To succeed in the NFL, offensive coordinators must be able to create favorable matchups through the clever deployment of personnel. While most offensive play-callers utilize various shifts, motions, formations and personnel groupings to generate big plays in the passing game, the Vikings have been able to generate explosive plays on the ground through their brilliant usage of multiple run-heavy formations from various personnel packages.
As I studied the All-22 Coaches Film of the Vikings' past few games, I noticed that their offense will routinely jump into quasi-unbalanced formations and goal-line-type sets to create numerical advantages at the point of attack. In theory, these formations and packages are designed to force opponents to play in a phone booth. Most defenses feature sleeker defensive linemen and linebackers, selected for their ability to get after the passer. The use of tight formations allows the Vikings' big, physical offensive line to overpower opponents over the course of the game. As a result, by the time the fourth quarter rolls around, Peterson is regularly able to find huge running lanes, often with the game hanging in the balance.
Interesting! Thanks for the link. It should help explain to those who dislike the Vikings use of tight formations just why they use them so much. It also illustrates that the much-maligned Bill Musgrave has something to do with the season Peterson is having. Offensive coordinators don't just coordinate passing plays.
Of course, Peterson has more to do with all this success than anyone else!
Mike Sando's weekly MVP Watch post has Denver Broncos quarterback Peyton Manning atop the rankings. I agree with Sando's assessment, and yes, I'm well aware of the monster season Minnesota Vikings tailback Adrian Peterson is having.
My AFC South colleague Paul Kuharsky notes that Tennessee Titans tailback Chris Johnson didn't get a sniff of the MVP voting during his 2,000-yard season in 2009. The Titans were 8-8 that season, a record in the neighborhood of where the 8-6 Vikings could finish.
Much of this debate depends on how you define the award. If you see the MVP as the player who has the biggest impact on his team's winning percentage, to me that's Manning. He joined a team that went 8-8 last year, has produced one of the best seasons of his career and has the Broncos 11-3 with two games remaining.
It's interesting that Siefert would put it that way. The Broncos are currently 3 wins ahead of their final total last year. the Vikings are 5 wins ahead. I realize Manning was an addition to the Denver team while peterson has been in Minnesota both seasons but from where I'm sitting, improved winning percentage doesn't seem like a strong argument in Manning's favor.
Mothman wrote:
It's interesting that Siefert would put it that way. The Broncos are currently 3 wins ahead of their final total last year. the Vikings are 5 wins ahead. I realize Manning was an addition to the Denver team while peterson has been in Minnesota both seasons but from where I'm sitting, improved winning percentage doesn't seem like a strong argument in Manning's favor.
Well Manning helped a playoff team from last year be a playoff team this year with more wins. That will automaticlly put him in the drivers seat for MVP. Why? Because he is a QB. And, he's Payton Manning. It's one of the reasons I don't put a whole lot of stock in the individual awards at the end of the year.
Vikings fan since Nov. 6, 1966. Annoying Packer fans since Nov. 7, 1966
Mothman wrote:
It's interesting that Siefert would put it that way. The Broncos are currently 3 wins ahead of their final total last year. the Vikings are 5 wins ahead. I realize Manning was an addition to the Denver team while peterson has been in Minnesota both seasons but from where I'm sitting, improved winning percentage doesn't seem like a strong argument in Manning's favor.
And what these talking heads don't take into account:
The NFL is stacked in favor of QBs, based on how easy WRs have it, compared to when defensive players could actually play physical. And the voters MVP all the quarterbacks, for having these ho hum seasons. These guys wouldn't have these same numbers, playing under old rules.
How about waiting until the season is over before crowning anybody MVP? You would think the success of the team should be a consideration. Personally, I think it should be a major consideration. If the Broncos or Patriots or Packers win the Super Bowl, there will be very little doubt about who was primarily responsible on any of those teams.
Eli wrote:How about waiting until the season is over before crowning anybody MVP? You would think the success of the team should be a consideration. Personally, I think it should be a major consideration. If the Broncos or Patriots or Packers win the Super Bowl, there will be very little doubt about who was primarily responsible on any of those teams.
I've often thought the same thing but it's a regular season award.
A lot of the consideration for Manning comes from the argument that he was the sole factor in why they are 11-3, in a very weak they division. Not only that but they won their conference last year and actually won a game in the playoffs. This isn't some trash tier team that he suddenly lifted from the realm of disarray and made into a playoff caliber team.
However I don't get how this same argument isn't applied to AD (other the he isnt a QB). He isn't only having the best season of his career, but he has a chance to break the single season rushing record. But if that isn't enough his team went from a low of 3-13 and the bottom tier team of their division to a 8-6 team with the potential to make the playoffs.
Peyton Manning has a huge effect on the Broncos, nobody can really deny that. But to simply forget how influential Adrians season has been in regards to the Vikings success cannot be ignored either.
Valhalla wrote:Texans and Packers are probably among the 5 or 6 best teams in the NFL right now. And both of their defenses are pretty tight and among the best. So AD will be trying to break the record against the best. Don't know if he could break away as much against teams like the Packers and Texans.
AD ran very well against the bears and 49ers, who both had amazing rush defenses. Texans are 8th in the league in rush defense, which is worse than the bears and 49ers. Packers were worse in yards allowed last year,and they are only 14th in rush defense this year. I think AD has a very good chance of breaking the record.however, I do agree with you that they are both in the top 5 or six teams in the league, and I don't think we will be able to beat both of them.
Mothman wrote:
It's interesting that Siefert would put it that way. The Broncos are currently 3 wins ahead of their final total last year. the Vikings are 5 wins ahead. I realize Manning was an addition to the Denver team while peterson has been in Minnesota both seasons but from where I'm sitting, improved winning percentage doesn't seem like a strong argument in Manning's favor.
Maybe Siefert flunked math when he was in school. We can probably use him in politics.
Without AD, the Vikes would still be in 3-13 land. There are only so many games you can win on pick sixes alone.
