View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Tue Oct 17, 2017 8:05 am



Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
 Norvanilla 
Author Message
Practice Squad
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 10:25 am
Posts: 26
Post Re: Norvanilla
Norv Resigns. I'm sad it ended this way but something had to change.


Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:44 am
Profile
Backup

Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2016 8:43 pm
Posts: 64
Post Re: Norvanilla
Sucks. Can't run an offense when plays have no time to develop. Especially his.


Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:48 am
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 11:02 am
Posts: 1608
Post Re: Norvanilla
TriceStyle wrote:
Sucks. Can't run an offense when plays have no time to develop. Especially his.



True, but there is the expectation of adjustments, quick slants. Fast plays. there are dozens of nfl caliber passing plays that throw in under 2 seconds.


Wed Nov 02, 2016 11:20 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Norvanilla
IrishViking wrote:
TriceStyle wrote:
Sucks. Can't run an offense when plays have no time to develop. Especially his.



True, but there is the expectation of adjustments, quick slants. Fast plays. there are dozens of nfl caliber passing plays that throw in under 2 seconds.


They've been running a lot of them this season but teams started taking a lot of those routes away. What's the counter to that when you can't run and you can't protect for long?


Wed Nov 02, 2016 11:22 am
Profile
Backup

Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2016 8:43 pm
Posts: 64
Post Re: Norvanilla
Yup Sam was asked and he specially said teams were taking away the quick things that worked away. Now they just play coverage and get pressure as if they were blitzing. Not much is going to happen unless guys are blowing coverage early.


Wed Nov 02, 2016 12:12 pm
Profile
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Posts: 10040
Location: Burbank, California
Post Re: Norvanilla
Mothman wrote:
IrishViking wrote:
TriceStyle wrote:
Sucks. Can't run an offense when plays have no time to develop. Especially his.



True, but there is the expectation of adjustments, quick slants. Fast plays. there are dozens of nfl caliber passing plays that throw in under 2 seconds.


They've been running a lot of them this season but teams started taking a lot of those routes away. What's the counter to that when you can't run and you can't protect for long?


You're back to quick hit passes anyway. The QB can look off one WR and quick hit another, or the team can utilize different formations to confuse the D and get a particular receiver open. It's going to be a head game and it will take better offensive creativity and less "tells" when the O lines up. There is also the need to understand each skill player's strength and play them accordingly, quick hit or not, which I believe was one of Norv's flaws. That and allowing too many tells.

OTOH, a lot of this would be far easier if the OL could get off the snap quickly, which they don't, and block effectively even if it's for 1.5 seconds. It's amazing how everything on the offense (every play and every skill player) is dependent on the OL to do their job right. That's why I still see problems for this offense. The OL issues aren't going away any time soon.

Man, do I hope I'm wrong about that!


Wed Nov 02, 2016 12:42 pm
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 11:02 am
Posts: 1608
Post Re: Norvanilla
Mothman wrote:
IrishViking wrote:
TriceStyle wrote:
Sucks. Can't run an offense when plays have no time to develop. Especially his.



True, but there is the expectation of adjustments, quick slants. Fast plays. there are dozens of nfl caliber passing plays that throw in under 2 seconds.


They've been running a lot of them this season but teams started taking a lot of those routes away. What's the counter to that when you can't run and you can't protect for long?



Max protect sets With the Fullback or TE slipping out if they are unblocked?


Wed Nov 02, 2016 1:30 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Norvanilla
losperros wrote:
You're back to quick hit passes anyway. The QB can look off one WR and quick hit another, or the team can utilize different formations to confuse the D and get a particular receiver open. It's going to be a head game and it will take better offensive creativity and less "tells" when the O lines up. There is also the need to understand each skill player's strength and play them accordingly, quick hit or not, which I believe was one of Norv's flaws. That and allowing too many tells.

OTOH, a lot of this would be far easier if the OL could get off the snap quickly, which they don't, and block effectively even if it's for 1.5 seconds. It's amazing how everything on the offense (every play and every skill player) is dependent on the OL to do their job right. That's why I still see problems for this offense. The OL issues aren't going away any time soon.

Man, do I hope I'm wrong about that!


I hope so too.

IrishViking wrote:
Max protect sets With the Fullback or TE slipping out if they are unblocked?


Sure, and they've run some plays like that but how many times a game can they go that route and be successful?

My point was that, by necessity, they need to be able to mix it up and counterpunch and they have some very limiting factors. As Craig indicated above, there are some things they can do to get receivers open and get the ball out quickly but ultimately, any offense that's too limited will struggle. To be effective week after week the offense needs to mix it up and attack the field at several levels or just dominate the line of scrimmage and impose their will on the other team. The Vikes don't look like they'll be doing the latter any time soon so they have to find a way to mix things up effectively without getting their QB killed or punting 12 times a game.


Wed Nov 02, 2016 2:02 pm
Profile
Pro Bowl Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2014 6:28 pm
Posts: 540
Post Re: Norvanilla
[quote="IrishViking]


Max protect sets With the Fullback or TE slipping out if they are unblocked?[/quote]


Exactly. Do SOMETHING. Anything except what they have been doing over and over. Something. Anything. Change it. Change alot. Change something. Ffs. Dude was incapable of adjusting. I wish him well but good riddance


Wed Nov 02, 2016 2:19 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3210
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: Norvanilla
I'm not sure max protect is the answer. Chicago ran a basic front 4 style attack on our OL and kicked the crap out of them. That means 7 guys in coverage. If we go max protect we'll have what 2 or 3 guys out on pattern. That effectively means they can blitz one guy and double cover everyone else. That isn't a recipe for success either.

I think we are going to see more chips and things like that to help beef up the tackles. Call it a hunch, but I bet that CP84 is going to see a resurgence in his career as they run more stuff in the short game that takes advantage of his athleticism. We'll probably see more stuff from Mckinnon similar to what the Eagles used to do with Michael Westbrook.

Will it be enough? Who knows.

_________________
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi


Thu Nov 03, 2016 8:45 am
Profile
Hall of Famer

Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:53 pm
Posts: 8438
Post Re: Norvanilla
mansquatch wrote:
I'm not sure max protect is the answer. Chicago ran a basic front 4 style attack on our OL and kicked the crap out of them. That means 7 guys in coverage. If we go max protect we'll have what 2 or 3 guys out on pattern. That effectively means they can blitz one guy and double cover everyone else. That isn't a recipe for success either.

I think we are going to see more chips and things like that to help beef up the tackles. Call it a hunch, but I bet that CP84 is going to see a resurgence in his career as they run more stuff in the short game that takes advantage of his athleticism. We'll probably see more stuff from Mckinnon similar to what the Eagles used to do with Michael Westbrook.

Will it be enough? Who knows.


Yeah, basically the most effective way to use max protect is to catch them on a blitz and have enough blockers to stop it and then connect with one of your guys in a 1 on 1 match up for a big play. It's not something you can really use when their front 4 alone is getting pressure since they can just blanket all your guys in coverage.

They'll be better off spreading it out a little bit and moving guys in motion to get separation off the snap. Also it wouldn't hurt to start playing Treadwell, every throw and catch is going to be tightly contested and we need a stronger presence at WR who can win at the point of attack.


Thu Nov 03, 2016 2:28 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3210
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: Norvanilla
Mondry you are thinking along the same lines as me. I see this as an enormous opportunity for the physical guys on our roster. Get Treadwell out there to start beating up DBs and get CP84 out there to start juking them out of their kleets. If the OL cant' maul, then lets put our physical pass catchers out there and beat up on them with size in the quick passing game. Why haven't we seen Treadwell setting picks for CP84 yet? That one just blows me away, you'd think it would be an obvious matchup issue for just about any defense.

_________________
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi


Fri Nov 04, 2016 9:33 am
Profile
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Posts: 10040
Location: Burbank, California
Post Re: Norvanilla
mansquatch wrote:
Mondry you are thinking along the same lines as me. I see this as an enormous opportunity for the physical guys on our roster. Get Treadwell out there to start beating up DBs and get CP84 out there to start juking them out of their kleets. If the OL cant' maul, then lets put our physical pass catchers out there and beat up on them with size in the quick passing game. Why haven't we seen Treadwell setting picks for CP84 yet? That one just blows me away, you'd think it would be an obvious matchup issue for just about any defense.


I agree with the two of you philosophically. Personally, I'm not as convinced about Treadwell's abilities as you guys are.

OTOH, I admit I'm biased because I wanted the Vikings to draft for the OL with their first pick.


Fri Nov 04, 2016 10:24 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3210
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: Norvanilla
I didn't understand why they went WR either, but the die is cast.

Will be interesting to see if some of the conservatism about starting rookies will change now that Turner is out. FWIW, I do not think it will. They've made Waynes wait the same way and he is on defense.

_________________
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi


Fri Nov 04, 2016 11:08 am
Profile
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Posts: 10040
Location: Burbank, California
Post Re: Norvanilla
mansquatch wrote:
I didn't understand why they went WR either, but the die is cast.

Will be interesting to see if some of the conservatism about starting rookies will change now that Turner is out. FWIW, I do not think it will. They've made Waynes wait the same way and he is on defense.


Good point.

Obviously, the conservatism regarding rookies working their way into the lineup didn't just come from Norv. Most of the time the team does it on both the offense and defense. That leads me to believe Zimmer will use that approach no matter who the coordinators are.


Fri Nov 04, 2016 11:33 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3210
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: Norvanilla
When the defensive players have spoken about the scheme they speak to how it is "all technique". I've wondered if Zimmer expects a very high level of precision on technique from his players and that influences who starts? Of course this doesn't really seem to square with what we've seen from the OL. They are terrible all over. Maybe that is a case of having to start guys vs. wanting to?

Shrug

_________________
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi


Fri Nov 04, 2016 1:38 pm
Profile
Commissioner

Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:24 pm
Posts: 23761
Post Re: Norvanilla
Quote:
I agree with the two of you philosophically. Personally, I'm not as convinced about Treadwell's abilities as you guys are.


Quote:
I didn't understand why they went WR either, but the die is cast.


:confused:
They had a bunch of #3 guys on most teams. Their most "talented" receiver was a guy who'd likely be better as a HB. Who had issues breaking press. His routes were incompetent. He was an athlete trying to become a WR. Every Wr on this team is a backup level player on most teams. Or a specialist.

Is Treadwell a starting WR? Considering his stock he should be. Why wasn't he? Isn't he fast enough to run Norv's 7 step offense? Who knows. He doesn't "practice" well enough? Same issues a half dozen Vikings WRs have had in the last decade. We spent a first round pick on a receiver, our offense is garbage. There is zero reason he shouldn't be out there at this point. We've seen the guys we're trotting out there. They can't do the job. Can Treadwell? We don't know. But after seeing the offense that's been trotted out there, it's a question that deserves an answer. And it can't be answered when they aren't willing to ask it.


Sat Nov 05, 2016 2:46 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cliff, dead_poet, Pondering Her Percy and 10 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.