Mothman wrote:At no point are Simpson and Rudolph open. You can't see Wright here (I cropped the image slightly to take some of the tool buttons out) but #24 is in great position to undercut him and make a pick if Ponder throws that way. We don't know what's going on with Aromashodu on the other side of the field.
The only way I can see a scramble working on that play is if Simpson's defender was undisciplined enough to break off his coverage before Ponder crossed the LoS, potentially leaving Simpson open. However, there's a safety right behind Rudolph and Simpson is heading toward him so even if the CB breaks away from Simpson, that safety could conceivably pick him up. He's in position to break on a pass thrown to either Simpson or Rudolph.
Sometimes the defense just makes a good play. Criticizing Ponder on this one is really nitpicking.
Am I seeing correctly or are both Aromashodu and Wright running into a zone defended by 3 Lions D players? I'm talking about the top shot. It appears as if there is a Lions player already in the end zone there but I'm only seeing his foot (if I'm really seeing a player). I think it's important to note that he's spit between two defenders, meaning he's probably a safety, and can add an extra body to defend a pass if Ponder takes a shot. I seriously doubt that both Wright and Aromashodu (who has shown he's not the best end zone target in the world) got open on the play. Even so, the safety wouldn't be hard pressed to cover ground and help defend wherever the pass went. At least that's how I'm seeing it, given I can't see the follow up to the shots posted on the right side.
Anyway, I'm not trying to make any excuses for anyone but I still think Ponder made a good read on this play. Don't get me wrong, I want the Vikings to score TDs in the red zone but I'll take a FG over a INT any day.
losperros wrote:Am I seeing correctly or are both Aromashodu and Wright running into a zone defended by 3 Lions D players? I'm talking about the top shot. It appears as if there is a Lions player already in the end zone there but I'm only seeing his foot (if I'm really seeing a player). I think it's important to note that he's spit between two defenders, meaning he's probably a safety, and can add an extra body to defend a pass if Ponder takes a shot. I seriously doubt that both Wright and Aromashodu (who has shown he's not the best end zone target in the world) got open on the play. Even so, the safety wouldn't be hard pressed to cover ground and help defend wherever the pass went. At least that's how I'm seeing it, given I can't see the follow up to the shots posted on the right side.
Anyway, I'm not trying to make any excuses for anyone but I still think Ponder made a good read on this play. Don't get me wrong, I want the Vikings to score TDs in the red zone but I'll take a FG over a INT any day.
You're seeing it correctly. The Lions rushed 4 and dropped 7 players into end zone coverage so there were 3 guarding Simpson and Rudolph at the top and 3 guarding Aromashodu and Wright at the bottom.
It will be interesting to see how this play looks from some different vantage points.
Mothman wrote:
Yes, he was accurate, decisive and did a much better job of staying the pocket and stepping into his throws. He was markedly better then he'd been in the previous 3 games.
You don't have to just take my word for it. Here's Pelissero's take:
The first sentence I highlighted is emphasized because I know you're interested in further development of the intermediate passing game (I am too). The second sentence I highlighted pertains to the conversation going on about the red zone checkdown to Gerhart.
I was going to take your word for it, but thanks for backing it up with Pelissero's observations. Sometimes a stat sheet can be deceptive and, as you note, I'm looking for evidence of real progress, especially in that intermediate range.
If I'm wrong about Ponder I'll gladly take my lumps and admit it, and I really do hope I am. With AD going off like he has been, merely competent play at QB should be enough even with the daunting upcoming schedule. Hopefully Ponder has started to turn the corner.
VikingLord wrote:I was going to take your word for it, but thanks for backing it up with Pelissero's observations. Sometimes a stat sheet can be deceptive and, as you note, I'm looking for evidence of real progress, especially in that intermediate range.
It's an area of the field they have to do a better job of exploiting.
The one qualifier I should have added is about Ponder stepping into his throws. It seemed to me while watching the game that he was doing that pretty consistently but it's one of the things I want to look for when I get a chance to watch the game again because over the past few weeks, it looked like he wasn't doing it consistently and that seemed to impact his accuracy.
Overall, I think you would have felt pretty good about his performance. He looked much more comfortable and decisive than he did in the previous 3 games. You should know that he had at least 3 passes dropped or his numbers would actually look a little better.
If I'm wrong about Ponder I'll gladly take my lumps and admit it, and I really do hope I am. With AD going off like he has been, merely competent play at QB should be enough even with the daunting upcoming schedule. Hopefully Ponder has started to turn the corner.
losperros wrote:From Tom Pelissero:
I thought this was a big help on several plays. I also would like to see the slants and crossing patterns used more often with burners like Harvin (when he's back) and Wright.
This has been one of my biggest criticisms of musgrave and his offense so in that sense I'm glad it happened but at the same time it's still very frustrating to know the only reason it really happened is because his bell cow Harvin got hurt and FORCED him to do something else.
In the end, let's hope he learned something and can continue the attack even with Harvin back.
But it's once again evidence that Ponder isn't the problem, he can and HAS made the throws necessary to go down the field, but musgrave's poor play calling and dependance on feeding harvin has been the big issue.
mondry wrote:This has been one of my biggest criticisms of musgrave and his offense so in that sense I'm glad it happened but at the same time it's still very frustrating to know the only reason it really happened is because his bell cow Harvin got hurt and FORCED him to do something else.
I'm not sure that's why it happened. It may be why they spread the ball around more but reports made it sound like they tweaked the routes and playcalling because the offense (even with Harvin) had been struggling so much the last few games and defenses were finding it easier and easier to anticipate what they were going to do. I give Musgrave credit for his ability to adjust but it shouldn't have taken him so long to adjust.
But it's once again evidence that Ponder isn't the problem, he can and HAS made the throws necessary to go down the field, but musgrave's poor play calling and dependance on feeding harvin has been the big issue.[/quote
I have no problem with them feeding Harvin but they can't be so predictable about it that the plays stop being effective!
Mothman wrote:
I'm not sure that's why it happened. It may be why they spread the ball around more but reports made it sound like they tweaked the routes and playcalling because the offense (even with Harvin) had been struggling so much the last few games and defenses were finding it easier and easier to anticipate what they were going to do. I give Musgrave credit for his ability to adjust but it shouldn't have taken him so long to adjust.
I suppose we shall see in the near future if he falls back on old habits when Harvin's healthy, I agree it shouldn't have taken this long but as they say, better late than never.
I have no problem with them feeding Harvin but they can't be so predictable about it that the plays stop being effective!
Nor do I, however I feel there is more to Harvin's game than 1 yard bubble screens and runs out of the back field. For example, I don't see why Harvin couldn't run a similar route down the middle of the field that Jarius Wright made a huge catch on. I don't see why he couldn't be effective in the middle of the field like Wes Welker is on the pats, or like steve smith (who's similar size) down field.
I'm not so cynical to say musgrave didn't do a better job, I think he did, I'm just a little skeptical it can continue and the length of time it took to make changes we seem to agree took a little too long. What happens if the bears come out with a game plan that's already adapted to his new stuff? Do we have to wait another month for something effective to come out? These are the questions that will hopefully be answered over the rest of the year. I'm just afraid he isn't dynamic enough to constantly be coming up with new ideas / plays / concepts to stay one step ahead of a defense.
mondry wrote:Nor do I, however I feel there is more to Harvin's game than 1 yard bubble screens and runs out of the back field. For example, I don't see why Harvin couldn't run a similar route down the middle of the field that Jarius Wright made a huge catch on. I don't see why he couldn't be effective in the middle of the field like Wes Welker is on the pats, or like steve smith (who's similar size) down field.
They use him that way, just not as often as they throw him the quick stuff.
I'm not so cynical to say musgrave didn't do a better job, I think he did, I'm just a little skeptical it can continue and the length of time it took to make changes we seem to agree took a little too long.
At least 2-3 games too long!
What happens if the bears come out with a game plan that's already adapted to his new stuff? Do we have to wait another month for something effective to come out? These are the questions that will hopefully be answered over the rest of the year. I'm just afraid he isn't dynamic enough to constantly be coming up with new ideas / plays / concepts to stay one step ahead of a defense.
I know I sound like a freakin' broken record about this but I really believe the playbook can expand if there are better WRs on the field. This is why I'm such an advocate for playing both Percy Harvin and Jarius Wright at the same time. Once again, I want to point out that Wright can play wide out and not just slot receiver. He did it well for Arkansas and I'd love to see him get a stab at doing it for the Vikings.
However, after reading a couple articles it appears that Frazier is not exactly warming up to the idea.
losperros wrote:
However, after reading a couple articles it appears that Frazier is not exactly warming up to the idea.
Awww, was hoping not to hear that. He's probably not as great a blocker but in one game it seems like he made more of an impact on the passing game then jenkins, aroma, and burton combined. Seems like the kid deserves at least a shot out there.
Man it's kind of interesting, if Simpson was fully healthy and Jarius started on the other side we would have Simpson, Harvin, and Wright. Not your typical huge receivers but that's a lot of speed, it seems like one of them should be open what with 8 guys being mandatory in the box for Peterson. Lot of possible 1 on 1's there when you include Rudolph.
mondry wrote:
Awww, was hoping not to hear that. He's probably not as great a blocker but in one game it seems like he made more of an impact on the passing game then jenkins, aroma, and burton combined. Seems like the kid deserves at least a shot out there.
I'm betting he'll get it. Frazier didn't rule it out. He may just be hedging his bets, thinking he shouldn't give the Bears any more of an idea than he has to give them about who the Vikes will be putting on the field in a couple of weeks. I'm not sure any advantage is really gained from that but coaches tend to think that way...
mondry wrote:Man it's kind of interesting, if Simpson was fully healthy and Jarius started on the other side we would have Simpson, Harvin, and Wright. Not your typical huge receivers but that's a lot of speed, it seems like one of them should be open what with 8 guys being mandatory in the box for Peterson. Lot of possible 1 on 1's there when you include Rudolph.
I would love to see a 3WR set with Harvin, Wright, and Simpson. Too bad Simpson isn't healthy and can't run at full speed. Now he has to have surgery during the off-season. I'm thinking the Vikings will dump him after this year. Who knows? Maybe that's a good thing. I still would have liked to see him play at 100 percent though. He's not a #1 WR but he's a heck of an athlete that I think could have been match up problems for opposing defenses.
Mothman wrote:
You're talking about an imaginary play. On the actual play, there was no receiver at the top of the screen in the back left hand corner. Even if Simpson had broken off his route and tried to get there or if Wright had come all the way across to that location (thus placing 3 Vikings and 5 Lions in the left hand portion of the endzone), is there any reason to assume the defenders wouldn't have been able to stick to them? Could Ponder have even kept the play alive that long? There's not a lot of room remaining to his left.
Sometimes the defense just makes a good play. Criticizing Ponder on this one is really nitpicking.
Now you are just being silly. Yes, there is every reason in the world to think that if Simpson cut back to the back corner, the CB who was watching the QB would have been at least a step behind, maybe five steps. Do you forget how easy it is in sports to lose a man who is marking you once he has committed to a course of action (in this case, sprinting sideways across the end zone)? I get open in soccer against kids half my age by cutting back when they aren't expecting it and they have committed to a course of action.
Here's an image to show you how a great QB would have handled that play.
Seriously, throwing a checkdown play to Toby in that situation is probably more likely to result in no points than in a TD. If you want to prove me wrong on that, check the yards after contact for Toby vs. his fumble percentage. A receiver moving at full speed, ok. A checkdown to a back that is essentially standing still, fugeddaboudit, unless that back is Harvin or Peterson, and then it's still a risk.
Mothman wrote:
I'm betting he'll get it. Frazier didn't rule it out. He may just be hedging his bets, thinking he shouldn't give the Bears any more of an idea than he has to give them about who the Vikes will be putting on the field in a couple of weeks. I'm not sure any advantage is really gained from that but coaches tend to think that way...
Tom Powers from the Strib is right there with you on that, Jim. He claims that Frazier is absolutely bluffing Lovie Smith and the Bears by saying Wright and Harvin may not play together in the same game.
John_Viveiros wrote:Now you are just being silly. Yes, there is every reason in the world to think that if Simpson cut back to the back corner, the CB who was watching the QB would have been at least a step behind, maybe five steps. Do you forget how easy it is in sports to lose a man who is marking you once he has committed to a course of action (in this case, sprinting sideways across the end zone)? I get open in soccer against kids half my age by cutting back when they aren't expecting it and they have committed to a course of action.
No offense, but we're not talking about soccer or kids. Simpson is running in the opposite direction of what you're talking about and you're assuming that if Ponder had rolled left, Simpson would have turned around (we're not talking about a simple cut here, he has reverse his forward momentum and turn around to go to the left corner), and run where you think he should have run. On top of that, you're assuming Ponder would have had time to stay behind the line of scrimmage and avoid defenders long enough for Simpson to come open. It's not impossible but as I've been saying, it's unlikely, especially when the receiver is running to the right and there's not much room on the left for either Ponder or Simpson. Keep in mind that there were still four defenders in that area of the endzone who would be reacting to whatever happened and two more who were in position to limit any scrambling Ponder could do behind the line. Also keep in mind that this is a static photo. Those players are in motion and there's not much space between them.
Here's Pelissero's take:
