Vikings Defensive Scheme Change?

[CharVike]

If they were to draft Parsons or JOK out of Notre Dame I'd like to see a Bucs type front and scheme. They pretty much play a 3-3 with Suh Vea and JPP always rushing while Shaq, White, and David blitz sometimes but can also drop. I'd have Pierce, Tomlinson and Hunter as my always rush guys with Barr at 50/50 and Kendricks/ the rookie dropping more often than not.

I really like this idea !!!

They played the same scheme in 2019 also. Didn't do much. Gave up 40 twice. We are not changing from the 4-3 to a whatever at this point. I'd like a 5 - 2 scheme. Our 5 against you're 5 straight up. Good luck blocking that. Better keep some extra bodies in. That won't happen either. I liked Ryans 46 D. No team wanted to pass against that defense. It was lights out. They should wipe the dust off that old 4-3 scheme. That won't happen either.

[StumpHunter]

I really like this idea !!!

They played the same scheme in 2019 also. Didn't do much. Gave up 40 twice. We are not changing from the 4-3 to a whatever at this point. I'd like a 5 - 2 scheme. Our 5 against you're 5 straight up. Good luck blocking that. Better keep some extra bodies in. That won't happen either. I liked Ryans 46 D. No team wanted to pass against that defense. It was lights out. They should wipe the dust off that old 4-3 scheme. That won't happen either.

The Bucs in 2019 were 8th in yards per drive given up and 20th in points per drive. Their QB gave them no chance, frequently turning the ball over and giving the opposition great field position. They were 6th in defensive DVOA, after being 32nd in their previous scheme the year before. As terrible a HC as Bowles was, the guy knows how to coach defense and he has something figured out with that scheme.

[VikingLord]

I really like this idea !!!

They played the same scheme in 2019 also. Didn't do much. Gave up 40 twice. We are not changing from the 4-3 to a whatever at this point. I'd like a 5 - 2 scheme. Our 5 against you're 5 straight up. Good luck blocking that. Better keep some extra bodies in. That won't happen either. I liked Ryans 46 D. No team wanted to pass against that defense. It was lights out. They should wipe the dust off that old 4-3 scheme. That won't happen either.

Ryan's 46 required special players to execute. Since he had those players he could pull it off, but most teams can't field 10 guys who have the talent to successfully do what the 46 requires them to do, which is why that Bear defense has never been replicated.

But what I think the 46 defense does illustrate is the benefits of fitting scheme to available talent. If you have players with certain attributes and abilities that allow them to do things that don't fit into a classic position or scheme, then changing the scheme to take advantage of what they have to offer is better than changing the player to fit the existing scheme. Ryan's approach, along with other creative DCs throughout NFL history, just illustrates the benefits of flexibility when it comes to utilizing talent and thus maximizing results.

[CharVike]

They played the same scheme in 2019 also. Didn't do much. Gave up 40 twice. We are not changing from the 4-3 to a whatever at this point. I'd like a 5 - 2 scheme. Our 5 against you're 5 straight up. Good luck blocking that. Better keep some extra bodies in. That won't happen either. I liked Ryans 46 D. No team wanted to pass against that defense. It was lights out. They should wipe the dust off that old 4-3 scheme. That won't happen either.

Ryan's 46 required special players to execute. Since he had those players he could pull it off, but most teams can't field 10 guys who have the talent to successfully do what the 46 requires them to do, which is why that Bear defense has never been replicated.

But what I think the 46 defense does illustrate is the benefits of fitting scheme to available talent. If you have players with certain attributes and abilities that allow them to do things that don't fit into a classic position or scheme, then changing the scheme to take advantage of what they have to offer is better than changing the player to fit the existing scheme. Ryan's approach, along with other creative DCs throughout NFL history, just illustrates the benefits of flexibility when it comes to utilizing talent and thus maximizing results.

Coaches get tied to what they do. Ryan took the 46 to Philly and it was still good but not the Bears. As you pointed out it was the players. I don't expect to see that again. Zimmer has put some good defenses together for us. Plus I like a 4-3. I also think he will put the focus on fixing that part of the team. That needs to happen.

[Cliff]

You can dig up Zimmer's defense stats throughout his career and see that more often than not they do not do well in the playoffs. If a team with a really good defense from the regular season gives up 38 unanswered points in the playoffs as in 2017 is it more likely that all of the players forgot how to play or were they out-coached?

I certainly hope he changes something because his schemes or coaching style or some combination do not seem to hold up in the playoffs. Even the game in 2017 to make it to that NFCC beating was "miraculous" only because the defense couldn't hold a 17 point lead going into the second half. It might even be time to bring in an *actual* defensive coordinator for a fresh perspective.

[VikingLord]

You can dig up Zimmer's defense stats throughout his career and see that more often than not they do not do well in the playoffs. If a team with a really good defense from the regular season gives up 38 unanswered points in the playoffs as in 2017 is it more likely that all of the players forgot how to play or were they out-coached?

I certainly hope he changes something because his schemes or coaching style or some combination do not seem to hold up in the playoffs. Even the game in 2017 to make it to that NFCC beating was "miraculous" only because the defense couldn't hold a 17 point lead going into the second half. It might even be time to bring in an *actual* defensive coordinator for a fresh perspective.

While that performance in the 2017 playoff loss certainly doesn't reflect well on Zimmer or his players, I think Foles just went off in the playoffs that year. Not just in that game, but in the Superbowl as well. He outplayed Tom Brady in the biggest game of his life, and I don't think anybody expected that. If Foles had stunk it up in the Superbowl, I'd have been more inclined to blame poor strategy or coaching on the part of Zimmer, but Foles was dropping dimes all over the field in the playoffs that year. It was a pretty amazing, albeit brief, performance from him. He got hot when it mattered, and that carried the Eagles to a Superbowl win.

Another factor in the 2017 defensive performance against the Eagles was the performance of the offense, specifically in their propensity to turn the ball over. Zimmer's defense didn't have to play from behind much that season, and it was able to be pretty aggressive and take some chances as a result. But when the Vikings offense started turning it over and giving Eagles free points and field position, the Vikings' defense was put on its heels. One could argue that Zimmer should have been able to compensate for that, but it was kind of like the snowball rolling down the hill. With Foles already playing out of his mind, the Vikings defense needed the offense to hold up and it failed miserably.

I think Zimmer's Vikings teams generally have played OK in the playoffs when things go according to plan. Maybe they've gotten a little lucky here and there, but when the team can stick to the plan they've done well. When things haven't gone to plan, however, they tend to fall apart. We saw that against Philly and against the 49ers. That isn't true of just the defense - the offense collapses as well. They just don't seem to have a plan B to fall back on, and instead start pressing and freelancing and that just makes things worse.

Maybe Zimmer just inherited the general Vikings curse as that has tended to be the way the team has played in those situations throughout it's existence regardless of the players and coaches involved. For some reason the Vikings always seem to find a way to shoot themselves in the foot when the chips are down. Total collapses aren't as frequent, but the self-inflicted fatal injury seems to be. I have yet to see this team rise to the occasion in those situations. The last time I remember the Vikings truly surprising to the upside in significant games was in the 1987 playoff wins against the Saints and 49ers. Of course, that team too reverted to the norm and lost in heartbreaking fashion one game short of the Superbowl to the Redskins, but at least they kicked the crap out of much more talented opponents in the two games leading up to that loss.