier and musgrave.
Last edited by yesmanfan on Mon Sep 17, 2012 8:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
yesmanfan wrote:omg you don't like using running backs in the passing game?????? wow??!!!!
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)?
and our weapons have proven they can get free,
Have they now? Aside from Harvin? And consistently? I'd disagree.
one of the reasons our pass completion percentage is so high.
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.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
yesmanfan wrote:
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.
Yes, but the opposing defense is often changing their approach in those situations so they aren't necessarily indicative of what the Vikings could do with a pass happy approach throughout entire games.
dead_poet wrote:
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.
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 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)?
when did i say they should be the leading receivers? im saying they should be part of the passing game.
one team that comes to mind that uses their rbs a ton in the pass game is the saints. but if i went thru the stats i know there are plenty of teams that have 5-15 passes a game to their running backs. to say we don't have enough weapons to pass to is ridiculous.
which is why this coaching staff needs to be fired unless they change to a pass-first strategy.
yesmanfan wrote: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).
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
dead_poet wrote:
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).
great points and to be completely fair to both sides of the argument, we just don't know how the team would react to a pass-first approach. i have a belief that every single nfl team should take this approach and are making a mistake if they don't and this is because of the new nfl rules.
one thing is for sure the run first approach has been an unbelievable failure for the last 18 games.
Last edited by yesmanfan on Mon Sep 17, 2012 9:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
dead_poet wrote:
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