name that RB.......

[fiestavike]

I think that is just part of Norvs famine, famine, feast scheme that Zim seems to tolerate. It does get a little tedious to watch but according to Zim "this is who we are".

Put another way, I don't think Zimmer was happy that "this is who we are", it was just the reality. I don't think Norv's scheme is "famine famine feast", I think they resorted to the scheme they chose because it was better than "famine famine famine".

[9man]

Interesting observation.

Basically, I think it comes down to balance. As I said before, there can't be half an offense. Teams have to run and pass well to win a Championship. And please, folks, I'm not discounting defense or special teams. I'm merely pointing out the offense.

I agree, a balance of run and pass should be the goal. Obviously a good run game will get you a long way. The Panthers, Seahawks and Vikings were 2-3-4 in rushing yards this year during the regular season. But, guess where the Pats were? 30th. So that tells me, if you have Tom Brady then who cares about the run game.

It's that easy, go find yourself a Tom Brady and then just sit back and admire your rings!

Seriously though, there are exceptions. The issue I see is if you invest so heavily on one position, one player, then the team can become one dimensional. With the exception of a QB because a highly skilled QB brings a different dynamic to the offense. We are familiar with this even though many fans would rather forget that we once had an ex Packer QB take the team to the NFCCG. Who was the leading receiver that year? I can't even remember his name. But who was the RB? The same one we have now.

[losperros]

Not able to open holes. Not able to spring big plays, and not able to be effective in short yardage and crunch time. In a word, they were ineffective.

They did well for an "ineffective" running team:

Adrian Peterson won the rushing title.
Vikings were 4th in the league in rushing yards.
Vikings were 2nd in the league with rushing plays of 40 yards or more.
Vikings were 6th in the league with rushing plays of 20 yards or more.
Vikings tied with the Bengals for 4th in the league with 18 rushing TDs.
Vikings were 5th in the league with 113 rushing first downs.

I think the Vikings were more than effective, given the state of their offensive line. Of course, some of this comes from the fact that the Vikings were a "run first" team but that was the identity they chose for a number of reasons.

[fiestavike]

They did well for an "ineffective" running team:

Adrian Peterson won the rushing title.
Vikings were 4th in the league in rushing yards.
Vikings were 2nd in the league with rushing plays of 40 yards or more.
Vikings were 6th in the league with rushing plays of 20 yards or more.
Vikings tied with the Bengals for 4th in the league with 18 rushing TDs.
Vikings were 5th in the league with 113 rushing first downs.

I think the Vikings were more than effective, given the state of their offensive line. Of course, some of this comes from the fact that the Vikings were a "run first" team but that was the identity they chose for a number of reasons.

Most of those stats are a credit to the things Adrian Peterson does well, but they are just stats. Watching the games it was clear that they are not an effective or dominant running team. Running a lot, and having an explosive runner don't equate to a great running game.

[losperros]

Most of those stats are a credit to the things Adrian Peterson does well, but they are just stats. Watching the games it was clear that they are not an effective or dominant running team. Running a lot, and having an explosive runner don't equate to a great running game.

Believe what you want.

[IrishViking]

Believe what you want.

All of these disagreement seem to boil down perspective. Not to even suggest labels of optimist pessimist but it does strike as glass half full glass half empty.

It is truly un provable if AP got those yards thanks to his line or in spite of his line. Same goes for Teddy. Until the Line improves we can prove anything one way or the other.

[saint33]

@Saint33.....you enitrely missed my point. The teams that did well all did so without a Premier RB.....they are running by committee and doing it with relatively low paid RBs. It is NOT a position that anyone else in the league is investing the lions share of their payroll on. WE are and it is an out dated, losing recipe.

YES, if we sell out the offensive scheme to the RB we will have the league rushing title....and that is ALL we will every win. The rules are stacked against a run oriented team.

Well first of all, I was replying to you're suggestion that the run oriented teams are less successful than pass oriented teams, which the numbers simply don't suggest, as half the teams in the playoffs were not even in the top half of the league in passing offense, while almost all the teams in the in the playoffs were in the top of half of rushing offense.

However, as for the debate about the bellcow RB or not, I think you're simplifying things significantly. If we go back just one year, 6 of the top 8 rushing leaders went to the playoffs.

Using this season as proof that teams prefer not use a bellcow running back anymore, and that having a split backfield is a more effective strategy is taking context out of the picture. First of all, none of the teams in the playoffs have a healthy running back of Adrian Peterson's caliber. Would Seattle, Houston, Pittsburgh or Kansas City have split their backfield as much if Lynch, Foster, Bell or Charles were healthy all season? Would Starks, Jones or Bernard have had as big a role in their respective offenses if Lacy, Morris or Hill had produced the way they had last year? This year was especially unique in that a large number of premier backs ended up injured or ineffective for various reasons. I would argue that a large number of teams ended up using a true running back by committee system by necessity rather than by design.

Which is why I simply don't agree with the theory that the Vikings are using a flawed design that cannot be effective in today's NFL. No other team has Adrian Peterson, but Seattle has the 2nd highest paid RB in the league and they rode him to 2 Superbowls in the past two years, winning one of those. The Vikings were able to win 11 games with this ineffective design, and were a 27 yard FG away from winning a playoff game. Had that kick have been made, we may still be playing. Hard to say that we can't win anything with this strategy of great defense and a great running game because it's proven to be a very successful strategy throughout the history of the NFL, including recently.

And on top of it all, it is not as if our RB's contract is hindering our team from improving our passing game. We are currently paying the 7th highest paid WR in the league, and the 9th highest paid TE. Money is not the issue.