Playcalling????

[Oakdale63]

I'm no coach (even though I think I'd be a damn good one!) but when I play madden and run with the Vikings, I have one thing in mind offensively: RUN THE ROCK. We have an improved offensive line and an invigorated ADRIAN PETERSON.... and we give him 15 carries? On the other side of the LOS Bucs ran their rookie rb 29 times. Ponder played well and all, but he's no Adrian Peterson. He needs to be getting at the very least 20 carries a game, and I mean bare minimum.

[Mothman]

I'm no coach (even though I think I'd be a damn good one!) but when I play madden and run with the Vikings, I have one thing in mind offensively: RUN THE ROCK. We have an improved offensive line and an invigorated ADRIAN PETERSON.... and we give him 15 carries? On the other side of the LOS Bucs ran their rookie rb 29 times. Ponder played well and all, but he's no Adrian Peterson. He needs to be getting at the very least 20 carries a game, and I mean bare minimum.

I agree. Once again, I think Musgrave over-thought things last night. It's good to have diversity on offense and not be too predictable but Peterson came out smoking against one of the NFL's best run defenses and Musgrave didn't stick with that enough. The Vikings running game was working,. They were imposing their will on the Bucs and they needed to keep doing it and force the Bucs to stop it.

There was just no excuse for Peterson only getting 15 carries in that game.

[VikingPaul73]

I agree to a point but you need a QB who can keep defenses honest. And we don't have that right now.

That said, Musgrave has gotta go. We have a new stadium in process now so it's time for Zygi to think long term!!!

[Mothman]

I agree to a point but you need a QB who can keep defenses honest. And we don't have that right now.

You need a passing game that can keep teams honest. It's way too easy to just focus on the QB but the passing game requires 3 components working together to keep defenses honest and lately, none of those 3 components are getting the job done with any consistency for the Vikings. The receiving corps, the o-line and the QB are all struggling mightily and they all impact one another.

Jim

[CalVike]

There was just no excuse for Peterson only getting 15 carries in that game.

I did not see the game yet, but I just studied the play-by-play. It seems to me AP was heavily used into the 2nd half, just far less effective. It would seem the fumbles by Simpson and Peterson and the failure of the defense to stop someone named Doug Martin were more important factors than Musgrave. It's hard to come back two scores or more with a one dimensional offense, no matter the RB.

[mansquatch]

They were getting like 4-10 years a clip in the 1st half when they ran the ball. I agree with Moth, why would you start throwing when you can gash them like that? They were totally failing to manage down and distance and it resulted in a crap load of 3 and outs. That IMO is why the defense was so bad. They had no break, no opportunity to make any adjustments. The Time of Position was like 17 minutes to 12 minutes in the first half. Just ridiculous.

The reality of this game is our Special Teams and Defense have been playing at amazing levels all season up until yesterday. Yesterday they had a bad game game and they needed the offense to have their back. The offense failed completely. Pass protection breakdowns, terrible play calling, fumbles, woeful QB play, etc. It was a buffet of ineptitude. The whole train fell off the tracks.

This performance was terrible, the Prime Time woes continue. The offense just got put front stage too. With Cook out, our secondary depth (ie lack there of) is going to be exposed for defenses to take advantage of. The offense is going to have to step up because other NFL teams are going to see this game and they are going to keep doing what Tampa did.

Ugh.

[Mothman]

They were getting like 4-10 years a clip in the 1st half when they ran the ball. I agree with Moth, why would you start throwing when you can gash them like that? They were totally failing to manage down and distance and it resulted in a crap load of 3 and outs. That IMO is why the defense was so bad. They had no break, no opportunity to make any adjustments. The Time of Position was like 17 minutes to 12 minutes in the first half. Just ridiculous.

The reality of this game is our Special Teams and Defense have been playing at amazing levels all season up until yesterday. Yesterday they had a bad game game and they needed the offense to have their back. The offense failed completely. Pass protection breakdowns, terrible play calling, fumbles, woeful QB play, etc. It was a buffet of ineptitude. The whole train fell off the tracks.

LOL! That's a great turn of phrase.

[Cliff]

Well the offense took a bunch of shots down the field last night.

Everybody happy now?

[Mothman]

Well the offense took a bunch of shots down the field last night.

Everybody happy now?

Those low percentage passes don't seem so great when they aren't connecting, do they?

If they're going to keep running those sideline fades to Simpson then, as Mike Mayock said on the broadcast, he needs to maintain more space between himself on the sidelines so the QB has enough room to work.

The offense was really discombobulated last night (I love that word— discombobulated, not night). You could almost hear the thought process leading up to the game:

"We need to run AD and impose our will."

"But Tampa Bay excels against the run and they're weak against the pass. This is our opportunity to get Ponder going and get Simpson more involved!"

... and so they forced it when they should have been riding AD's early success the way TB continued to ride Martin once he got going.

Sigh. It's going to be a long 10 days until the next game.

[CalVike]

They played AD heavy until down 3 scores. Study the play-by-play. You cannot play catch up with a power RB. Turnovers and bad defense took AD out. He ran several times in the third quarter for very few yards. Eventually defenses key him. Sometimes it works.

[losperros]

The reality of this game is our Special Teams and Defense have been playing at amazing levels all season up until yesterday. Yesterday they had a bad game game and they needed the offense to have their back. The offense failed completely. Pass protection breakdowns, terrible play calling, fumbles, woeful QB play, etc. It was a buffet of ineptitude. The whole train fell off the tracks.

I couldn't agree more. Once the D and special teams fell short, there was nothing much left to pick up the slack.

I'm sure the playcalling might be partially to blame. However, blown assignments and missed tackles, not to mention the continuously putrid passing game, has a lot to do with bad execution. As I said in another thread, this team is better than last year's version but it's not a *good* team yet.

[Mothman]

They played AD heavy until down 3 scores. Study the play-by-play. You cannot play catch up with a power RB. Turnovers and bad defense took AD out. He ran several times in the third quarter for very few yards. Eventually defenses key him. Sometimes it works.

I have to disagree. He had 9 carries in the first half : 8 yards, 5, 4, 11, 11, 11, -1, 6 (fumble), 0, 5. despite only 2 of those carries going for less than 4 yards, he only had back-to-back carries once. To me, that's not playing him heavy.

Peterson's not just a power back. He's an explosive player, as capable of giving the team big plays as any of their receiving threats. You said he ran several times in the third quarter for very few yards but his first 3 carries of the third quarter went like this: 0, -2, 64 (TD). His next (and last) two carries went for 3 and -2.

The 64 yard run kind of voids the "very few yards" conclusion. I think the real point here is that they didn't stick enough with what was working early and I feel that contributed to them falling behind and to their struggles in the passing game. When the star RB starts the game with 50 yards on his first 6 carries, more than 2 of those carries should come back-to-back.

[Delaqure]

I know there were a lot of folks whining about no deep throws earlier in the year. I could care less about that. 5-6 yard throws are fine with me if they are moving the chains. That kind of game plan eats up the clock and drives us down the field (if they are connecting.) It can keep the defense fresh. Take your shots down field when the defense pulls in to stop the short stuff.

I do think Musgrave has the inability to adjust though. Several games now I've seen where the defense is shutting us down and Musgrave can't figure out a way to adjust to what the defense is doing and change things up. It's like he has a game plan and when it doesn't work he doesn't know what to do.

I do think a new OC (providing he's a good one) and a legitimate outside threat would do wonders for this offense.

It seems that ever since Chilly became our coach we can't find an OC who can adjust when the original game plan isn't working. That's why Farve did so well in 09. He would audible a lot because he didn't like the plays called. And it worked.

Speilman please find us a better OC!

[CalVike]

I have to disagree. He had 9 carries in the first half : 8 yards, 5, 4, 11, 11, 11, -1, 6 (fumble), 0, 5. despite only 2 of those carries going for less than 4 yards, he only had back-to-back carries once. To me, that's not playing him heavy.

Peterson's not just a power back. He's an explosive player, as capable of giving the team big plays as any of their receiving threats. You said he ran several times in the third quarter for very few yards but his first 3 carries of the third quarter went like this: 0, -2, 64 (TD). His next (and last) two carries went for 3 and -2.

The 64 yard run kind of voids the "very few yards" conclusion. I think the real point here is that they didn't stick enough with what was working early and I feel that contributed to them falling behind and to their struggles in the passing game. When the star RB starts the game with 50 yards on his first 6 carries, more than 2 of those carries should come back-to-back.

Good point on the 64-yarder. My point, the team was down way too many points for your argument to have any credibility. A team cannot come back from 30-10, 30-17, 36-17 with AD. And they certainly did not ignore him. Without a consistent mid- and decent long passing game, more losses will become the norm. I am glad they tried to go beyond AD and throw long to Simpson. Relying more on AD would still have meant a loss. No matter how good AD is, he can not make up Ponder and WR shortcomings. Good defenses of which the Bucs are not one will crush the AD strategy.

[mansquatch]

Good point on the 64-yarder. My point, the team was down way too many points for your argument to have any credibility. A team cannot come back from 30-10, 30-17, 36-17 with AD. And they certainly did not ignore him. Without a consistent mid- and decent long passing game, more losses will become the norm. I am glad they tried to go beyond AD and throw long to Simpson. Relying more on AD would still have meant a loss. No matter how good AD is, he can not make up Ponder and WR shortcomings. Good defenses of which the Bucs are not one will crush the AD strategy.

You are right when it got to be the 2nd half and they were down by 17. However, Moth's point is about the 1st half. In the first half they ran far too sparingly, and as Moth points out, when they did run they were wildly successful. The question you have to ask is if they had run AD more, how would the game have changed. My guess is at the very least, the time of possession would have been far more balanced and we would have had more than 7 points at halftime. That changes the rest of the game.

This is an indictment on play calling. You ahve AP and your team relies on either taking a lead or being within reach in the 4th quarter. Above all, that means controlling the ball, which they didn't do. Way too much passing (and bad passing) in the 1st half IMO.