Vikings Message Board.Com

DK Sweets wrote:I heard somebody on ESPN Radio this morning (sorry, can't remember who) say that if you want a smart resilient team you need smart, resilient players.

DK Sweets wrote:My guess is that Zimmer/Norv don't see those qualities in Patterson and possibly now Johnson. They would rather have the consistency of these other players than the peaks and valleys of these more talented receivers, whether it's emotional or otherwise.

I'm not advocating for this approach or saying it's always the best route to take. I do think it is the only likely explanation for the talent in the bench, though.

J. Kapp 11 wrote: Man, that would be a longshot IMO.

Not that I don't agree with you. But Zimmer and Turner go WAY back.

Maybe we'll get lucky and somebody will actually think Norv is still head coaching material.

autobon7 wrote:My gut tells me that it seems like a longshot as well.......can only hope. When listening to the media ask Zim about CJ and him acknowledging that he is probably frustrated just angers me. What are we doing??? Gazing into the crystal ball I can see Wallace on the move after seasons end due to salary, lack of chemistry. and the want to be more involved. Patterson may be gone for reasons discussed over and over here. Now CJ too??? That leaves us with Diggs, Wright, and Thielen using my hypothetical worst case scenario.

mansquatch wrote:This is speculation on my part, but I STRONGLY doubt Jeffrey will ever make it to FA. The Bears will give him a nice contract before he hits the market, he is their biggest threat in the passing game.

dead_poet wrote: My money is on franchise tag but either way he's not getting out of Chicago.

As an offense, the Vikings have struggled to consistently produce, ranking 25th in yards per play and 26th in points per game. Players such as tight end Kyle Rudolph and guard Brandon Fusco have called for more of a balance on offense, or at least consistency throwing the ball when teams sell out to stop Peterson.

They’ve kept Peterson on a snap count this season to “make sure he’s fresh throughout the entire game,” Turner said, and that’s shown as he’s dominated defenses in fourth quarters, most recently in Oakland and Atlanta. But Peterson wasn’t subbed out as often against the blitz-happy Cardinals in Arizona, where quarterback Teddy Bridgewater threw for a career-high 335 yards and a season-long 9.3 yards per throw.

Turner said he doesn’t see much of a connection between Peterson staying in the game and Bridgewater thriving, but coach Mike Zimmer said he liked including Peterson in passing situations as he always draws attention from defenses.

“We’ll probably continue to want more,” Zimmer said. “When he’s in there, he’s a threat. One of the first things you do before you make the calls are, “who is the back?” so you can determine run-pass kind of things.

“So the more he’s in there, the more it helps your passing game as well.”

“I think every situation is different,” Turner said. “I think that when we fake to [Peterson] and throw the screen, yeah it helps. It’s just depending on, I would say, the play. I think you all try to make too much out of it. I think it’s about going out and executing, performing and everyone doing their job.”

mondry wrote:Kind of more "proof" that Norv just doesn't really get it. Having Peterson in for more snaps, including passing snaps makes a difference if for no other reason than limiting your predictability. In my eyes the best chance for this offense to find success is if Peterson can stay on the field and not be a liability on passing downs. He did pretty well picking up blitzes against ARI and I even saw him in a shotgun play or two.

I do find it interesting though that Zimmer basically says "the more he's out there the better" where Norv is saying "it doesn't really matter who the back is".

Maybe not exactly frustration from Zimmer but a tiny bit of disagreement on how things should be handled. If Norv has one of his 8 carry's, barely plays in the 2nd half kind of games for Peterson again maybe that get's the ball rolling for a new OC. One can only hope...

Mothman wrote:
I think I'd rather hope that we never see one of those games again but I know what you meant.

mansquatch wrote:This is speculation on my part, but I STRONGLY doubt Jeffrey will ever make it to FA. The Bears will give him a nice contract before he hits the market, he is their biggest threat in the passing game.

mansquatch wrote:My gut on the Fox situation in Denver is they say his Carolina record and then his seasons in DEN and concluded he would get them there but not win it. Also, they more than anyone must know that the "window" with Manning is closing fast. Elway is going for broke to get a title, but it might be too late. I think Fox is a great coach and the staff they have in Chicago is elite. They just need time to build a roster and they will be scary.

For the Vikings, I'm really chilling on Turner. However, I have to temper that with knowing I(we) do not know everything that is going on. The OL issues could realistically be a huge driver in the plays they are caling and that is a culprit in limiting snaps. I do not find this entirely persuasive, but again, we do not know what we do not know. I just find it mind boggling that we are not using our short passing games weapons to their fullest potential given the OL woes we are facing. It almost feels like the thought process is "well if we run short stuff they'll cheat up and we need to keep throwing deep just to keep them honest."