AP's Dissappearing Trick....

[chicagopurple]

I watched the Detroit game twice. I am still trying to figure how the monster RB from last year could totally become a non-factor against Detroit!! All last year he over came crappy blocking, 9 in-a-box, and playing with a laughable passing threat. I am really afraid that he is playing with an undisclosed injury. How else could you explain one big run followed by 4 quarters of ineffectiveness??

[Funkytown]

Felton disappearing first.

[mosscarter]

its simple: he doesn't have a team around him. i'm so sick and tired of how much weight adrian peterson is forced to carry because he is surrounded by an incompetent offensive coordinator and the worst starting qb in the nfl. wake up.

[Eli]

Peterson has always been remarkably feast and famine. To the point that using and relying upon him is not the same as using a typical, consistent running back. He may at some point be averaging 6 yards per carry, but when faced with 3rd and 4, he's not always the best bet for picking up that first down.

Against the Lions he started with his feast, and then he saw nothing but famine. Oddly enough, that didn't strike me as unusual.

[dead_poet]

Ineffective blocking. He had nowhere to go.

[Hunter Morrow]

Ansah, Fairley and Suh were in the backfield every game. I watched the terrible Packers O-line provide pretty good run blocking and an ETERNITY for
Rodgers to pass against the 49ers. Our O-Line got schooled all game.

[dead_poet]

Ansah, Fairley and Suh were in the backfield every game. I watched the terrible Packers O-line provide pretty good run blocking and an ETERNITY for
Rodgers to pass against the 49ers. Our O-Line got schooled all game.

It will be curious to learn if the Vikings got destroyed because they're something seriously wrong with them, or if the Lions defensive line is just that good.

[BGM]

Ok. He scored 3TDs. That is not a disappearing act. Oh, you mean why did he have only 15 yards rushing after that 78 yd TD scamper? Well, as has been said elsewhere, the Lions sold out to stop him, and it worked, kinda. The OL could not keep the Lion's DL out of the backfield and Zach Line is a terrible blocking back. Even so, he was able to find the end zone three times! AD is at his best once he breaks through the line. He's much like Barry Sanders in that respect. I remember watching a Lions-Packers game where Sanders was held to negative yardage. It's testament to the talent of AD that a game of 93 yards rushing and 3TDs is a cause for concern.

[Mothman]

Ok. He scored 3TDs. That is not a disappearing act. Oh, you mean why did he have only 15 yards rushing after that 78 yd TD scamper? Well, as has been said elsewhere, the Lions sold out to stop him, and it worked, kinda. The OL could not keep the Lion's DL out of the backfield and Zach Line is a terrible blocking back. Even so, he was able to find the end zone three times! AD is at his best once he breaks through the line. He's much like Barry Sanders in that respect. I remember watching a Lions-Packers game where Sanders was held to negative yardage. It's testament to the talent of AD that a game of 93 yards rushing and 3TDs is a cause for concern.

LOL! That's true. He had 3 TDs and 111 yards of total offense during that "disappearing trick". Not bad...

[Raptorman]

OMG, the world is going to end. Only 93 yards for Peterson. You do realize that he was the 4th best rusher in the NFL in week one? 4th. As in only 3 players rushed for more yards then he did. So in one of his worst games in the past two year he was still the 4th. As in only 3 better. He is not Superman. This is a team game and if the team does not block he wont make it into the top 3. You also realize that he scored 18 points. As in 3 TD's. Only one other person did that last week. A WR from the Giants. Tell you what, AD disappears like that ever game, 93 yards and 3 TD's, if the Defense steps up a bit, the Vikings have a good chance of winning some games this year.

BTW, 93 yards a game would have made him the 5th best rusher in 2012.

[allday1991]

LOL! That's true. He had 3 TDs and 111 yards of total offense during that "disappearing trick". Not bad...

Exactly my thoughts. If he played this exact game 16 times he would have almost 1600 yards and 48 tds, some 'disappearing trick'.

[Mothman]

and the Vikings would probably end up 0-16.

LOL! Only if the rest of the team played the same game...

[PurpleKoolaid]

Wasn't the 'best' drive we had capped off with AD having a receiving TD? I tell ya, that's what I personally want to see more of. He was open so many times, and they finally got the ball to him. This whole drive showed what can happen when things are mixed up, because even though Simpson connected on a few big catches, the Lions #1 priority was to take AD's running game away. Musgrave has to take advantage of that. Just not the slant to Simpson, I don't think that has ever worked. Try it to Jennings or Patterson.

[Just Me]

The only "disappearing trick" I saw was when he "disappeared" through the Lion's defense to score several touchdowns...

[VikingLord]

If you want to know why he disappeared, just look at where he was getting first contact. When a RB is consistently getting hit behind the LOS, that's a sign the defense is getting through too easily. When it happens a few times, that can usually be chalked up to a guy losing a one-on-one battle at the line. When it happens consistently, as it did against the Lions, something far worse is usually happening, and that is the defense is flooding the lanes and overwhelming the number of blockers. And when that happens, it's the surest sign you can have that the defense has zero respect for the opponent's ability to pass. Even though AD didn't set foot on the field beyond 2 meaningless snaps at San Fran, this is how every defense has played the Vikings since the preseason started. Last year they brought a lot of guys up, but were careful not to sell out by sending everyone on plays that could be runs. But with the stats telling no lies and based on plenty of tape, I believe most defensive coordinators have concluded the Vikings are no threat to seriously burn them.

I find it somewhat disheartening to listen to Frazier and Ponder complain about the blocking, quite honestly, and the Vikings say the Bears lack the same defensive line talent as the Lions and therefore the Vikings can expect an improvement. If the Bears are smart, and I have no reason to believe they aren't, they're going to do the exact same thing to the Vikings that the Lions, 49ers, and Bills did when the starters were on the field. On downs that aren't obvious passing plays or when the Vikings get into their now famous bunched formations, expect what amounts to a zero blitz, plenty of defenders in the backfield almost immediately, and plenty of runs for negative yardage. Also, expect to see a lot more of Ponder's famous rollouts where he either holds the ball too long, manages to fire an inaccurate pass, or does his tuck-and-run schtick. I expect Patterson to ride the bench most of the game, lots more 3-and-outs, and just general ineffectiveness across the board. Unfortunately, things aren't going to change until it is painfully obvious they have to change, and for this coaching staff that looks like its going to be a while yet based on the comments they are making.

If the Vikings don't commit turnovers the score will be closer. If they do, and the Bears turn them into points, this is likely to be another blowout.