Vikings Message Board.Com

Norv Resigns. I'm sad it ended this way but something had to change.

Sucks. Can't run an offense when plays have no time to develop. Especially his.

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.

IrishViking wrote:
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?

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.

Mothman wrote: 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!

Mothman wrote: 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?

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.

[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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.