Chiefs post game

[Svt40]

I am completely baffled as to why Zim doesnt blitz more and is so conservative. He is a master of getting a free rusher when we blitz and when we did that and show that aggressive style at the end of that game yesterday, Matt Moore was absolutely lost. He was fumbling right and left, back pedaling 10 yards and looked downright scared. Zim knew the game was on the line at that point and became aggressive. Granted they got a few quick passes out of it but for the most part, we were dominating their front. But that's what ticks me off, why are we waiting until then to do it?? If he blitzed more early on and was more aggressive, Matt Moore crumbles and we win by at least 10 or more IMO.

I've felt that way for a long time. It seems every time we get another team into a 3rd and long he goes prevent and the D sits back 10 yards past the line to get. I have very little faith in the D's ability to stop the better teams in any sort of "must do" situation unless we are backed up on the goalline. On the other side we get a 3rd and short and I never say to myself "we got this".

As for yesterdays game. A lot of missed simple passes. A few misses long balls with one that I can recall not being Cousins fault. KC sold out on stopping the run and dared Cousins to beat them in the air and we fell short...

I'm kind of glad I missed the end of game when the stream starting getting wonky.

[Dames]

We lost to a really talented team, in their house... and we could have won. It's frustrating.

The Vikings definitely earned their participation award yesterday...

OMG. I think just accidentally stated that yesterday was the dreaded "moral victory". Thanks for showing me the error of my ways VL! I hate moral victories!

You're right about trying to take the emotion out of it, but I'd almost rather leave the emotion in, because the irrationality of that emotion is really the only thing that can keep me hopeful for this team.

If I take the emotion out of it and look at the facts, I see a team that isn't nearly as good in reality as they are on paper. I see a QB who can't settle down and execute simple or difficult plays and lacks awareness in key situations where he can't afford to be unaware. I see a defense that knows what's coming and still can't stop it, nor can they actually dictate to an offense in key situations where they need a stop. I see a special teams that continues to struggle, and a coaching staff that does likewise, coming up with ill-advised calls and a strategy that doesn't mate with the facts heading into a game.

If only the better teams in the NFL were all like the Giants, Redskins, and Falcons... The Vikes under Zimmer would be Superbowl-bound. Unfortunately, to get to anything meaningful in this league, you have to be able to beat teams that want it BAD and have talent, and, the way this particular Vikings team is going, you're going to have to beat said teams in their stadiums to boot. That is something the Vikings haven not shown any ability to do so far.

Realistically, I'll never be able to remove the emotion either, and like you, I really wouldn't want to. There would be no point in even watching football without it. I guess maybe I mean...just taking a step back and removing the instant reaction. For me personally, I'm just trying to work on being a more positive person, because I found that being perpetually pessimistic (I called it being a realist), just didn't serve me very well in life. But, that's just a personal journey for me. It certainly helps me enjoy the season more as a whole, but damn I get all worked up during the games still.

I guess we'll see if they can shake that off against a very good Dallas team in a primetime game. Anyone here want to bet they'll do that?

[Insert cricket smily here...]

I'll take that bet... but only a very small wager. I definitely think we match up better vs the Cowboys than we did KC. I'm far from guaranteeing a win of course. We seem to play better on turf for some reason too.

The following week vs Seattle though? THAT looks like major trouble. It seems like Wilson will shred this current secondary. He is amazing this year.

[Tdj755]

1. The Vikings got out coached again. We can’t even come up with a plan against some guy that was on a barstool last year. A career back up that didn’t even play last year.
2. Defense that is overrated. A good quarterback will shred these corners. They need to blitz more to help these clowns out.
3. Cousins is accurate most of the time. So are a lot of quarterbacks. He just doesn’t have the moxy or feel for the game. All quarterbacks get pressured. The good ones move around in the pocket enough to make plays. He can’t. Slide 2 yards short of the first down? 1st and goal in Green Bay and throw one up for grabs? Below average situational awareness for him and coaching staff.
4. Seems we can gripe about Thielen being out. Did you see the 4 starters out for Kansas City? One was the quarterback. The Vikings have had the best of the injury report all year against the teams we played.
5. Dalvin and Mattison are good. They make our offensive line look better than it is.
6. We can’t beat a good team on the road. We always find a way to stumble.
7. If you want a Super Bowl, get a better quarterback, better corners, better coaching. Seen this song and dance too many times. Pretenders.

[Dmizzle0]

NFC North got WRECKED yesterday. I think the Vikings can bounce back against the Cowboys.

[VikingLord]

I guess we'll see if they can shake that off against a very good Dallas team in a primetime game. Anyone here want to bet they'll do that?

[Insert cricket smily here...]

I'll take that bet... but only a very small wager. I definitely think we match up better vs the Cowboys than we did KC. I'm far from guaranteeing a win of course. We seem to play better on turf for some reason too.

The following week vs Seattle though? THAT looks like major trouble. It seems like Wilson will shred this current secondary. He is amazing this year.

Actually, I think the week following the Cowboys game is against Denver at home. Then they play the Seahawks (on the road, of course. In a primetime game, of course.)

Not sure what to bet.

How about something therapeutic for both of us? If the Vikings beat the Cowboys, I come on here and be positive about their overall prospects for the rest of the season. If the Vikings lose, you come on here and be really pessimistic about them.

But I do have to ask how you can be a fan of this team and not be "perpetually pessimistic"? At least when it comes to the Vikings, they have done absolutely zero to give their fans any hope, and in many cases, utterly destroyed whatever kernels of hope might have existed. This has happened over and over. It's now like an endowment, a tradition of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory and failing completely in the biggest games and at the worst possible times.

You almost have to divorce yourself from reality to not be a pessimist with this team. You have to convince yourself of things that simply aren't true, or completely ignore their long, ongoing history of this kind of failure. No objective outside observer believes Kirk Cousins is going to do anything other than fall short against the Cowboys this Sunday night. His whole career is riddled with such failures. It's like believing in a fairy tale to think otherwise.

No objective outside observer is going to think, if it's late in the game and the Vikings defense needs a stop against the Cowboys they're actually going to make that stop. Zimmer will sit back in that situation and play prevent and the end result will be anything but preventing anything.

The saddest part of the above is that is not me being a pessimist. That's me relating the tried-and-true history of the Vikings under Mike Zimmer, Kirk Cousins, and this overpaid defense.

The Cowboys are a good team. They've underperformed and their record doesn't reflect it, but they're good. Better than KC (or at least more complete). They have an offense capable of big plays and run the ball better and more consistently than KC. Defensively, they are much more balanced and complete than KC. They're at home and they will also need the win as bad as KC. I don't think I'm being pessimistic to believe this Vikings team is incapable of meeting that challenge and coming out on top.

[Dames]

1. The Vikings got out coached again. We can’t even come up with a plan against some guy that was on a barstool last year. A career back up that didn’t even play last year.

I've seen this point made too much, but you know what... Moore has been a really good backup, and KC has a TON of talent, so it's not like we were playing against Haskins and the Giants out there. This was not even remotely close to a typical back-up QB situation. KC is vastly better than most offenses, even with a backup.

2. Defense that is overrated. A good quarterback will shred these corners. They need to blitz more to help these clowns out.

I would have preferred that we were more aggressive also, but, then again, that didn't exactly work in our favor at the end of the game either.

3. Cousins is accurate most of the time. So are a lot of quarterbacks. He just doesn’t have the moxy or feel for the game. All quarterbacks get pressured. The good ones move around in the pocket enough to make plays. He can’t. Slide 2 yards short of the first down? 1st and goal in Green Bay and throw one up for grabs? Below average situational awareness for him and coaching staff.

He's certainly not a perfect QB, but in the previous 4 games he was simply outstanding. He did not have his best game yesterday, but to make a blanket statement that he doesn't have the feel for the game is probably going too far. I still have my doubts about his ability to play in high-pressure games, but honestly in this last game he probably did enough to win. I mean, he threw 3 TDs and had no turnovers... and not in garbage time. So, that at least gives me a little hope.

4. Seems we can gripe about Thielen being out. Did you see the 4 starters out for Kansas City? One was the quarterback. The Vikings have had the best of the injury report all year against the teams we played.

You are absolutely correct that the Vikings have one the best injury situations in the league. We are very healthy this year. Theilen being out hurts, but we should be able to rely on our backups some. They were almost invisible yesterday. Tread made some plays, but the fact that I feel like I have to give a guy credit for making 3 friggen catches is just silly.

5. Dalvin and Mattison are good. They make our offensive line look better than it is.

We have a deadly duo in the backfield. We allowed KC to neutralize that yesterday... that was extremely disappointing.

[VikingLord]

I've seen this point made too much, but you know what... Moore has been a really good backup, and KC has a TON of talent, so it's not like we were playing against Haskins and the Giants out there. This was not even remotely close to a typical back-up QB situation. KC is vastly better than most offenses, even with a backup.

Moore can actually hit his deep passes consistently too. That's a big difference between him and Cousins.

I actually turned to my son yesterday after watching yet another ball sail out of the reach of Diggs' outstretched arms and wondered out loud if maybe the Vikings just need faster wide receivers...

[S197]

Hill had some nice splash plays, which he’s going to get but it was Watkins who had a great game. He was catching everything and extended key drives. The KC defense played well against the run and even better against play action. Most of the time absolutely no one was open, they definitely game planned to shut that down. The first drive I think it was execution rather than play calls. Thielen was WIDE open on 2nd down, I’m talking no one within 15 yards and Cousins didn’t see him until it was way too late and then still threw off target. But the play was definitely there.

I agree this was a team loss. Coaches, defense, Cousins, special teams, they all could have done much better. They also had an extra long week to prepare. Hate to say it because I love the guy but I think this team tops out around 10 wins + or - 1 while Zimmer is HC. He doesn’t have what it takes to get to the next level. The offense especially is incredibly basic, it’s really noticeable next to a Reid run offense. On defense we have far too much draft capital invested to be just above average.

[StumpHunter]

Hill had some nice splash plays, which he’s going to get but it was Watkins who had a great game. He was catching everything and extended key drives. The KC defense played well against the run and even better against play action. Most of the time absolutely no one was open, they definitely game planned to shut that down. The first drive I think it was execution rather than play calls. Thielen was WIDE open on 2nd down, I’m talking no one within 15 yards and Cousins didn’t see him until it was way too late and then still threw off target. But the play was definitely there.

I agree this was a team loss. Coaches, defense, Cousins, special teams, they all could have done much better. They also had an extra long week to prepare. Hate to say it because I love the guy but I think this team tops out around 10 wins + or - 1 while Zimmer is HC. He doesn’t have what it takes to get to the next level. The offense especially is incredibly basic, it’s really noticeable next to a Reid run offense. On defense we have far too much draft capital invested to be just above average.

We won 13 in 2017 with him as HC.

[Dames]

I'll take that bet... but only a very small wager. I definitely think we match up better vs the Cowboys than we did KC. I'm far from guaranteeing a win of course. We seem to play better on turf for some reason too.

The following week vs Seattle though? THAT looks like major trouble. It seems like Wilson will shred this current secondary. He is amazing this year.

Actually, I think the week following the Cowboys game is against Denver at home. Then they play the Seahawks (on the road, of course. In a primetime game, of course.)

Right you are. I overlooked the Broncos, just like I hope the Vikings don't. I think I'm glad they play Seattle after a bye... but then again, they may come into the game half asleep.

Not sure what to bet.

How about something therapeutic for both of us? If the Vikings beat the Cowboys, I come on here and be positive about their overall prospects for the rest of the season. If the Vikings lose, you come on here and be really pessimistic about them.

That hilarious. I love it. You're on!

But I do have to ask how you can be a fan of this team and not be "perpetually pessimistic"? At least when it comes to the Vikings, they have done absolutely zero to give their fans any hope, and in many cases, utterly destroyed whatever kernels of hope might have existed. This has happened over and over. It's now like an endowment, a tradition of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory and failing completely in the biggest games and at the worst possible times.

You almost have to divorce yourself from reality to not be a pessimist with this team. You have to convince yourself of things that simply aren't true, or completely ignore their long, ongoing history of this kind of failure. No objective outside observer believes Kirk Cousins is going to do anything other than fall short against the Cowboys this Sunday night. His whole career is riddled with such failures. It's like believing in a fairy tale to think otherwise.

No objective outside observer is going to think, if it's late in the game and the Vikings defense needs a stop against the Cowboys they're actually going to make that stop. Zimmer will sit back in that situation and play prevent and the end result will be anything but preventing anything.

The saddest part of the above is that is not me being a pessimist. That's me relating the tried-and-true history of the Vikings under Mike Zimmer, Kirk Cousins, and this overpaid defense.

The truth is, I still suffer all that every game. I often expect the worst still, and rightfully so when it comes to this team. (My wife will attest to that, because I drive her nuts - Thank God she is as big of fan as I am).

I'm not a think-positive-and-the-world-will-be-great kind of guy. That's just being naive. I went into the 2017 NFC championship feeling pretty damn optimistic, and look what that got me.

I guess the bottom line is this: I'm not divorcing myself from reality, I'm simply not letting it eat at me anymore. It's a conscious effort, and it's something I have to work through during the games, but I find that being able to separate myself for a while afterwards gives me a little more perspective than I used to have. I will never miss a game unless I absolutely have to, and I'm starting to enjoy just being in the moment while watching. I love this fn team, but I'm not going to let it define me. But, I definitely want a Superbowl trophy, because that would be awesome for a while.

The Cowboys are a good team. They've underperformed and their record doesn't reflect it, but they're good. Better than KC (or at least more complete). They have an offense capable of big plays and run the ball better and more consistently than KC. Defensively, they are much more balanced and complete than KC. They're at home and they will also need the win as bad as KC. I don't think I'm being pessimistic to believe this Vikings team is incapable of meeting that challenge and coming out on top.

They are not a bad team, but they have not really beaten anyone either. Giants, Redskins, Dolphins and Eagles. Those are their 4 victories. Not exactly impressive. They lost to a horrible Jets team, and only gave up 12 to the Saints and lost.

I understand the Vikings haven't beaten much either. Again, I'm not over-confident, and far from claiming an easy win, but on paper this team is not as good as KC. They have some talent though. Cooper and Zeke are great. Dak... the jury is still out, but since Cooper arrived, he has looked much better. Would it surprise me to see the Viking's lay an egg in Dallas? Sadly, no. It also wouldn't surprise me if they blew out Dallas. (That's unlikely I think... unless we see Angry Kirk. )

Defensively they look better than KC, but against weak competition. They gave up 34 to GB, and 24 to the Jets a week later. But they did shut down Philly last week. That's something I guess.

In all, our wins have been more impressive. We are blowing out in most victories, and keeping tight in most losses. I feel good about this game. I didn't feel great going into the KC game. (I thought they would win that though, so maybe I'm just delusional.)

[Dames]

I actually turned to my son yesterday after watching yet another ball sail out of the reach of Diggs' outstretched arms and wondered out loud if maybe the Vikings just need faster wide receivers...

Haha, that's one solution.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Granted they got a few quick passes out of it but for the most part, we were dominating their front.

You saw the last play before the winning field goal was kicked, right?

Yeah? It was a quick pass that gained yards. Like I said, they got a few quick passes out of it but we were dominating their front with the blitz

[Dames]

You saw the last play before the winning field goal was kicked, right?

Yeah? It was a quick pass that gained yards. Like I said, they got a few quick passes out of it but we were dominating their front with the blitz

I want to go back and review this from the film, but I seem to recall we were having more success than failure with the blitz, and I wondered why it took them so long to start blitzing. Of course, it all blurs together now, so my reality may be skewed.

[VikingLord]

You saw the last play before the winning field goal was kicked, right?

Yeah? It was a quick pass that gained yards. Like I said, they got a few quick passes out of it but we were dominating their front with the blitz

But that's the problem - it was a quick pass that gained yards. Lots of yards. More than enough yards for that quick pass to get them into field goal range, and a field goal was all they needed to win the game.

Is it unreasonable to expect the Vikings to defend a quick pass and keep said quick pass from picking up that critical yardage?

KC's defense kept the Vikings from hitting anything quick (or otherwise) on the last two Vikings offensive possessions, and the Vikings didn't even need a score. All they needed was to drain clock.

Fact is, KC made the plays they needed to make on both offense and defense when the game was on the line and the Vikings didn't, neither offense nor defense nor special teams. In critical situations on all sides of the ball, the Chiefs stepped up while the Vikings wilted.

And so it goes - close, but no cigar, and the Vikings continue to lose against motivated, quality competition.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Yeah? It was a quick pass that gained yards. Like I said, they got a few quick passes out of it but we were dominating their front with the blitz

But that's the problem - it was a quick pass that gained yards. Lots of yards. More than enough yards for that quick pass to get them into field goal range, and a field goal was all they needed to win the game.

Is it unreasonable to expect the Vikings to defend a quick pass and keep said quick pass from picking up that critical yardage?

KC's defense kept the Vikings from hitting anything quick (or otherwise) on the last two Vikings offensive possessions, and the Vikings didn't even need a score. All they needed was to drain clock.

Fact is, KC made the plays they needed to make on both offense and defense when the game was on the line and the Vikings didn't, neither offense nor defense nor special teams. In critical situations on all sides of the ball, the Chiefs stepped up while the Vikings wilted.

And so it goes - close, but no cigar, and the Vikings continue to lose against motivated, quality competition.

I'm not sure what you're trying to argue here? My initial point was that Zim needs to be more aggressive with blitzes because teams cant handle them. And be more aggressive throughout the game, not just when it's crunch time. Then you went on a whole new tangent