View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sun Oct 22, 2017 2:16 pm



Reply to topic  [ 390 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13
 Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7 
Author Message
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 11:38 pm
Posts: 1542
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
According to ESPN Stats and Information, - the Eagles sent a defensive back as a pass rusher on 13 of Sam Bradford's dropbacks, the same number as the Eagles' total from the first five games of the season. On those plays, the Eagles sacked or pressured Bradford on 8 dropbacks.

http://www.espn.com/espn/now?nowId=21-0 ... 55038150-4

That would explain why Sam got hit a lot of times by guys coming in untouched.


Sun Oct 23, 2016 6:17 pm
Profile
Veteran

Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2016 8:02 pm
Posts: 212
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
FullWood wrote:
Bradford was with the Eagles last year it looks like the Eagles knew him very and i mean very well.


Only problem with this logic is none of the coaches were there last year.


Sun Oct 23, 2016 6:46 pm
Profile
Commissioner

Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:24 pm
Posts: 23761
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
RFIP wrote:
FullWood wrote:
Bradford was with the Eagles last year it looks like the Eagles knew him very and i mean very well.


Only problem with this logic is none of the coaches were there last year.


Maybe not. But maybe they knew he was gunshy and reacted to pressure more?
Or they knew the offensive line was garbage and if sent extra rushers it could cause trouble.
:confused:
With this defense it's frustrating to see an offensive performance like this with the one dimensional teams we've put up with over the last decade or more, that's for sure. :wallbang:


Sun Oct 23, 2016 7:21 pm
Profile
Online
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2006 3:38 pm
Posts: 8976
Location: Fort Lauderdale, FL
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
halfgiz wrote:
Mike Zimmer calls loss 'embarrassing' and Vikings offensive line 'soft' bit.ly/2eviAQ5

“It was embarrassing in at least two of the phases,” the head coach said, “and I’m very disappointed in the performance that we gave today. We turned the ball over offensively, we didn’t block people, we dropped balls, we got the quarterback hit, we [need] two inches and we can’t convert on third down or fourth down, we got three shots in the red zone in the first half, we throw an interception, we gave up a 98-yard kickoff return, we fumbled a punt. If you’re going to do those things, you have no chance to win.”

The biggest irritant to Zimmer was a Vikings offensive line that he said got “whipped” by the Eagles, who had six sacks and a dozen quarterback hits.

“We didn’t block anybody,” he said. “We were soft. We got overpowered.”

Zimmer said the Vikings have to fix their offensive line from within.



At least he didn't claim that players need to fit into the system, or some such nonsense that we've heard from other Vikings HC's. Zimmer doesn't obfuscate much. Credit for that... now I hope he can figure something out between now and next game.

_________________
*********
A die-hard Vikings fan in South Florida


Sun Oct 23, 2016 8:02 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4400
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Demi wrote:
Quote:
Like I said before, I think this team still has a great chance to win the division and probably will, but that offensive line weakness is going to make it a short run in the playoffs.


A competent OC/GM would fix that within 10 weeks. Do we have that? :confused:
If it is a short run in the playoffs, both positions should be looked at.



Hereee weeee goooo :roll:

You're silent for 6 weeks now all of the sudden we have a bad GM again because we lost. Yup makes perfect sense

_________________
Image


Sun Oct 23, 2016 8:07 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4400
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
PurpleKoolaid wrote:
I had to miss the game, saw bits and pieces and heard a lot of it. Sounded like a good one to miss.
Rick sure put together a good Oline. Even the most least knowledgeable Vikings fan KNEW we needed a much better Oline right now.

We played so bad on the O and D side, im just going to pretend it didnt happen, and that we beat Chicago next week, before it a becomes a nightmare like our seasons usually end up as.


We definitely didnt play bad on the defensive side. We had 4 turnovers

_________________
Image


Sun Oct 23, 2016 8:09 pm
Profile
Pro Bowl Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2014 6:28 pm
Posts: 540
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Mothman wrote:

Don't kid yourself. Philly won it. Their defense made the Vikes offense look bad.


Dude, they came in ranked 30th in yardage, the offense has made the offense look bad all season. With the eagles deep turnovers and the way our defense was making wentz look like a high schooler they should have blown out Philly. Lets be real here, 31,18,27,29 and currently coming into this game, 30th. Probably dead last once the week finishes. Offensive yardage ranks in turners last 5 years as a coordinator. At some point spielman is going to have to call a spade a spade. At what point do we start shifting blame from the players to something with a glaringly obvious bullseye?


Sun Oct 23, 2016 8:19 pm
Profile
Pro Bowl Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2014 6:28 pm
Posts: 540
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
PurpleKoolaid wrote:
I had to miss the game, saw bits and pieces and heard a lot of it. Sounded like a good one to miss.
Rick sure put together a good Oline. Even the most least knowledgeable Vikings fan KNEW we needed a much better Oline right now.

We played so bad on the O and D side, im just going to pretend it didnt happen, and that we beat Chicago next week, before it a becomes a nightmare like our seasons usually end up as.


We definitely didnt play bad on the defensive side. We had 4 turnovers


Defense was good. You hold any team to 238 yards total and 4 turnovers you expect to win. This was 100% on the offense and its shenanigans


Sun Oct 23, 2016 8:21 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4400
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
I'm confident that this is our clunker game for the year, like @ SF last season. If the Vikes would have converted those 3 TOs in the 1st quarter into just 10 points, we are probably celebrating 6-0.

_________________
Image


Sun Oct 23, 2016 8:25 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:52 pm
Posts: 7667
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
I dont think Im wrong about Rick (too tired to go into it too much) there are quite a few things I have to say about it and Norv.

This is a top 8 D If we only had that killer instinct, that other team have, even the BEST in the league, and could run the ball, we would be a team no one wants to play. We dont want to slide that was.

Wouldnt it be nice to have 2 awesome Olinemen and not a DB and a DB that look ok?


Sun Oct 23, 2016 8:51 pm
Profile
Strong Safety
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 2:05 am
Posts: 11330
Location: California
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Games like this just bring out, " the oh crap here we go again in me as a Vikings fan..."

its like were foolish children; running across a multicolored blanket and reality is about
to rip the blanket out from underneath us, and we will land flat on our backs , once again...

_________________
no one expects the Spanish Inquisition!


Sun Oct 23, 2016 9:19 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4400
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
PurpleKoolaid wrote:
I dont think Im wrong about Rick (too tired to go into it too much) there are quite a few things I have to say about it and Norv.

This is a top 8 D If we only had that killer instinct, that other team have, even the BEST in the league, and could run the ball, we would be a team no one wants to play. We dont want to slide that was.

Wouldnt it be nice to have 2 awesome Olinemen and not a DB and a DB that look ok?


Once again though, injuries are making this OL much worse than it originally was. Did we mess up by not selecting an OL early in the past few years? Yes. But that doesnt make Spielman a bad GM by any means. If it wasnt for Spielman, Zimmer wouldnt be here. Lets not forget the defense he put out there. You can give credit to Zimmer of course but if it wasnt for Spielman, those guys wouldnt be out there. We would still have Shaun Hill at QB if it wasnt for Spielman. Are you going to really blame him for the running game? We haven't been bad at run blocking in years so I can't really lay that one on Spielman.

Look at Seattles dumpster fire of an offensive line. Does that make Schneider a bad GM?? Denver's QB situation and how they added no depth behind Manning in past years, Carolina's defensive backs. Every team has a weakness somewhere. Ours is clearly offensive line. What Spielman has done with this team since 2012 has been pretty damn good if you ask me. We're 5-1 not 1-5. So go ahead and critique him all you want for us losing one game, but I will tell you now, you're dead wrong if you going to sit there and say he is a bad GM.

_________________
Image


Sun Oct 23, 2016 9:38 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4400
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Is anyone else watching this Seattle game? And we thought our OL was bad :shock:

Hmmm 5-1 team, with a bad offensive line.....must mean they have a bad GM

_________________
Image


Sun Oct 23, 2016 10:13 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
I'm wondering how people feel about Zimmer's decision to keep Bradford in the game after it was out of reach on Sunday. This is from Jim Souhan's column:

http://www.startribune.com/sam-bradford ... 398120531/

Quote:
For all of the ugliness on display Sunday afternoon, the most important moment of the game for the Vikings might have arrived during their last drive. The score was 21-3. The Vikings had no way to win or tie. Vikings coach Mike Zimmer kept Bradford in the game.

Bradford took a couple of big hits, and after one he lay on the turf, as backup Shaun Hill started trotting onto the field.

Bradford got up, gathered himself, and threw a touchdown on his last pass.

Did Zimmer consider pulling Bradford? “No,” he said.

Is that his general philosophy or was it a situational decision? Zimmer took a while to answer, then said: “I’m not going to pull guys. I want them to learn how to fight under pressure. So you know what? Stay in there and fight. Get the guys to block for you, and let’s go. So that is not my mentality.”

Zimmer’s tough-love coaching is one big reason the Vikings are 5-1, but if he gets this quarterback hurt, he will be watching Hill play in December, and he will be hunting come January. Sometimes discretion is the better part of coaching.


Mon Oct 24, 2016 8:46 am
Profile
Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:36 pm
Posts: 280
Location: Bradford, UK
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Mothman wrote:
I'm wondering how people feel about Zimmer's decision to keep Bradford in the game after it was out of reach on Sunday. This is from Jim Souhan's column:

http://www.startribune.com/sam-bradford ... 398120531/

Quote:
For all of the ugliness on display Sunday afternoon, the most important moment of the game for the Vikings might have arrived during their last drive. The score was 21-3. The Vikings had no way to win or tie. Vikings coach Mike Zimmer kept Bradford in the game.

Bradford took a couple of big hits, and after one he lay on the turf, as backup Shaun Hill started trotting onto the field.

Bradford got up, gathered himself, and threw a touchdown on his last pass.

Did Zimmer consider pulling Bradford? “No,” he said.

Is that his general philosophy or was it a situational decision? Zimmer took a while to answer, then said: “I’m not going to pull guys. I want them to learn how to fight under pressure. So you know what? Stay in there and fight. Get the guys to block for you, and let’s go. So that is not my mentality.”

Zimmer’s tough-love coaching is one big reason the Vikings are 5-1, but if he gets this quarterback hurt, he will be watching Hill play in December, and he will be hunting come January. Sometimes discretion is the better part of coaching.


In a nutshell Zimmer personally did Bradford a favour keeping him in. He gained a little bit back from the TD pass, and pulling him would of been the icing on the cake for the home fans. Hopefully, he can take a bit of momentum from the Patterson TD to Monday night.
However, i do agree that it would of been in the interests of the team if he'd of been pulled. One hit and our season gets a lot harder to pull off.
It's a tough one. But i would always take the decision of Zimmer over anyone every time.


Mon Oct 24, 2016 9:08 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
UKno1VIKING wrote:
In a nutshell Zimmer personally did Bradford a favour keeping him in. He gained a little bit back from the TD pass, and pulling him would of been the icing on the cake for the home fans. Hopefully, he can take a bit of momentum from the Patterson TD to Monday night.
However, i do agree that it would of been in the interests of the team if he'd of been pulled. One hit and our season gets a lot harder to pull off.
It's a tough one. But i would always take the decision of Zimmer over anyone every time.


That's a somewhat contradictory answer. :)

Personally, while I understand Zimmer's mentality, I think it was needlessly risky to have Bradford in there so late, still taking hits with game well out of reach.


Mon Oct 24, 2016 9:17 am
Profile
Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:36 pm
Posts: 280
Location: Bradford, UK
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Mothman wrote:
UKno1VIKING wrote:
In a nutshell Zimmer personally did Bradford a favour keeping him in. He gained a little bit back from the TD pass, and pulling him would of been the icing on the cake for the home fans. Hopefully, he can take a bit of momentum from the Patterson TD to Monday night.
However, i do agree that it would of been in the interests of the team if he'd of been pulled. One hit and our season gets a lot harder to pull off.
It's a tough one. But i would always take the decision of Zimmer over anyone every time.


That's a somewhat contradictory answer. :)

Personally, while I understand Zimmer's mentality, I think it was needlessly risky to have Bradford in there so late, still taking hits with game well out of reach.


I don't think it is. I was saying that from Bradford's perspective, Zimmer did him a favour.
For me, i agree with you, i'd much ratrher he be fit and healthy for next week and beyond.
But i am not one to second guess Zimmer. The man is the best head coach i've seen in the 20 years of following this bunch of heartbreakers.


Mon Oct 24, 2016 10:21 am
Profile
Fenrir
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Posts: 10507
Location: Hawaii
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Mothman wrote:
UKno1VIKING wrote:
In a nutshell Zimmer personally did Bradford a favour keeping him in. He gained a little bit back from the TD pass, and pulling him would of been the icing on the cake for the home fans. Hopefully, he can take a bit of momentum from the Patterson TD to Monday night.
However, i do agree that it would of been in the interests of the team if he'd of been pulled. One hit and our season gets a lot harder to pull off.
It's a tough one. But i would always take the decision of Zimmer over anyone every time.


That's a somewhat contradictory answer. :)

Personally, while I understand Zimmer's mentality, I think it was needlessly risky to have Bradford in there so late, still taking hits with game well out of reach.


I think this is a bit of a unique situation where you've had a guy on the team for a little over a month and probably could use the reps. In this situation, I don't mind keeping him in.


Mon Oct 24, 2016 1:27 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
UKno1VIKING wrote:
I don't think it is. I was saying that from Bradford's perspective, Zimmer did him a favour.
For me, i agree with you, i'd much ratrher he be fit and healthy for next week and beyond.
But i am not one to second guess Zimmer. The man is the best head coach i've seen in the 20 years of following this bunch of heartbreakers.


I understand where you're coming from. I was just giving you a hard time because "it would of been in the interests of the team if he'd of been pulled" is basically the opposite of what Zimmer actually decided to do. :) However, I get it. You trust his judgment.

S197 wrote:
I think this is a bit of a unique situation where you've had a guy on the team for a little over a month and probably could use the reps. In this situation, I don't mind keeping him in.


No offense intended but that seems like a stretch to me. One or two extra series against the Eagles weren't likely to make a difference in the big picture... unless, of course, they had resulted in an injury. Bradford can more safely get the reps in practice and/or in post-practice work with his receivers.

I think Zimmer stubbornly made a bad call. It's a "tough guy" choice that's in his DNA and the football neanderthal in me loves that mentality but they obviously gave up a 1st round pick (and more) for Bradford because they felt they needed someone better than Hill to get them where they wanted to go this season. Consequently, it makes little sense to risk his health needlessly late in an inevitable loss.


Mon Oct 24, 2016 1:42 pm
Profile
Fenrir
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Posts: 10507
Location: Hawaii
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Mothman wrote:

No offense intended but that seems like a stretch to me. One or two extra series against the Eagles weren't likely to make a difference in the big picture... unless, of course, they had resulted in an injury. Bradford can more safely get the reps in practice and/or in post-practice work with his receivers.

I think Zimmer stubbornly made a bad call. It's a "tough guy" choice that's in his DNA and the football neanderthal in me loves that mentality but they obviously gave up a 1st round pick (and more) for Bradford because they felt they needed someone better than Hill to get them where they wanted to go this season. Consequently, it makes little sense to risk his health needlessly late in an inevitable loss.


There's simply some things you can't replicate in practice, I've heard QBs say that over and over. Players in general actually. You always hear about guys who look great in practice but do nothing on the field. Bradford looked out of sync with his receivers and clearly rattled by the hits. But it is what it is, and he was able to put together a scoring drive, which I think was big and hopefully something they can take a look at and build on.


Mon Oct 24, 2016 1:59 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Posts: 5528
Location: The Great White North
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Demi wrote:
RFIP wrote:
FullWood wrote:
Bradford was with the Eagles last year it looks like the Eagles knew him very and i mean very well.


Only problem with this logic is none of the coaches were there last year.


Maybe not. But maybe they knew he was gunshy and reacted to pressure more?
Or they knew the offensive line was garbage and if sent extra rushers it could cause trouble.
:confused:
With this defense it's frustrating to see an offensive performance like this with the one dimensional teams we've put up with over the last decade or more, that's for sure. :wallbang:


Is there such a thing as a zero-dimensional offense, because that is what I saw yesterday.


Mon Oct 24, 2016 7:00 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Posts: 5528
Location: The Great White North
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Mothman wrote:
I'm wondering how people feel about Zimmer's decision to keep Bradford in the game after it was out of reach on Sunday. This is from Jim Souhan's column:


I love the fact that Bradford, Asiata, and the rest of the offense were hyped up at the end and still gave a darn, but given the rash of injuries this team has faced on offense, I think Zimmer was spitting into the wind with that move. It's nice the Vikings finally did score, but heck, the way it was going it might have been smart to pull Bradford after the first 3 drives - he was getting hit that much.


Mon Oct 24, 2016 7:03 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
VikingLord wrote:
Mothman wrote:
I'm wondering how people feel about Zimmer's decision to keep Bradford in the game after it was out of reach on Sunday. This is from Jim Souhan's column:


I love the fact that Bradford, Asiata, and the rest of the offense were hyped up at the end and still gave a darn, but given the rash of injuries this team has faced on offense, I think Zimmer was spitting into the wind with that move. It's nice the Vikings finally did score, but heck, the way it was going it might have been smart to pull Bradford after the first 3 drives - he was getting hit that much.


:lol: Well said.


Tue Oct 25, 2016 8:20 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:51 pm
Posts: 7957
Location: Kentucky
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
At what point do you stop? Is Bradford the only one who gets that treatment? If we're going to sit one player to be cautious then why not all of the starters?

I think it's a "give up" move when Zimmer's mantra is to keep fighting.

_________________
“There is a chance that if I lose 100 pounds, I could be a jockey ...” - Coach Zimmer


Tue Oct 25, 2016 11:38 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Cliff wrote:
At what point do you stop? Is Bradford the only one who gets that treatment? If we're going to sit one player to be cautious then why not all of the starters?


They aren't all equally important to the team's success but sure, it wouldn't be a bad idea in that situation to sit other key players or even just put in the second team.

Quote:
I think it's a "give up" move when Zimmer's mantra is to keep fighting.


That's obviously his preference and as I said, the football neanderthal in me approves but the game was literally out of reach. A point was reached where fighting on with the starters wasn't going to change the final outcome. Again, they desperately traded two draft picks, one a first rounder and the other possibly as high as a second rounder, to acquire Bradford because they didn't want to play out this season with just the other QBs on their roster. Why risk his health late in an inevitable loss in which he's already been taken a beating? It's great to "fight on" but is that worth jeopardizing a player they were desperate to acquire and putting themselves right back in the position they were in before they made the trade, just to maintain a tough guy mentality?


Tue Oct 25, 2016 12:05 pm
Profile
All Pro Elite Player

Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 11:17 pm
Posts: 1223
Location: St. Paul, MN
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
halfgiz wrote:
According to ESPN Stats and Information, - the Eagles sent a defensive back as a pass rusher on 13 of Sam Bradford's dropbacks, the same number as the Eagles' total from the first five games of the season. On those plays, the Eagles sacked or pressured Bradford on 8 dropbacks.

http://www.espn.com/espn/now?nowId=21-0 ... 55038150-4

That would explain why Sam got hit a lot of times by guys coming in untouched.


I guess I don't agree that 'explains why'. Normally the defense has 4 linemen to rush so if you add 1 db then that makes 5 rushers. The offense has 5 blockers to protect the passer (and sometimes more when a back or tight end stays in to block). Pass rushers should never be untouched in a 5 on 5 situation. Now if they sent more pass rushers than blockers, then I can see it but just sending one extra db should be picked up.


Tue Oct 25, 2016 5:31 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Posts: 5528
Location: The Great White North
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Purple Reign wrote:
halfgiz wrote:
According to ESPN Stats and Information, - the Eagles sent a defensive back as a pass rusher on 13 of Sam Bradford's dropbacks, the same number as the Eagles' total from the first five games of the season. On those plays, the Eagles sacked or pressured Bradford on 8 dropbacks.

http://www.espn.com/espn/now?nowId=21-0 ... 55038150-4

That would explain why Sam got hit a lot of times by guys coming in untouched.


I guess I don't agree that 'explains why'. Normally the defense has 4 linemen to rush so if you add 1 db then that makes 5 rushers. The offense has 5 blockers to protect the passer (and sometimes more when a back or tight end stays in to block). Pass rushers should never be untouched in a 5 on 5 situation. Now if they sent more pass rushers than blockers, then I can see it but just sending one extra db should be picked up.


Another aspect, and I think where Zimmer's comment about them being "soft" at least partially came from, was the inability of the Vikings tackles to shove the outside rush up and past the QB. That inability to disrupt the edge rushers sufficiently was what allowed all of the arm swats, which is something that maybe happens once per game and at most twice, but which Philly managed to do at least 4 times fairly clean. So it wasn't like Philly had a clean extra rusher taking a direct shot most of the time, but rather found a way to get a rusher to pressure from the backside a lot of the time. That's clearly on the tackles to get locked onto those edge rushers and force them up the field if they're taking that bonsai edge rush, plus on the offensive coordinator to get them some help if he sees them struggling to do that for whatever reason.


Tue Oct 25, 2016 5:44 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:51 pm
Posts: 7957
Location: Kentucky
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Mothman wrote:
Cliff wrote:
At what point do you stop? Is Bradford the only one who gets that treatment? If we're going to sit one player to be cautious then why not all of the starters?


They aren't all equally important to the team's success but sure, it wouldn't be a bad idea in that situation to sit other key players or even just put in the second team.

Quote:
I think it's a "give up" move when Zimmer's mantra is to keep fighting.


That's obviously his preference and as I said, the football neanderthal in me approves but the game was literally out of reach. A point was reached where fighting on with the starters wasn't going to change the final outcome. Again, they desperately traded two draft picks, one a first rounder and the other possibly as high as a second rounder, to acquire Bradford because they didn't want to play out this season with just the other QBs on their roster. Why risk his health late in an inevitable loss in which he's already been taken a beating? It's great to "fight on" but is that worth jeopardizing a player they were desperate to acquire and putting themselves right back in the position they were in before they made the trade, just to maintain a tough guy mentality?


I'm not sure the team overall has an identity without maintaining that mentality. I imagine from a leadership perspective it's difficult to preach "Be tough" and then say "except Sam, he's a bit fragile and we're screwed without him".

_________________
“There is a chance that if I lose 100 pounds, I could be a jockey ...” - Coach Zimmer


Thu Oct 27, 2016 1:13 pm
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 11:38 pm
Posts: 1542
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
#Vikings K Blair Walsh: "The lack of effort thing that pisses me off Anyone who thinks that they’re wrong To question my effort that sucks."
1:02 PM - 28 Oct 2016

http://www.twincities.com/2016/10/28/vi ... josh-huff/

Maybe he should spend a week with the defense learning how to tackle. :rofl:
That was one lousy excuse for a tackle on that kick return.
Just hit him!!!! :lol:


Fri Oct 28, 2016 4:28 pm
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 07, 2013 11:38 pm
Posts: 1542
Post Re: Viking @ Eagles Game Day Discussion Thread -- Week 7
Vikings guard Alex Boone was fined $12,154 for unsportsmanlike conduct in Philly. Had words for referee after a holding call.
That's a lot of money for the F bomb :beerock:


Fri Oct 28, 2016 8:37 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 390 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 808vikingsfan, Baidu [Spider], dead_poet, ERIK the PURPLE, IrishViking, jeg067, me4get, mossbutt, PsyDanny, Rhodes Closed, soflavike, SP1966, ThePiper, Yahoo [Bot] and 25 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.