My thoughts on the offense as a whole

[Mothman]

I just find it fascinating that so many people are coming to this conclusion. I don't think they're absolving Teddy by default but Garda is at least the fourth separate writer that I've read that has said essentially the same thing when it comes to the offense's struggles (in addition to the abysmal pass protection).

I wonder if their standards are different from your own, Jim.

Clearly... maybe it has to do with what they consider deep. For me, it's anything over 20 yards.

I can't help wondering if sometimes they just see a defender in close proximity to the receiver and call that "covered". In the NFL, receivers don't always get a lot of separation. I don't see wide open receivers downfield for the Vikings all the time but I do see them get "NFL open" and get separation.

[dead_poet]

Clearly... maybe it has to do with what they consider deep. For me, it's anything over 20 yards.

I can't help wondering if sometimes they just see a defender in close proximity to the receiver and call that "covered". In the NFL, receivers don't always get a lot of separation. I don't see wide open receivers downfield for the Vikings all the time but I do see them get "NFL open" and get separation.

I would consider getting a couple steps on a defender on a route as "open" or "open enough." However most writers (that maybe don't have a team affiliation) use the same criteria when evaluating. I would hope so, anyway. So if they say that the Vikings' receivers are mostly covered ("in the hip pocket"), this is more consistent than other teams (or individuals) they evaluate.

[mondry]

I just find it fascinating that so many people are coming to this conclusion. I don't think they're absolving Teddy by default but Garda is at least the fourth separate writer that I've read that has said essentially the same thing when it comes to the offense's struggles (in addition to the abysmal pass protection).

I wonder if their standards are different from your own, Jim.

It's all in the eye of the beholder, we're biased creatures by nature, it's how 100 different people can look at the same ink blot and call it 100 different things!

From what I've seen, Teddy does miss open WR's, I think every QB does, so it'd be silly to say he doesn't. Sometimes it looks like he's looking right at the open guy even but it seems he's a little bit gun shy and will take the 6 yard check down instead of going for the open 20 yard pass. When I say open I mean there's a 1 second window where a perfect throw is an easy completion but that window can close quickly and a bad throw can still be dangerous. The Int on the down field pass to Diggs was open but it sailed on him for the INT as an example.

What it comes down to for me is evaluating the surrounding circumstances of the play. Often times the pressure's on Teddy and he has to move off his spot or scramble to his right to avoid pressure from the left. In that case I don't consider the WR who may be open on the left as a viable option, it's not realistic for teddy to throw 30 yards across the field / across his body when his momentum is taking him the other way. Even just having to move off his spot changes the angles and dynamics of throws which sometimes also makes an open WR just not a viable option. Not saying everyone who sees open WR's is ignoring this, but it is something I've noticed a good bit.

What I see a lot is that the other team gets pressure on Teddy before there's an "open" receiver ready to catch the football. People can post stills all day saying "hey look this guys open" but if it's early in the route that's not a viable target, and by the time the WR finishes his route they often run themselves into coverage due to the design of the play / route. That can also be misunderstood as teddy hesitating or holding the ball to long when in reality the route just hasn't developed yet. That's one of the reasons I've been extra spiteful towards Norv, seattle pretty much camped out in the 15-25 yard range and he called play after play that just ran our WR's straight into the teeth of their defense while the 8-12 yard stuff was less defended.

In norv's defense he was much better in the ARI game taking what the defense gave us. He called a bunch more 8-15 yard stuff and Teddy capitalized on the intermediate throws which are his bread and butter and it showed. Turns out the WR's can get open when they aren't running 25 yards down field into cover 3 defense.

Before I sound too much like an apologist I do want to go back and talk about the misses, there are times guys are open and Teddy DOES miss them or if not miss them, chooses not to go to them. That's the frustrating side of it right now, especially when you consider the ARI game, Teddy was very decisive and made some really tough throws into really tight windows. It's the kind of stuff that makes me really sold on him but when you look at some of the tape you can see the exact same play with the exact same receiver with the exact same amount of "openness" and sometimes he just decides not to take it.

It's impossible to really explain but it's something he'll need to do better on to become more consistent. When Norv shortened the routes against ARI he seemed to have no trust / confidence / hesitation issues so maybe that's part of it, he just feels better with a game plan revolving around the 5-15 yard passes. Something to keep an eye on for sure going forward.

[Mothman]

I would consider getting a couple steps on a defender on a route as "open" or "open enough." However most writers (that maybe don't have a team affiliation) use the same criteria when evaluating. I would hope so, anyway.

I would hope so but who knows?

So if they say that the Vikings' receivers are mostly covered ("in the hip pocket"), this is more consistent than other teams (or individuals) they evaluate.

I don't know what to say. Maybe they're overstating things for the sake of simplicity. Twitter doesn't leave a lot of room for nuance. All I can tell you is it's not true that "Vikings receivers just cannot get open deep. No ability to get separation".

Heck, we know that's false because we've seen evidence to the contrary on TV broadcasts (as opposed to just on coaches film). Consequently Garda is obviously exaggerating, Now it's a question of how much. What's he seeing? What does he consider 'deep"? What does he consider adequate separation to be considered open?

As you know, I have very little confidence in the amateur/semi-pro press.

[dead_poet]

I don't know what to say. Maybe they're overstating things for the sake of simplicity. All I can tell you is it's not true that "Vikings receivers just cannot get open deep. No ability to get separation".

Probably. Or instead of saying "never" it should be "hardly ever" or something to that extent. The general sentiment is there if you don't take it literally. I think he probably means "hardly ever" or "gains separation far less often that is generally seen by a group of NFL receivers." But, you know, Twitter.

Mondry also had a great point about what is considered to be "open." Just because a receiver looks "open" doesn't mean he is a realistic target for Teddy due to other circumstances.

Heck, we know that's false because we've seen evidence to the contrary on TV broadcasts (as opposed to just on coaches film). Consequently Garda is obviously exaggerating, Now it's a question of how much. What's he seeing? What does he consider 'deep"? What does he consider adequate separation to be considered open?

Again, I'm not that concerned if he's expressing a belief based on the same criteria as used to judge others.

As you know, I have very little confidence in the amateur/semi-pro press.

Sure. I guess I place more stock in them because they have more experience (and time) at watching film/evaluating than I do. That doesn't make them "experts", of course, but more qualified than some I suppose. Again, it's interesting that several writers this year have said the same thing. Are they all wrong about our receivers' abilities to generate consistent separation? Seems to be a reoccurring theme amongst film-watchers.

[losperros]

Probably. Or instead of saying "never" it should be "hardly ever" or something to that extent. The general sentiment is there if you don't take it literally. I think he probably means "hardly ever" or "gains separation far less often that is generally seen by a group of NFL receivers." But, you know, Twitter.

Mondry also had a great point about what is considered to be "open." Just because a receiver looks "open" doesn't mean he is a realistic target for Teddy due to other circumstances.

So, yeah, what is considered to be open? Do all these experts who think the receivers aren't getting open expect 5 yard separation in all the routes? Because it's not going to happen that way. As I said in another thread, it's also the QB's job to thread the needle when the need arises. And it's the receiver's job to make a play on the ball.

Anyway, I agree with Jim. There isn't a lick of truth in saying, "Vikings receivers just cannot get open deep. No ability to get separation." The film says otherwise. Seriously, how big of a window is needed? We see other teams pull off tight throws. I think the Vikings can too.

[dead_poet]

So, yeah, what is considered to be open? Do all these experts who think the receivers aren't getting open expect 5 yard separation in all the routes? Because it's not going to happen that way. As I said in another thread, it's also the QB's job to thread the needle when the need arises. And it's the receiver's job to make a play on the ball.

Anyway, I agree with Jim. There isn't a lick of truth in saying, "Vikings receivers just cannot get open deep. No ability to get separation." The film says otherwise. Seriously, how big of a window is needed? We see other teams pull off tight throws. I think the Vikings can too.

There's clearly a fine line between "threading the needle" and "throwing into coverage." The funny thing is that it usually depends on the result. If it's caught, it's "threading the needle" and a "great throw." If it's intercepted it's "a covered receiver" and "a ball that should never have been thrown."

[chicagopurple]

clearly, the biggest failure of performance is the Ol. I dont't think there is ANY offensive scheme that these guys could perform well with.

Bridgewater has "issues"......even when WR are open, he is hesitant and tends to over throw when he finally does stop hesitating and tries to throw. He has become MORE hesitant in his second year to throw to recievers or even throw the ball away.

Nepotism is a recipe for failure. Our QB coach is the OC's little boy....what joke. We have a very young QB in a very tough situation and the team decided to give him a QB coach who is still in training pants.....DUHHHHH The GM needs to be held accountable for failing to develop talent in Ponder AND now Bridgewater.

[Mothman]

Probably. Or instead of saying "never" it should be "hardly ever" or something to that extent. The general sentiment is there if you don't take it literally. I think he probably means "hardly ever" or "gains separation far less often that is generally seen by a group of NFL receivers." But, you know, Twitter.

Mondry also had a great point about what is considered to be "open." Just because a receiver looks "open" doesn't mean he is a realistic target for Teddy due to other circumstances.
Again, I'm not that concerned if he's expressing a belief based on the same criteria as used to judge others.
Sure. I guess I place more stock in them because they have more experience (and time) at watching film/evaluating than I do. That doesn't make them "experts", of course, but more qualified than some I suppose. Again, it's interesting that several writers this year have said the same thing. Are they all wrong about our receivers' abilities to generate consistent separation? Seems to be a reoccurring theme amongst film-watchers.

Again, I don't know what to tell you. I'm not saying the Vikes have no issues in this department. I don't know what criteria the writers you're referring to are using but when they exaggerate or generalize, that leaves their statements open to interpretation. As I said above, Garda's comment certainly doesn't reflect what I've seen on film over the majority of this season. I'm sure he didn't mean it to be taken literally but that just leaves us to wonder exactly what he meant. I don't think the WRs get consistent separation deep but until you threw that word in there, I didn't think we were talking about consistent separation. I wouldn't say any aspect of the passing game has been consistent this year.

[Mothman]

It's all in the eye of the beholder, we're biased creatures by nature, it's how 100 different people can look at the same ink blot and call it 100 different things!

From what I've seen, Teddy does miss open WR's, I think every QB does, so it'd be silly to say he doesn't. Sometimes it looks like he's looking right at the open guy even but it seems he's a little bit gun shy and will take the 6 yard check down instead of going for the open 20 yard pass. When I say open I mean there's a 1 second window where a perfect throw is an easy completion but that window can close quickly and a bad throw can still be dangerous. The Int on the down field pass to Diggs was open but it sailed on him for the INT as an example.

What it comes down to for me is evaluating the surrounding circumstances of the play. Often times the pressure's on Teddy and he has to move off his spot or scramble to his right to avoid pressure from the left. In that case I don't consider the WR who may be open on the left as a viable option, it's not realistic for teddy to throw 30 yards across the field / across his body when his momentum is taking him the other way. Even just having to move off his spot changes the angles and dynamics of throws which sometimes also makes an open WR just not a viable option. Not saying everyone who sees open WR's is ignoring this, but it is something I've noticed a good bit.

What I see a lot is that the other team gets pressure on Teddy before there's an "open" receiver ready to catch the football. People can post stills all day saying "hey look this guys open" but if it's early in the route that's not a viable target, and by the time the WR finishes his route they often run themselves into coverage due to the design of the play / route. That can also be misunderstood as teddy hesitating or holding the ball to long when in reality the route just hasn't developed yet. That's one of the reasons I've been extra spiteful towards Norv, seattle pretty much camped out in the 15-25 yard range and he called play after play that just ran our WR's straight into the teeth of their defense while the 8-12 yard stuff was less defended.

In norv's defense he was much better in the ARI game taking what the defense gave us. He called a bunch more 8-15 yard stuff and Teddy capitalized on the intermediate throws which are his bread and butter and it showed. Turns out the WR's can get open when they aren't running 25 yards down field into cover 3 defense.

Before I sound too much like an apologist I do want to go back and talk about the misses, there are times guys are open and Teddy DOES miss them or if not miss them, chooses not to go to them. That's the frustrating side of it right now, especially when you consider the ARI game, Teddy was very decisive and made some really tough throws into really tight windows. It's the kind of stuff that makes me really sold on him but when you look at some of the tape you can see the exact same play with the exact same receiver with the exact same amount of "openness" and sometimes he just decides not to take it.

Exactly and that's what frustrates me. He leaves quite a few plays like that on the field and those are precisely the kinds of plays I'm talking about when I post reagrding the need for him to be more decisive, more aggressive, etc.

I fully understand what you were saying above about windows of opportunity too. I always look for that when I watch film. Sometimes, a player might be wide open but if Bridgewater couldn't realistically look that way or throw that way, it really doesn't matter (aside from perhaps illustrating that player's ability to get open and even then, there are "windows" to consider).

[Mothman]

There's clearly a fine line between "threading the needle" and "throwing into coverage." The funny thing is that it usually depends on the result. If it's caught, it's "threading the needle" and a "great throw." If it's intercepted it's "a covered receiver" and "a ball that should never have been thrown."

There's more than an hint of truth to that.

I actually think an NFL QB has to be willing to throw into single coverage at times and give the receiver a chance to make a play on the ball (or knock it down if it's going to be intercepted). I see the better, more productive QBs in the league do this all the time. It backfires on them once in a while but it's worth doing. Maybe if the Vikes add a big, physical WR to their roster it will encourage TB to do this. Of course, I could see Patterson developing into that role but...

[mondry]

There's more than an hint of truth to that.

I actually think an NFL QB has to be willing to throw into single coverage at times and give the receiver a chance to make a play on the ball (or knock it down if it's going to be intercepted). I see the better, more productive QBs in the league do this all the time. It backfires on them once in a while but it's worth doing. Maybe if the Vikes add a big, physical WR to their roster it will encourage TB to do this. Of course, I could see Patterson developing into that role but...

Yeah, basically all of our WR's right now fit into the speedy / quick small guys and none of them are really the type to win tight contested 1 on 1 battles. I consider Cutler a fairly bad QB but his willingness to chuck it up to Alshon is top notch heh, not to mention how good a guy like Evans made Manziel look in college. Maybe that would help Teddy feel more comfortable / maybe he would trust a guy like that more to come up with contested throws. Lately he's seem to hit it off with the TE's who, being TE's, are bigger dudes who can come up with contested throws so I guess that's a tiny bit of evidence it might not be a bad idea.

[Mothman]

Yeah, basically all of our WR's right now fit into the speedy / quick small guys and none of them are really the type to win tight contested 1 on 1 battles. I consider Cutler a fairly bad QB but his willingness to chuck it up to Alshon is top notch heh, not to mention how good a guy like Evans made Manziel look in college. Maybe that would help Teddy feel more comfortable / maybe he would trust a guy like that more to come up with contested throws. Lately he's seem to hit it off with the TE's who, being TE's, are bigger dudes who can come up with contested throws so I guess that's a tiny bit of evidence it might not be a bad idea.

I've noticed the same thing. He seems more willing to throw into a tight window when throwing to Rudolph in particular. It's understandable.

Cutler's fearless with those throws to Jeffery. He clearly has a great deal of trust in him.

[TSonn]

Cutler's fearless with those throws to Jeffery. He clearly has a great deal of trust in him.

How much is Jeffery gonna cost in free agency this summer (assuming the Bears don't franchise him)?

[dead_poet]

How much is Jeffery gonna cost in free agency this summer (assuming the Bears don't franchise him)?

My guess is somewhere between what Jeremy Maclin signed for (five-year, $55 million w. $22.5 million guaranteed) and Demarius Thomas (five-year, $70 million contract w. $43.5 million guaranteed). He shouldn't get Dez Bryant money.

Not sure why they wouldn't franchise or re-sign him, though. They're uninspiring and completely unproven behind him even with White and I'm not sure who else on the roster would be worth the tag and he's arguably their best offensive player. Probably losing Bennett, too, who is a big receiving threat. Only sticking point may be injury history, but I don't expect that to be that detrimental to him. I'd be surprised if they let him get away.