Vikings Message Board.Com

yeah spot on. any quarterback that has ever lived would die to play with peterson in their backfield and we have yet another underachiever. keep making excuses for him, as we will finish 9-7 at best. the majority of his wins last year came against bad teams and so have the majority of his wins this year. he is the worst starting qb in the nfl. are you implying purplekoolaid that bridgewater is on river's level? river's could throw a tighter ball with his opposite arm.

mosscarter wrote:yeah spot on. any quarterback that has ever lived would die to play with peterson in their backfield and we have yet another underachiever. keep making excuses for him, as we will finish 9-7 at best. the majority of his wins last year came against bad teams and so have the majority of his wins this year. he is the worst starting qb in the nfl. are you implying purplekoolaid that bridgewater is on river's level? river's could throw a tighter ball with his opposite arm.

Teddy is not the worst starting qb in the nfl. He sucks this year, but i would take him over at least 10 other qbs.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

purplereign as a consistent starter i challenge you to name me 10 worse statistically. and keep in mind this is his 21st or 22nd start. total yards, total td's, are you kidding me? the only thing he has is a high completion percentage because he can't throw beyond 10 yards. name me 10 worse qb's that have started as many games in a row as he has. they simply don't exist. the rookies this year alone have much better stats.

mosscarter wrote:its not norv people, put phillip rivers into the is offense and then you get the real norv because he would have a qb who can EXECUTE HIS PLAY CALLS. bridgewater is done and he should be. he looks embarrassing out there. today was a complete joke.

You do realize the irony of the QB you just picked, right?

Out of all the QBs you could have chosen in this league, you picked the one that actually was on a team when Norv got fired. Lo and behold, Rivers improved afterwards.

EDIT: Seems like I'm not the only one who caught that irony.

how is that relevant to our current quarterback situation? are you saying phillip rivers isn't a great qb? or, are you assuming that if norv goes, teddy will become great too? because that is a bad assumption. norv was also the head coach out there for how long? you people are splitting hairs here. our offensive passing game sucks, period.

mosscarter wrote:how is that relevant to our current quarterback situation? are you saying phillip rivers isn't a great qb? or, are you assuming that if norv goes, teddy will become great too? because that is a bad assumption. norv was also the head coach out there for how long? you people are splitting hairs here. our offensive passing game sucks, period.

How is it relevant that the QB you say would thrive in this offense has actually played in this offense and got Norv fired?

...?

That's the question you ask?

DK Sweets wrote:You do realize the irony of the QB you just picked, right?

Out of all the QBs you could have chosen in this league, you picked the one that actually was on a team when Norv got fired. Lo and behold, Rivers improved afterwards.

EDIT: Seems like I'm not the only one who caught that irony.

Of course, if you look even a little deeper, you can see that while Rivers had a down season in Turner's last year with the Chargers, he was also a top 10 passer in the 4 years prior to that (and he was #1 in the league one of those years). Turner was his head coach in each of those seasons.

In other words, Turner was hardly the only factor involved in Rivers' ups and downs.

Mothman wrote:
Of course, if you look even a little deeper, you can see that while Rivers had a down season in Turner's last year with the Chargers, he was also a top 10 passer in the 4 years prior to that (and he was #1 in the league one of those years). Turner was his head coach in each of those seasons.

In other words, Turner was hardly the only factor involved in Rivers' ups and downs.

Salty

We're also talking about a team that was absolutely loaded after they fired Schottenheiner after a 14-2 season. After that, Norv led them to 11-5, 8-8, 13-3, 9-7, 8-8, and 7-9. Outside of 2009, that's a pretty steady decline.

One of the most constant criticisms of Norv is that he can only make things happen when he's already been given a winning hand.

I'm not saying Norv is a terrible coach (although admittedly, I do have issues with his perceived inflexibility). I do find the analogy choice amusing, though.

DK Sweets wrote:Salty

We're also talking about a team that was absolutely loaded after they fired Schottenheiner after a 14-2 season. After that, Norv led them to 11-5, 8-8, 13-3, 9-7, 8-8, and 7-9. Outside of 2009, that's a pretty steady decline.

One of the most constant criticisms of Norv is that he can only make things happen when he's already been given a winning hand.

I'm not saying Norv is a terrible coach (although admittedly, I do have issues with his perceived inflexibility). I do find the analogy choice amusing, though.

I understand why and I'm not a big Norv fan either, I just think the irony loses t's luster a bit when you look at the bigger picture since the implication is that all it took for Rivers to be good was removing Turner from the equation.

Okay, before this long thread about Bridgewater transforms into a Norv Turner thread, let me remind everybody that we have a few about Turner already, including this one named after his short-lived family sitcom, "Norv":

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=28893

Let's take the Turner discussion to that thread unless it pertains directly to Bridgewater as well.

Boon, I just moved your post to that thread.

Thanks, everybody.

norv's general manager also thought it was wise to get rid of michael turner, darren sproles, vincent jackson, and didn't replace the pro bowl left side of the line when they got injured.

you put rivers in this offense today and we are a 12 win team

Mothman wrote: It's interesting but correlation doesn't prove causation and I'm not inclined to attribute Bridgewater's play to those changes. I think we saw this Bridgewater last season too. He had some games that encouraged optimism but the ineffective performances, the tendency to lean on checkdowns and cautious play and the accuracy issues were evident too. It's possible that replacing jennings with Wallace and adding Peterson to the mix messed him up but I think it's more likely that teams studied his film, saw his shortcomings and tendencies and realized they could capitalize on them, especially with the Vikings makeshift OL protecting him.

It's likely a bit of "all of the above," but I agree with the article. Teddy seems obsessed with avoiding mistakes.

He's got to get over that, or every team in the league will destroy him. They'll do like Seattle did yesterday and like every team did to Ponder ... sell out to stop AP, play a single high safety and dare Teddy to beat them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

*EDIT* This is more of a Norv issue, but it does directly affect Teddy's play so I believe it is justified to post it in this thread.

Hard to be an effective QB with this offensive line. Combine that with an offensive system predicated on having the QB taking seven-step drops often and it is even more difficult to be effective. Finally, combine that with a QB who is young, doesn't trust his offensive line and is looking to avoid making a mistake - no vertical offense is going to be effective.

My biggest quesiton with this offense is this: when is the Jykell and Hyde mentality going to stop? It seems that every game Norv is trying to do something different offensively. There is no consistency. We come from a game where Peterson had over 25 carries and then proceed to run the ball 8 times with the the top HB in the NFL?

To me, it seems that Norv is almost trying to impose his system and is not calling what is effective. It is almost like he is trying to pass to spite the offense. It is clear to me that this offensive system is not working. We don't have the personnel for it - we never have.

I still question why this was the chosen offensive system for our team in the first place. Speed wide receivers and the Air Corylle don't mesh well together. Now, I am far from an offensive minded genius, but it was pretty clear (to me at least) that a vertical-predicated offensive system was not going to be the best choice for the Vikings - given the personnel.

Going forward it is time for the coaching staff to have gut-check time. If nothing changes, we are going to miss the playoffs. Run the ball, abandon the consistent seven-step drops, use the shotgun, and FFS, throw in some god-damn slant patterns once in a while.

HardcoreVikesFan wrote: My biggest quesiton with this offense is this: when is the Jykell and Hyde mentality going to stop? It seems that every game Norv is trying to do something different offensively. There is no consistency.

Honestly, that typically doesn't bother me much. There's something to be said about adapting your game plan for each opponent. Hell, how many times have we seen the Patriots do this? I recall a couple recent examples where they used Blount like 30 times vs. the Colts one week then pass it 45 times vs. the Bills another. Offenses should be adaptable, playing to their strengths while maximizing the weakness of your opponent. The converse side of this is being predictable.

We come from a game where Peterson had over 25 carries and then proceed to run the ball 8 times with the the top HB in the NFL?

Yeah, that was dumb and likely Norv getting his own form of "happy feet"; getting away from what he probably wanted to do (a.k.a. the only thing this offense in its current form CAN do) run the ball.

To me, it seems that Norv is almost trying to impose his system and is not calling what is effective. It is almost like he is trying to pass to spite the offense. It is clear to me that this offensive system is not working. We don't have the personnel for it - we never have.

It's hard to argue with you, there. Norv has his system and it has been effective. He adapted it a bit already from what he wanted to do early-on (shotgun), so that's something I guess.

I still question why this was the chosen offensive system for our team in the first place. Speed wide receivers and the Air Corylle don't mesh well together. Now, I am far from an offensive minded genius, but it was pretty clear (to me at least) that a vertical-predicated offensive system was not going to be the best choice for the Vikings - given the personnel.

I'm not sure what you mean by "speed wide receivers and the Air Corylle don't mesh well together" but this offense looked a lot better going into the season than it does now. On paper, you have a team full of speedy, vertically-inclined receivers and a good enough healthy offensive line with an ascending young quarterback that looked capable of making every throw. Now? A patchwork offensive line that's getting Teddy smashed, can't hold blocks, can't block anyone (all at the same play), a quarterback that's gun-shy with no time to throw and when he does he hesitates and is now feeling pressure when there isn't any because he's the most pressured QB in the league with receivers that are having a startlingly difficult time creating consistent separation. The whole thing is a mess.

One of my main problems with bridgewater is that he has bad throwing mechanics. The announcers kept bringing it up yesterday about his poor throwing motion. He had that issue coming out of college and still has what would be considered bad mechanics. I hoped they would have improved after 2 years.

I may have missed it, but has he tried to seriously change them? There are guys like Tom House who focus specifically on throwing mechanics. There are quite a few NFL qb's that he has worked with. I don't understand why a NFL guy wouldn't try to fix it when it's been brought up repeatedly about how bad his throwing motion is.