View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:17 am



Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
 Time to go to Heineke 
Author Message
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Time to go to Heineke
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Agree 100%. I truly believe they will. They had to modify their damn offense because the OL was so weak for gods sake. They're going to address it big time. I'm not worried


Of course, that's what everybody thought after last year...


Wed Dec 21, 2016 6:15 pm
Profile
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Posts: 10040
Location: Burbank, California
Post Re: Time to go to Heineke
Mothman wrote:
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Agree 100%. I truly believe they will. They had to modify their damn offense because the OL was so weak for gods sake. They're going to address it big time. I'm not worried


Of course, that's what everybody thought after last year...


If the Vikings go another year without adequately addressing the offensive line, then I won't know what to think anymore. It shouldn't have happened in the first place and it sure better not happen again. That's why I'm hoping they'll go after OL help in a big way.


Wed Dec 21, 2016 7:07 pm
Profile
Starter
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 6:08 pm
Posts: 156
Location: The Trees
Post Re: Time to go to Heineke
Most people bashing Bradford are just butt hurt over Bridgewater's pending demotion.

Bradford has flaws. He checks down too often and he doesn't move in the pocket as well as he can. He has no blind side awareness, leaving him vulnerable to strip sacks. All of these should be curable. The cure to checkdownitis is to throw the ball away if nobody is open 5+ yards downfield. The cure to not moving in the pocket is to remember that legs are movable appendages, and use them. The cure to no blind side awareness is to practice counting to 3. If 3 seconds have passed and you haven't thrown yet with this OL, you need to run like hell or throw it away FAST.

_________________
Mothman wrote:
... a good completion percentage in a performance like that is like putting lipstick on a pig.


Wed Dec 21, 2016 7:48 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:52 pm
Posts: 7657
Post Re: Time to go to Heineke
I think keeping Heineke and Bradford as long as possible no. The one starting though is going to be Sam out of the three.
AlssoTrade Rick for just something good. Because he isnt playing any better then good.


Wed Dec 21, 2016 8:54 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
Posts: 6335
Post Re: Time to go to Heineke
Purple Martin wrote:
Most people bashing Bradford are just butt hurt over Bridgewater's pending demotion.

Bradford has flaws. He checks down too often and he doesn't move in the pocket as well as he can. He has no blind side awareness, leaving him vulnerable to strip sacks. All of these should be curable. The cure to checkdownitis is to throw the ball away if nobody is open 5+ yards downfield. The cure to not moving in the pocket is to remember that legs are movable appendages, and use them. The cure to no blind side awareness is to practice counting to 3. If 3 seconds have passed and you haven't thrown yet with this OL, you need to run like hell or throw it away FAST.

So you'd rather have an incompletion and no gain over a check-down completion for a 3-yard gain?

That's ... interesting.

_________________
Image


Wed Dec 21, 2016 9:25 pm
Profile
Starter
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 6:08 pm
Posts: 156
Location: The Trees
Post Re: Time to go to Heineke
J. Kapp 11 wrote:
Purple Martin wrote:
Most people bashing Bradford are just butt hurt over Bridgewater's pending demotion.

Bradford has flaws. He checks down too often and he doesn't move in the pocket as well as he can. He has no blind side awareness, leaving him vulnerable to strip sacks. All of these should be curable. The cure to checkdownitis is to throw the ball away if nobody is open 5+ yards downfield. The cure to not moving in the pocket is to remember that legs are movable appendages, and use them. The cure to no blind side awareness is to practice counting to 3. If 3 seconds have passed and you haven't thrown yet with this OL, you need to run like hell or throw it away FAST.

So you'd rather have an incompletion and no gain over a check-down completion for a 3-yard gain?

That's ... interesting.


Depends on what down it is...I'd rather we not waste time on 3 yard passes on 3rd and long. But I was only using the specific number 3 as a euphemism for "worthlessly shorter than we need".

_________________
Mothman wrote:
... a good completion percentage in a performance like that is like putting lipstick on a pig.


Wed Dec 21, 2016 9:31 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
Posts: 6335
Post Re: Time to go to Heineke
Purple Martin wrote:
J. Kapp 11 wrote:
Purple Martin wrote:
Most people bashing Bradford are just butt hurt over Bridgewater's pending demotion.

Bradford has flaws. He checks down too often and he doesn't move in the pocket as well as he can. He has no blind side awareness, leaving him vulnerable to strip sacks. All of these should be curable. The cure to checkdownitis is to throw the ball away if nobody is open 5+ yards downfield. The cure to not moving in the pocket is to remember that legs are movable appendages, and use them. The cure to no blind side awareness is to practice counting to 3. If 3 seconds have passed and you haven't thrown yet with this OL, you need to run like hell or throw it away FAST.

So you'd rather have an incompletion and no gain over a check-down completion for a 3-yard gain?

That's ... interesting.


Depends on what down it is...I'd rather we not waste time on 3 yard passes on 3rd and long. But I was only using the specific number 3 as a euphemism for "worthlessly shorter than we need".

And again ... you'd rather guarantee a punt than give someone a chance to break a tackle for a first down?

I guarantee you, Sam Bradford would rather throw past the sticks on third down than check down. Sometimes you have to take what the defense gives you. And since he's 6th in the league in efficiency on throws of 15+ yards, it's not like he CAN'T throw downfield.

_________________
Image


Wed Dec 21, 2016 9:41 pm
Profile
Starter
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 13, 2014 6:08 pm
Posts: 156
Location: The Trees
Post Re: Time to go to Heineke
J. Kapp 11 wrote:

And again ... you'd rather guarantee a punt than give someone a chance to break a tackle for a first down?

I guarantee you, Sam Bradford would rather throw past the sticks on third down than check down. Sometimes you have to take what the defense gives you. And since he's 6th in the league in efficiency on throws of 15+ yards, it's not like he CAN'T throw downfield.


You'd rather we have better punting position than a first down? I'd rather we make more aggressive efforts for the first down, like having Rudolph run 11 yard routes on 3rd and 10 instead of 7 yard routes.

We are Vikings. We don't break tackles for first downs on 3rd and long, silly man. Only other teams can do that. I've seen Bradford (and Bridgewater, and Ponder...) throw an awful lot of worthlessly short passes on 3rd down, that don't get us the first down and do little for us in the field position game. It doesn't mean I don't like Bradford, because I do. He's the best QB we've had in 7 years. I just think its an area he could improve. I put forth my opinions on his shortcomings along with my praise of him as evidence I'm not blind to his weaknesses. You're welcome to disagree with my assessemnt of some of his checkdowns.

_________________
Mothman wrote:
... a good completion percentage in a performance like that is like putting lipstick on a pig.


Wed Dec 21, 2016 9:59 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
Posts: 6335
Post Re: Time to go to Heineke
Purple Martin wrote:
J. Kapp 11 wrote:

And again ... you'd rather guarantee a punt than give someone a chance to break a tackle for a first down?

I guarantee you, Sam Bradford would rather throw past the sticks on third down than check down. Sometimes you have to take what the defense gives you. And since he's 6th in the league in efficiency on throws of 15+ yards, it's not like he CAN'T throw downfield.


You'd rather we have better punting position than a first down? I'd rather we make more aggressive efforts for the first down, like having Rudolph run 11 yard routes on 3rd and 10 instead of 7 yard routes.

Who said that? Look, you said if nobody is open 5+ yards down the field, especially on third down, Bradford should throw it away. You called it the cure for checkdownitis. That's just not smart football. That's saying you'd rather guarantee a punt than give your guy a chance.

Purple Martin wrote:
We are Vikings. We don't break tackles for first downs on 3rd and long, silly man. Only other teams can do that.

Now you're generalizing. That comment simply doesn't hold water. We've gotten plenty of first downs this year on the individual effort of guys breaking tackles. How many times have we marveled at how hard Cordarrelle Patterson runs, or how elusive Stefan Diggs is.

Purple Martin wrote:
I've seen Bradford (and Bridgewater, and Ponder...) throw an awful lot of worthlessly short passes on 3rd down, that don't get us the first down and do little for us in the field position game. It doesn't mean I don't like Bradford, because I do. He's the best QB we've had in 7 years. I just think its an area he could improve. I put forth my opinions on his shortcomings along with my praise of him as evidence I'm not blind to his weaknesses. You're welcome to disagree with my assessemnt of some of his checkdowns.

Again, I'm not saying the checkdown is always the right play. But it's certainly not always the wrong play.

I get that we fans get upset when we throw short of the sticks on third down. It's frustrating, especially when we're behind. But it's not like everybody is open and Sam's just scared to throw it. He's throwing to who's open, and he's throwing it before the pocket collapses, which with this line is typically about a half second after the top of his drop. I'd rather have him do that than throw into coverage and get picked. Nobody said Bradford is perfect. But blaming Bradford for every checkdown and calling it a "weakness" is like blaming the sun for the weather being hot. There's a lot more that goes into it than Bradford's role.

_________________
Image


Wed Dec 21, 2016 10:49 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4386
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: Time to go to Heineke
Mothman wrote:
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Agree 100%. I truly believe they will. They had to modify their damn offense because the OL was so weak for gods sake. They're going to address it big time. I'm not worried


Of course, that's what everybody thought after last year...


Guess I got a different outlook than you then. It's the most obvious need on this team this year with no depth or veterans like Sullivan and Loadholt going in. it will happen

_________________
Image


Wed Dec 21, 2016 11:07 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
Posts: 3225
Post Re: Time to go to Heineke
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Mothman wrote:
Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Agree 100%. I truly believe they will. They had to modify their damn offense because the OL was so weak for gods sake. They're going to address it big time. I'm not worried


Of course, that's what everybody thought after last year...


Guess I got a different outlook than you then. It's the most obvious need on this team this year with no depth or veterans like Sullivan and Loadholt going in. it will happen


Boy, you really thought Sullivan and Loadholt were going to return and be a big help. Hard to believe, but alright.


Mon Dec 26, 2016 11:52 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Posts: 4386
Location: Watertown, NY
Post Re: Time to go to Heineke
fiestavike wrote:

Boy, you really thought Sullivan and Loadholt were going to return and be a big help. Hard to believe, but alright.


Nope never said that. There was a change neither of them started but if they stuck around they'd be a lot better than what we have. Especially Loadholt.

_________________
Image


Mon Dec 26, 2016 11:59 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 42 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 1 guest


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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.