View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:47 pm



Reply to topic  [ 41 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling 
Author Message
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
In order to keep the "positive" thread positive, let's carry the discussion of red zone scoring and play calling over into this thread.

I think we all agree the Vikes need to do a better job of scoring in the red zone. How should they go about it? Has their play calling been too conservative inside the opponent's 20? Do they play for the field goal too often? Should they attack the end zone more aggressively?

Discuss. :)


Thu Apr 20, 2017 6:43 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3303
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
Jimsucksbig

:spanking: :spanking: :spanking: :spanking:

I continue my question from before: Is it the play calling that is the limiting factor or the ability of the players on the field to execute that is the limiting our PF?

I feel like the playcalling follows the ability of the players, but maybe I'm in the minority.

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


Thu Apr 20, 2017 8:01 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
mansquatch wrote:
Jimsucksbig

:spanking: :spanking: :spanking: :spanking:


What the...? All I did was start a thread so this subject wouldn't keep derailing another thread. I didn't even introduce the subject!

Quote:
I continue my question from before: Is it the play calling that is the limiting factor or the ability of the players on the field to execute that is the limiting our PF?


I don't think it's just one or the other. They've both been limiting factors but the playcalling has tended to be conservative and it doesn't have to be conservative.

Quote:
I feel like the playcalling follows the ability of the players, but maybe I'm in the minority.


It depends on what you mean. If you don't have good red zone targets or a QB who can be trusted to decisively make accurate throws into tight coverage, attacking the end zone is much more difficult. If you have a good power running game, it makes sense to utilize it in the red zone.

I don't see this as an issue where the quality of the OL can be used as a justification for conservative play calling, particularly since conservative play calling tends to lean heavily on blocking to be successful!


Thu Apr 20, 2017 8:35 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3303
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
Mothman wrote:
mansquatch wrote:
Jimsucksbig

:spanking: :spanking: :spanking: :spanking:


What the...? All I did was start a thread so this subject wouldn't keep derailing another thread. I didn't even introduce the subject!


This was supposed to be funny!

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


Thu Apr 20, 2017 9:25 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
mansquatch wrote:
This was supposed to be funny!


My reply was supposed to subtly indicate I was in on the joke too but I didn't exactly make that clear. Sorry. I'm really tired today...


Thu Apr 20, 2017 9:35 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3303
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
Well why doesn't it HAVE to be conservative?

If your offense is weak relative to the defense you face, which in the case of the 2016 Vikings offense was every game, then points are at a premium.

If your defense was #3 in the league and the strength of your team, then the points you need to win, on average, is less than most other teams.

So in this case, while getting to the redzone and walking away with NOTHING is ALWAYS bad, in the case of the vikings it is MORE BAD because your trips to the redzone are more scarce. Moreover, because your defense is pretty good, the value of 3 points is GREATER than if your defense were worse.

Ergo... maybe getting a field goal over ZERO is the better play?

Comparing our risk taking to NE and GB is silly btw. Both teams reach the redzone with FAR greater frequency than the Vikings and thus can afford to take risks since they can reliably get there again. If we have Tom Brady at QB I'd expect us to take more risks too. But we don't...

Also, the reason our red zone trips were less frequent was because of... drum roll... our Offensive Line.

So yeah, I'd say one drives the other.

If you do not like that argument, there here is another one: Has anyone seen Pat Shurmer (or Norv) call plays without a shaky OL while with the Vikings? I haven't. So how can we conclude that if the OL wasn't shaky they would still call plays conservatively?

Or another angle: Why do you want them taking more risks when the OL increases the negatives without any increase in the positives or More Risk vs. same reward?

I think what we saw last year was the coaches trying to do what would give them the best opportunity to win with what they had on the field, not what would give them the best chance to win if things were more ideal. If you are to conclude that the coaching will continue to be conservative, then you are also concluding the state of the offense (especially the OL) will remain the same.

Given how last year went vs. 2015 I can see the reasoning since they went into the 2015 offseason saying that had to fix the OL and in 2016 it was worse. That is completely fair. However, we have the luxury of specifics in the NFL, so the real question to me is this: Why do you think Reiff/Remmers will be as bad as Clemmings/Sirles?

I think R/R will be better than C/S. Therefore, given how bad our OL was in 2016, I think we'll see material improvement in our Offense and thus more diversity in the playbook. How much is the question.

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


Thu Apr 20, 2017 9:43 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
Posts: 3226
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
Its mysterious that this problem didn't improve with Shurmur. Of course, the closer you get to endzone the more downhill defenders can play on the underneath routes, but given what Bradford does well, I don't see any reason they shouldn't be able to spread the defense and create quick reads for Sam to use his accuracy.

The state of the OLine and Norvs system was a completely incompatible situation. Unfortunately for Turner's entire tenure that was the case, but I think that explains redzone problems before Shurmur took over pretty well.


Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:18 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3303
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
The over commitment to the run last year inside the red zone was quite frustrating, especially later in the season when you could all but predict the outcome. On many of the passing downs my recollection was Bradford having little if any time due to impending pass rushers. That wasn't always the case, but it seemed to be more often than not.

I'm sure some of the pass rush woes were to do it being 3rd and goal after going backward in the running game on the first two snaps making it an obvious passing situation.

That stuff needs to get fixed and I agree, it is more than the OL. The play calling needs to recognize the situation and be more dynamic.

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


Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:30 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
mansquatch wrote:
Well why doesn't it HAVE to be conservative?

If your offense is weak relative to the defense you face, which in the case of the 2016 Vikings offense was every game, then points are at a premium.


Isn't that all the more reason to get 7 on trips to the red zone instead of 3?

Quote:
If your defense was #3 in the league and the strength of your team, then the points you need to win, on average, is less than most other teams.

So in this case, while getting to the redzone and walking away with NOTHING is ALWAYS bad, in the case of the vikings it is MORE BAD because your trips to the redzone are more scarce. Moreover, because your defense is pretty good, the value of 3 points is GREATER than if your defense were worse.

Ergo... maybe getting a field goal over ZERO is the better play?

Comparing our risk taking to NE and GB is silly btw.


I didn't make that comparison.

Quote:
If you do not like that argument, there here is another one: Has anyone seen Pat Shurmer (or Norv) call plays without a shaky OL while with the Vikings? I haven't. So how can we conclude that if the OL wasn't shaky they would still call plays conservatively?


I don't see why a shaky OL dictates conservative play calling when, for example, leaning on running plays relies on good performance from that same OL. As an explanation for conservative playcalling, that doesn't wash. It's the same argument people were using after the second Lions game last season in response to complaints about conservative playcalling. The Vikings supposedly couldn't throw downfield because the OL was so bad. Bradford even complained about the conservative playcalling at the time and in subsequent weeks, even with a lousy OL, the Vikings were actually able to throw and complete some effective passes downfield. It wasn't impossible at all.

Quote:
Or another angle: Why do you want them taking more risks when the OL increases the negatives without any increase in the positives or More Risk vs. same reward?


It's not the same reward. A TD is worth more than a FG. I want them to be more aggressive in the red zone because I want them to score more points. Scoring points takes pressure off the defense and wins football games. I want them to try. If they fail, they fail. Bad OL play is going to be a factor on conservative plays and aggressive plays so I don't find it a convincing argument against trying harder to get into the end zone.

Quote:
Given how last year went vs. 2015 I can see the reasoning since they went into the 2015 offseason saying that had to fix the OL and in 2016 it was worse. That is completely fair. However, we have the luxury of specifics in the NFL, so the real question to me is this: Why do you think Reiff/Remmers will be as bad as Clemmings/Sirles?


I've never stated I think Reiff/Remmers will be as bad as Clemmings/Sirles. :confused:


Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:37 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
mansquatch wrote:
The over commitment to the run last year inside the red zone was quite frustrating, especially later in the season when you could all but predict the outcome. On many of the passing downs my recollection was Bradford having little if any time due to impending pass rushers. That wasn't always the case, but it seemed to be more often than not.

I'm sure some of the pass rush woes were to do it being 3rd and goal after going backward in the running game on the first two snaps making it an obvious passing situation.

That stuff needs to get fixed and I agree, it is more than the OL. The play calling needs to recognize the situation and be more dynamic.


Exactly but if that's how you feel, I don't understand why you seem to be arguing the opposite above.


Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:40 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3303
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
I feel that the predictability of the play calling needs to changed. I'm just not sure how much of that is blundering by the coaches and how much is due to personnel limitations. I know I implied the former above. My criticism was meant to be narrow: I think the coaches need to be more aware of how predictable they are. However, I also think having watched most games last season that the offense as whole was predictable because they were so limited in what they could do as a result of the OL disaster. They couldn't do other things well enough to make them worth doing against an NFL defense.

It is hard for me think this somehow isn't equally (or more) of a driver of the red zone issues that just blundering by the coaches.

The biggest thing for me here is the lack of information. We just do not know.

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


Thu Apr 20, 2017 11:07 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
mansquatch wrote:
I feel that the predictability of the play calling needs to changed. I'm just not sure how much of that is blundering by the coaches and how much is due to personnel limitations.

I know I implied the former above. My criticism was meant to be narrow: I think the coaches need to be more aware of how predictable they are. However, I also think having watched most games last season that the offense as whole was predictable because they were so limited in what they could do as a result of the OL disaster. They couldn't do other things well enough to make them worth doing against an NFL defense.

It is hard for me think this somehow isn't equally (or more) of a driver of the red zone issues that just blundering by the coaches.


I'd describe it as a chosen coaching philosophy rather than blundering (just because the latter implies a careless mistake) but it's a multi-season issue. Personnel issues have some impact on play calling decisions and maybe you think those same factors have been driving predictable and conservative offense from the Vikes for a few years now. If that's the case, it brings us back to larger issues about the team's approach to the offense.

Quote:
The biggest thing for me here is the lack of information. We just do not know.


What crucial information are we lacking on this subject? We know who determines the personnel on the roster and on the field. We know who calls the plays. We know what plays were called. We know the results of those plays. We know which players were on the field. Whether the red zone playcalling is driven by fear of mistakes or an inherently conservative coaching philosophy, it plays out the same on the field. They're making a choice to be predictable and conservative and they have other, potentially more effective, options.

The approach they've taken has just not yielded very good results.


Thu Apr 20, 2017 11:36 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3303
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
Jim you are basically saying that in three years under Zimmer we've been seeing conservative play calling (we have) and since it has been three seasons, it is safe to call it a pattern. That is a reasonable conclusion to reach on that broad stroke.

However I have difficulty squaring it with the OL situation. The OL was at best below AVG in 2014. In 2015 it was so bad that going into the offseason they said it was their biggest issue going forward. Then we had the total dumpster fire that was 2016. It isn't a stretch to say we've never seen them have the benefit of even average OL production in the Zimmer era. In fact, two of those three seasons we saw TJ Clemmings, quite possible the worst Vikings Tackle of ALL TIME, play the majority of the offensive snaps.

I just think it is fair to wonder if we will see more aggressive play calling if we start getting more reliable play up front? Or you might turn it around and ask the reverse question: If we get better protection would we continue to call the same dink and dunk offense?

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


Thu Apr 20, 2017 2:33 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
mansquatch wrote:
Jim you are basically saying that in three years under Zimmer we've been seeing conservative play calling (we have) and since it has been three seasons, it is safe to call it a pattern. That is a reasonable conclusion to reach on that broad stroke.

However I have difficulty squaring it with the OL situation. The OL was at best below AVG in 2014. In 2015 it was so bad that going into the offseason they said it was their biggest issue going forward. Then we had the total dumpster fire that was 2016. It isn't a stretch to say we've never seen them have the benefit of even average OL production in the Zimmer era. In fact, two of those three seasons we saw TJ Clemmings, quite possible the worst Vikings Tackle of ALL TIME, play the majority of the offensive snaps.

I just think it is fair to wonder if we will see more aggressive play calling if we start getting more reliable play up front? Or you might turn it around and ask the reverse question: If we get better protection would we continue to call the same dink and dunk offense?


I think they probably would.

It's certainly fair to wonder if we might see more aggressive play calling with more reliable OL play but if the OL is indeed what's been holding it back, that's indicative of a pretty conservative mindset in the first place because predictable, conservative red zone play calling isn't the only way to deal with that problem. In fact, I'd argue it's not even the smartest way. If the goal is simply to avoid turnovers and make sure to get at least 3 points per trip, that approach is a way to accomplish those modest goals but except in very particular game situations, that really shouldn't be their goal. Their primary goal on the vast majority of trips into the red zone should be to actually score TDs and although a bad OL makes it harder to attack the end zone, it doesn't preclude it. If anything, I think the more conservative approach tends to make it harder on the OL in those situations by asking them to do what they don't do well: exert their will against stacked fronts in the running game (mainly on first and second down) and then pass protect in obvious third down passing situations because they weren't actually able to exert their will on the previous 2 plays! A more aggressive, less predictable approach could help them achieve better results by making them harder to defend. Fielding a better OL in the first place would obviously be helpful too. :)

I suspect if we see better OL play than we have in the previous 3 years, especially in the running game, we'll see more of the same conservative playcalling because they'll have increased confidence that their ground game can do the job. Of course, if it actually can do the job most of the time, that would be fine.


Thu Apr 20, 2017 3:11 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3303
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
Let me phrase it a different way:

If the OL is better, the array of plays they have to choose from is probably quite a bit larger than what we saw last year or even in 2015.

Also, in 2015, relying on the run to score wasn't that bad of an idea since we were handing the ball to Adrian Petersen who at the team was both the leading rusher in the league and a proven red zone threat. The fact that he is no longer on the team will probably also have an impact this issue. To what extent we do not know.

That last point is another reason why we should be careful to assume we understand patterns or tendencies with regards to the offense.

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


Thu Apr 20, 2017 3:43 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
mansquatch wrote:
Let me phrase it a different way:

If the OL is better, the array of plays they have to choose from is probably quite a bit larger than what we saw last year or even in 2015.


They couldn't be more aggressive with a limited number of plays?

Quote:
Also, in 2015, relying on the run to score wasn't that bad of an idea since we were handing the ball to Adrian Petersen who at the team was both the leading rusher in the league and a proven red zone threat. The fact that he is no longer on the team will probably also have an impact this issue. To what extent we do not know.

That last point is another reason why we should be careful to assume we understand patterns or tendencies with regards to the offense.


I guess I just don't see a need for caution in that regard. The patterns and tendencies are easily identifiable. We can see them. Nobody is saying they are immutable.


Thu Apr 20, 2017 4:29 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Posts: 3303
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
Jim, the patterns in the past are obvious. However, if the players are different, especially a key cog like Adrian Petersen then a patter which involved him should be considered suspect if going forward he is not on the team.

Likewise, what we saw in 15 and 14 probably isn't that relevant any longer since Norv Turner was calling the plays vs. Pat Shurmer.

I get it, the Vikings did stuff a certain way in the past. I'm not arguing that. I'm asking what they are going to do in 2017. If the staff and roster are different at critical positions then it is logical to think the offense will not be the same.

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


Mon Apr 24, 2017 8:51 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
mansquatch wrote:
Jim, the patterns in the past are obvious. However, if the players are different, especially a key cog like Adrian Petersen then a patter which involved him should be considered suspect if going forward he is not on the team.


Existing patterns are all we have to discuss. We can't draw conclusions from what has yet to occur. As I wrote above, I'm not suggesting the patterns and tendencies we've seen are immutable.

Quote:
Likewise, what we saw in 15 and 14 probably isn't that relevant any longer since Norv Turner was calling the plays vs. Pat Shurmer.

I get it, the Vikings did stuff a certain way in the past. I'm not arguing that. I'm asking what they are going to do in 2017. If the staff and roster are different at critical positions then it is logical to think the offense will not be the same.


It's never exactly the same. It's been different in one capacity or another every year but what we've seen from the team philosophically under Zimmer is likely to inform what we'll see going forward. That doesn't mean there won't be differences and it's possible we could see dramatic differences but it's still worth considering what we've seen so far and what that might tell us about what lies ahead. We obviously don't know what they are going to do in 2017. I'm hoping they will be more aggressive about attacking the end zone and more effective at finishing drives with TDs.


Mon Apr 24, 2017 9:22 am
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 am
Posts: 1269
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
Guys this is an exercise in futility. The fundamental fact and limiting factor was that the team had NO O Line. No matter how great your RB, Coach, or QB might be, you will get nowhere without an OL. We cannot judge the Coaches from last year, not even the O Line Coach, until they have at least an average O Line.

Consider the opposite situation, ie a team with a great O Line and substandard RB.....they DO stand a chance of getting to the end zone.....we did not.


Mon Apr 24, 2017 10:23 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
chicagopurple wrote:
Guys this is an exercise in futility. The fundamental fact and limiting factor was that the team had NO O Line. No matter how great your RB, Coach, or QB might be, you will get nowhere without an OL. We cannot judge the Coaches from last year, not even the O Line Coach, until they have at least an average O Line.

Consider the opposite situation, ie a team with a great O Line and substandard RB.....they DO stand a chance of getting to the end zone.....we did not.


As I've said several times already, it's not just a one year problem. It's not just an OL issue either.


Mon Apr 24, 2017 10:38 am
Profile
All Pro Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 am
Posts: 1269
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
no, its not. But you cant really judge everything else until you have a servicable line.

I just got my list of game dates and its really hard to face shelling out 230-350$ per ticket for myself and my wife and 2 friends as I have done for years, after the horrible run of poor quality foot ball that management has put of the field for the last 2 yrs. When I take everyone up to MN for the weekend, its well over a grand for tickets, hotel rooms and meals. Up until the last few years I never hesitated because it was a momentous weekend and there was great optimism. Now I feel like I am just going through the motions and kinda wasting my money because the team is rather hopeless.....like Cleveland or Buffalo.....I am NOT excited and kinda feel like a chump buying my tickets.


Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:04 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
chicagopurple wrote:
no, its not. But you cant really judge everything else until you have a servicable line.

I just got my list of game dates and its really hard to face shelling out 230-350$ per ticket for myself and my wife and 2 friends as I have done for years, after the horrible run of poor quality foot ball that management has put of the field for the last 2 yrs. When I take everyone up to MN for the weekend, its well over a grand for tickets, hotel rooms and meals. Up until the last few years I never hesitated because it was a momentous weekend and there was great optimism. Now I feel like I am just going through the motions and kinda wasting my money because the team is rather hopeless.....like Cleveland or Buffalo.....I am NOT excited and kinda feel like a chump buying my tickets.


I hear you. I'd be reluctant to spend big bucks on a trip to see the Vikes right now too. :(

It's weird to see just how divided we are as a fan base. Some fans are feeling very enthusiastic about the team right now and others seem to have "the blahs". We're obviously in the latter category at the moment, which is a drag. I haven't felt this way since the Childress era and I can't remember the last time I struggled so much to get interested in the draft...

That might seem off topic and to an extent, it is but I think it's also a consequence of watching years of offensive futility. I enjoy watching good defense but it would be nice to see a complete team for once.


Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:52 am
Profile
Fenrir
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Posts: 10706
Location: Hawaii
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
chicagopurple wrote:
no, its not. But you cant really judge everything else until you have a servicable line.

I just got my list of game dates and its really hard to face shelling out 230-350$ per ticket for myself and my wife and 2 friends as I have done for years, after the horrible run of poor quality foot ball that management has put of the field for the last 2 yrs. When I take everyone up to MN for the weekend, its well over a grand for tickets, hotel rooms and meals. Up until the last few years I never hesitated because it was a momentous weekend and there was great optimism. Now I feel like I am just going through the motions and kinda wasting my money because the team is rather hopeless.....like Cleveland or Buffalo.....I am NOT excited and kinda feel like a chump buying my tickets.


For me it's been the exact opposite, I was much more pessimistic before going to the games. Granted I've been lucky as of late, I was there to watch them blow out the Chargers and then beat the Packers the following year in the new stadium opener, so that helps. It's awesome to see a sea of fans in purple, the stadium, the skol chant, some old school guy blowing the horn (was Bud Grant last year).

The atmosphere is great but if you aren't into it, doesn't seem to make sense paying money if you feel like you're just going through the motions. All I can say is the Falcons started 2015 at 5-0 then ended up 8-8 for the year. Look where they were in 2016. And I feel they did it with much less adversity than the Vikings had to face.


Mon Apr 24, 2017 7:19 pm
Profile
Career Elite Player
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 5:45 pm
Posts: 2749
Location: Hawaii
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
S197 wrote:
chicagopurple wrote:
no, its not. But you cant really judge everything else until you have a servicable line.

I just got my list of game dates and its really hard to face shelling out 230-350$ per ticket for myself and my wife and 2 friends as I have done for years, after the horrible run of poor quality foot ball that management has put of the field for the last 2 yrs. When I take everyone up to MN for the weekend, its well over a grand for tickets, hotel rooms and meals. Up until the last few years I never hesitated because it was a momentous weekend and there was great optimism. Now I feel like I am just going through the motions and kinda wasting my money because the team is rather hopeless.....like Cleveland or Buffalo.....I am NOT excited and kinda feel like a chump buying my tickets.


For me it's been the exact opposite, I was much more pessimistic before going to the games. Granted I've been lucky as of late, I was there to watch them blow out the Chargers and then beat the Packers the following year in the new stadium opener, so that helps. It's awesome to see a sea of fans in purple, the stadium, the skol chant, some old school guy blowing the horn (was Bud Grant last year).

The atmosphere is great but if you aren't into it, doesn't seem to make sense paying money if you feel like you're just going through the motions. All I can say is the Falcons started 2015 at 5-0 then ended up 8-8 for the year. Look where they were in 2016. And I feel they did it with much less adversity than the Vikings had to face.



Agree. I can't see how being a Vikings fan now, could be worse than how it was during the Frazier and Childress era. 3-13, QB carousel on a weekly basis. Enter 2017. Bradford is one of the best QBs the Vikings have had in 13 years (maybe more). They have a top 5 defense. They can afford to sit Clemmings. They seem to be moving away from a run first philosophy. The GM and HC seem to be on the same page. They finally have a place to call home. Plus, this year seems to be a deep draft and the Vikings have a lot of mid round picks which they should be able to fill the major holes.

Losing interest. Losing patience. Not much anyone can do to help you with that. But I don't think you can say it's because the product on the field is worse than before.

I can't wait for week 1.

_________________
Joined: Aug 2006
Deleted: Sept 12 2014
Reborn: Sept 17 2014


Mon Apr 24, 2017 11:07 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
808vikingsfan wrote:
Agree. I can't see how being a Vikings fan now, could be worse than how it was during the Frazier and Childress era. 3-13, QB carousel on a weekly basis. Enter 2017. Bradford is one of the best QBs the Vikings have had in 13 years (maybe more). They have a top 5 defense. They can afford to sit Clemmings. They seem to be moving away from a run first philosophy. The GM and HC seem to be on the same page. They finally have a place to call home. Plus, this year seems to be a deep draft and the Vikings have a lot of mid round picks which they should be able to fill the major holes.

Losing interest. Losing patience. Not much anyone can do to help you with that. But I don't think you can say it's because the product on the field is worse than before.


It feels stagnant. Sure, there are changes every year but the mediocrity remains.

This dissatisfaction isn't without a foundation. Do people here realize we're actually in the least successful extended stretch of seasons in Vikings history (in terms of actually reaching the postseason)? They've been to the playoffs 5 times in the past 16 years and they've won just one playoff game in that period.


Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:36 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
Posts: 3226
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
Mothman wrote:

This dissatisfaction isn't without a foundation. Do people here realize we're actually in the least successful extended stretch of seasons in Vikings history (in terms of actually reaching the postseason)? They've been to the playoffs 5 times in the past 16 years and they've won just one playoff game in that period.



I think that's what 808 was getting at. Its been grim. The Ownership group - McCombs - Childress - Frazier...Zimmer is a dramatically new direction. They played the cover 2 (mostly not very well) for the better part of 20 years, and have taken a new direction. After some of what transpired last year, I'm less hopeful, but it certainly doesn't feel stale to me. Its starting to feel impatient and desperate though. I hope they prove me wrong this year and keep laying a foundation instead of mortgaging to save their jobs.


Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:47 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
fiestavike wrote:
I think that's what 808 was getting at. Its been grim. The Ownership group - McCombs - Childress - Frazier...Zimmer is a dramatically new direction. They played the cover 2 (mostly not very well) for the better part of 20 years, and have taken a new direction. After some of what transpired last year, I'm less hopeful, but it certainly doesn't feel stale to me. Its starting to feel impatient and desperate though. I hope they prove me wrong this year and keep laying a foundation instead of mortgaging to save their jobs.


I don't think switching defensive schemes constitutes a dramatically new direction for the team. I see Zimmer's Vikings teams as an extension of the same direction with a new defensive scheme. We might say the team is in the Childress era, Zimmer era, etc. but what the Vikes are really in is the Wilf/Spielman era. We've seen continuity of similar issues across 3 different coaching staffs now and the extension of that same extended unsuccessful stretch I mentioned above.

They've already stopped laying the foundation


Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:17 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
Posts: 3226
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
Mothman wrote:
They've already stopped laying the foundation


That's what I'm afraid of.


Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:19 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37219
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
fiestavike wrote:
Mothman wrote:
They've already stopped laying the foundation


That's what I'm afraid of.



LOL! You responded to that fast! I took that line out, thinking it might be stated too definitively, but you responded to it before I could delete it so what the heck, i've put it back in.

I'll just qualify it by saying I fear what you fear: that they've already stopped. We've seen that show before and It speaks to what I was writing about above: we're in the Spielman/Wilf era. The characteristics that have defined the team for over a decade now flow down from the top.


Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:24 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
Posts: 3226
Post Re: Red Zone Scoring and Play Calling
Mothman wrote:
fiestavike wrote:
Mothman wrote:
They've already stopped laying the foundation


That's what I'm afraid of.



LOL! You responded to that fast! I took that line out, thinking it might be stated too definitively, but you responded to it before I could delete it so what the heck, i've put it back in.

I'll just qualify it by saying I fear what you fear: that they've already stopped. We've seen that show before and It speaks to what I was writing about above: we're in the Spielman/Wilf era. The characteristics that have defined the team for over a decade now flow down from the top.


I recognize the correlation, but I'm not certain about the causation yet.

I hope to see the Wilfs exercise the kind of patience that we've seen in Pittsburg over the years. If they are applying pressure to 'win now', this team is probably 1-2 years out from full rebuilding mode. If they mortgaged the future in order to not have to open the stadium with a backup QB, that doesn't reassure me about the Wilfs. If Spielman invested in Bradford as a solid longterm solution, I feel a little better about it, despite my lukewarm opinion of Bradford as an NFL QB.

I didn't like Childress from the get go, and I think it was the right move to fire him, but I liked that they seemed to show some interest in continuity by retaining Frazier. It wasn't the right move, but it was a good instinct in my opinion. The problem was they had a wrong vision in the first place, and it never seemed to be a vision shared by the full organization.

Do they have the right vision this time around with Zimmer? I don't know, but I like transitioning to an aggressive defense in todays NFL. The key is to get the whole organization on the same page going forward. That means you don't try to run the cover 2 and fail to invest in LBers capable of playing it at a high level. You don't try to run Turner's offense and neglect the OT position. And now, you can't try to run Shurmurs system and not get him offensive weapons that can create mismatches. You can't run Zimmer's defense and fail to have a true, effective 3 technique, and a safety who can allow more versatility. I'm reassured by the OTs they targetted in FA that they are at least looking for personnel to match their system, and not bringing in guys like Wagner to run the system we just left behind. I have a similar take on letting Peterson walk. On the other hand, Its a slight mystery to me that they let Patterson walk as we institute an offense which could make better use of his talents, but I have heard from a couple sources that he is such a goofball that maybe it was more of a cultural/personality issue than a scheme fit issue.

I haven't drawn a conclussion on the Wilfs yet, except that they are 100 percent an improvement over the ownership group and Red McCombs.

*edit: From where they were when Zimmer and Turner came in, this team had what I thought was a great vision but a VERY long way to go in order to get the pieces to complete that vision. I wish they'd been able to show the patience to put all those pieces together and complete what would have been a perennial contender, but c'est la vie.

Shurmur's system is clearly a short cut to try to attain production instead of excellence, and I'm not excited about it, but if they commit to the defensive vision, perhaps the pairing can be effective enough to still become contenders.


Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:47 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 41 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 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.