Zimmer: Teddy Bridgewater needs to refine mechanics

[Mothman]

I think the point Jim made about it being one game is succinct.
It may be more correct to suggest a strong defense is a big component to getting you to that final game...and occasionally it can win it for you. But most often both teams have a solid defenses and it just comes down to who plays better on that day. Sometimes both stout defenses get blown up, like when the Harbaugh bowl happened.
I don't think it's a winning formula to put all your eggs in one basket in any sense.
TB has got to improve if he is going to ever expect to hoist the Lombardi. The same can be said for Zimmer....he ain't ready yet IMO. His defense plays great..they're good enough to get you there IMO, but you have to be able to get into the endzone to seal the deal. That doesn't mean you need the #1 offense...it means you have to find a way when it matters, regardless of what defense you're up against.
Peyton Manning is no slouch.....poetic he closes his career winning a superbowl as a game manager with a dominant defense after years of mostly coming up short with explosive offenses and no D. He showed huge adaptability and humility this season.
Hopefully the Vikes can get this offense rolling so as not to waste whatthey have going on D.
But seriously rankings don't win superbowls.....coaches and players do. The more you can do, the better your chances.

Well said!

[jackal]

Disagree, no, not really. Most people have just ignored while calling for a QB that throws for 4,000 yards and 40 tds a year. It's the defense that wins you the Super Bowl. That has been proven time and time again.

People can be real morons. The NFL has always been defense, and the ability to control what the other team is able to do.
Yeah its great, passing for 500 plus yards a game and six touchdowns in September. Bottom line is most seasons you are going to
run into a physically dominant team, who can stop you most of the time. Then control the game through running the ball, or stopping
the run.

All the Vikings need Teddy to do is turn it on; when the situation needs it, and score a few times. In fairness to teddy we need to
be more aggressive on play calling. We also need an Offensive line that can hold its own. IMO out OL is one of the worst in the
NFL. I am a big Teddy guy and I admit he needs to improve. I won't let him take the fall for things that not his fault, play calling,
drops, and a horrible OL.

[Demi]

Disagree, no, not really. Most people have just ignored while calling for a QB that throws for 4,000 yards and 40 tds a year. It's the defense that wins you the Super Bowl. That has been proven time and time again.

To be fair...look at the last however many super bowl winners/quarter backs. They are all able to put up big numbers. Even Russell Wilson who people thought was more of a game manager, put up 4k this year. Manning has had a 5k 50 year. Big Ben. Brady. Cam. Brees. Rodgers. Eli. These are all guys who've had those numbers. Maybe not the year they won, but they were capable of it, and showed it. Teams with elite Qbs are in the playoffs pretty much every season. Teams with top defenses and questionable QBs miss them a lot more often. Jets. Bills. Texans. Without the QB you don't even have a chance. The broncos have a hall of fame QB. End of his career and game managing. But I doubt they win this year with Brock Osweiler, despite that defense.

That said, Teddy showed this year he can do enough to keep the team in games. With a questionable beat up line, and average at best receivers. Give him some help, keep improving the D and hopefully he can continue to play at this level...or maybe even step his game up. I'm not sure he's every going to be capable of a 4000 yd 40 td season, regardless of the talent around him.

[Raptorman]

To be fair...look at the last however many super bowl winners/quarter backs. They are all able to put up big numbers. Even Russell Wilson who people thought was more of a game manager, put up 4k this year. Manning has had a 5k 50 year. Big Ben. Brady. Cam. Brees. Rodgers. Eli. These are all guys who've had those numbers. Maybe not the year they won, but they were capable of it, and showed it. Teams with elite Qbs are in the playoffs pretty much every season. Teams with top defenses and questionable QBs miss them a lot more often. Jets. Bills. Texans. Without the QB you don't even have a chance. The broncos have a hall of fame QB. End of his career and game managing. But I doubt they win this year with Brock Osweiler, despite that defense.

That said, Teddy showed this year he can do enough to keep the team in games. With a questionable beat up line, and average at best receivers. Give him some help, keep improving the D and hopefully he can continue to play at this level...or maybe even step his game up. I'm not sure he's every going to be capable of a 4000 yd 40 td season, regardless of the talent around him.

And what did all those QB's have in common the year they won their Super Bowl? A top defense. Even Eli, in that one year they were 25th in the league in scoring during the regular season but during the playoffs they stopped the other team from scoring. 2, 20, 17 and 17 points. Rodgers, Packers were 2nd. Big Ben, 3 and 1. Brady, 6, 1, 2 and 8. Brees is the only odd one out at 20.

[Demi]

And what did all those QB's have in common the year they won their Super Bowl? A top defense.

Colts. Pats. Cardinals. Giants. Saints. All had below average defenses.
How many below average QBs? Grossman is probably the only one in the super bowl in the last decade.

Broncos were 15-1 when Manning had the majority of pass attempts.
5-3 when Osweiler did.

[Raptorman]

Average ranking of teams in scoring offense and defense of winning and losing Super Bowl teams the last 50 years.

Code: Select all

      Offense PPG                    Defense PPG                   
   Winners       Losers            Winners     Losers
      5.9         5.3                 5.3        7.1

Only 7 times in the history of the Super bowl has a team that has a defense outside the top 10 in scoring won the Super Bowl. So if you want to win, you gotta stop the other team from scoring.

5 of those 7 have been in the last 15 years. The Giants had 2 of them. First in 2007. They were 17th in the league during the regular season at 21.6ppg. During the playoff run they held the other teams to 14, 17, 20 and 14. Their second one was in 2011 when they were 25th during the season but in the playoffs they held them to 2, 20, 17 and 17.

Then there was the Saints. They were 20th during the season at 21.3, playoffs, 14, 28 and 14.

Ravens in 2012, they were 12th in the season at 21.5 ppg, playoffs 9, 35, 13 and 31. Ravens still won on defense since their defense scored 28 points in those two high scoring games.

And then you had the 2006 Colts. 23rd in the league during the season at 22.5 ppg but in the playoffs, 8, 6, 34, 17 ppg. And in that 34 point game, the Colts defense scored 2 TD's.

All those teams except the Ravens all have one thing in common. They all held the other team to a low scoring average during the playoffs. All of them except the Ravens averaged under 17 ppg during the playoffs. So while doing it during the season is important, you have to do it during the playoffs.

[Mothman]

For those interested, here's a great article from a few years ago about that old cliché that defense wins championships:

http://freakonomics.com/2012/01/20/does ... pionships/

[Demi]

It’s a clear offensive vs. defensive matchup in both conference championships. If you believe the hype, it’ll be a matchup of the defensive-minded Harbaugh brothers in the Super Bowl. If you follow the numbers, it’ll likely be only one Harbaugh who makes it, but we couldn’t tell you which.

Brady vs. Flacco
Eli vs. Kaepernick

I predict a Brady vs. Eli superbowl.

[Mothman]

Brady vs. Flacco
Eli vs. Kaepernick

I predict a Brady vs. Eli superbowl.

[losperros]

For those interested, here's a great article from a few years ago about that old cliché that defense wins championships:

http://freakonomics.com/2012/01/20/does ... pionships/

Thanks for the link. Great article. I liked this part a lot:

We found that when it comes to winning a title, or winning in sports in general for that matter, offense and defense carry nearly identical weight. For example, here’s what Berman didn’t tell you: the number of Super Bowl champs with a top 10 offense? Thirty-eight. And a top 3 offense? Twenty. In other words, offense wins championships, too.

Perhaps it's when one unit dominates the other at the line of scrimmage that really helps their team win. A great offensive line overpowering a defensive line can certainly determine the outcome of a game, especially if there are good skill players to go with it. I think that formula is just as effective at winning as a team with a great overall defense would be.

[Raptorman]

For those interested, here's a great article from a few years ago about that old cliché that defense wins championships:

http://freakonomics.com/2012/01/20/does ... pionships/

I have to say it's true. You need both to win. But you can't just have a future HOF QB that does it on his own. It does not work. Which has been my point all along. You need a good QB and a top defense.

What I found interesting was at the end he listed four teams still in the running. The two with the top defenses' ended up in the Super Bowl that year.

[808vikingsfan]

Here's one I read a while back.

Does Offense or Defense Win Super Bowl Championships?

So, in the end, defense does win Super Bowls (unless your offense is average). Or, especially, if your offense is average. Everyone knew that the Broncos were in for a world of hurt against Seattle’s D. But does this mean that Denver could be overlooking Seattle’s 18th ranked offense? In six of the past 13 Super Bowls, the winning team has been ranked between 15th and 19th offensively (2000 & 2012 Ravens, 2001 & 2003 Patriots, 2005 Steelers and 2007 Giants). And on three occasions over the same period, a #1 offense has lost to offensive units ranked 19th (2001 Patriots over Rams), 24th (2002 Buccaneers over Raiders) and 16th (2007 Giants over Patriots).

[The Breeze]

Any GM and/or HC who is not trying to be the very best they can be in all 3 phases of the game would not have jobs.
-
Duh...the championship teams will likely rank high in all 3 of those phases.(exceptions are the rule)
Why all this crap about some magical formula for winning a superbowl?
You beat the crap out of the team you are playing...and if you want to do that consistently, you strive to fundamentally out play them in every phase of the game.
-
I think the real variable, outside of a HoF QB(which is huge), is having a staff that knows how to motivate and focus the talent they are given as well as put them in advatageouus situations via scheme. Which is why you repeadtedly see certain coaches and coordinators in the thick of it on a yearly basis.

[Mothman]

Perhaps it's when one unit dominates the other at the line of scrimmage that really helps their team win. A great offensive line overpowering a defensive line can certainly determine the outcome of a game, especially if there are good skill players to go with it. I think that formula is just as effective at winning as a team with a great overall defense would be.

I couldn't agree more, Craig.

I have to say it's true. You need both to win. But you can't just have a future HOF QB that does it on his own. It does not work. Which has been my point all along. You need a good QB and a top defense.

... or a great running game and a top defense, or a mediocre offense, a top defense and great special teams, or a great offense, an average defense, etc.. There are lots of ways to make it work but very one-dimensional teams are rarely going to win it all. In the end, whatever the components, they have to add up to a really good team. It definitely takes more than a HOF-caliber quarterback. I would hope most fans understand that.

[Cliff]

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... ep-indoors

Vikings GM: Bridgewater can take next step indoors

Bridgewater is 2-2 as a pro in domed stadiums and 0-1 in retractable roof stadiums, with four touchdowns and three interceptions in five games, according to splits provided by Pro Football Reference. However, he does have a significantly higher completion percentage (70 indoors, 63 outdoors) and yards per game, which climbs by almost 40.

He made incremental strides in 2015 statistically, seeing his completion percentage rise from 64 to 65 and his interceptions drop from 12 to nine. His yards per game fell, but with the return of Adrian Peterson, that decline was expected. Still, buoyed by an excellent defense, Bridgewater had the Vikings in position to travel down to Carolina in the divisional round of the playoffs. There is no doubt he is viewed as an ascending player still.

See that, everyone? No doubt. Should I lock the thread?