Vikings Message Board.Com

Our relative health is a big plus. And except for Graham, we match up well against the Aints ... and even then, Harrison Smith might be a better answer to Graham than most other teams have. Their defense is ATROCIOUS, so if Cassel can control the ball via short passes and we play mistake-free on offense, we should be able to keep the ball away from Brees and Graham. Rudolph and Jennings should have big games.

LEAFMAN THE PURPLE FAN

Leafman wrote:Our relative health is a big plus. And except for Graham, we match up well against the Aints ... and even then, Harrison Smith might be a better answer to Graham than most other teams have. Their defense is ATROCIOUS, so if Cassel can control the ball via short passes and we play mistake-free on offense, we should be able to keep the ball away from Brees and Graham. Rudolph and Jennings should have big games.

Short passes are pretty much all Cassel has been completing so far this season, at least to fellow Vikings.

I don't know if the Vikes will be able to play mistake-free on offense or not but they probably need to if they want to win this one. The Saints defense has been atrocious but the problem is, that word could also be accurately ascribed to the performance of the Vikings offense last week. Something has to give...

Meanwhile, I'm not sure the Vikes defense matches up all that well against the Saints. They need to get pressure on Brees and pressure on Brady was in short supply last week. The Vikes gave up 150 yards rushing to the Patriots and while everyone thinks of passing when they think of the Saints, New Orleans is averaging an impressive 5.7 yards per carry through two games and that's on 55 attempts, so it's not like they've been shy about running the ball. Their longest run of the season is 28 yards so their average isn't being inflated by a 75 yard run or anything.

I think the Vikes need to rediscover their ground game, pressure Brees and win the turnover battle if they're going to win this one. If I were the Saints, I'd test the Vikes run defense and defensively, I'd look to shut down Minnesota's run and force Cassel to make plays.

It will be interesting to see what happens...

Leafman wrote:Our relative health is a big plus. And except for Graham, we match up well against the Aints ... and even then, Harrison Smith might be a better answer to Graham than most other teams have. Their defense is ATROCIOUS, so if Cassel can control the ball via short passes and we play mistake-free on offense, we should be able to keep the ball away from Brees and Graham. Rudolph and Jennings should have big games.
LEAFMAN THE PURPLE FAN

It will be interesting to see how Zimmer tries to take Graham out of the game (all DCs try to do it, few succeed). I'd like to see what Anthony Barr can do on underneath coverage on Graham. If he can stay with him, Barr has the height to contest those jump balls that Graham usually wins. After Graham, the match-up that concerns me is Brandin Cooks. Saints first round pick this year. Undersized explosive player who is a pretty decent WR in addition to being a threat running the jet sweep and bubble screens.

As for the Saints defense I thought that going into the season they were going to have one of the better secondaries in the league. Patrick Robinson and Kennan Lewis at the corners, and Kenny Vaccaro and Jairus Byrd at the safties (Saints blew a wad of money signing Byrd in the offseason). On paper that looks pretty stout but so far they've stunk it up.

Personally I think Rob Ryan is overrated. He uses so many gimmicks in his scheme that it invariably leads to communication problems (as evidenced on that last drive against the Browns where they left a WR uncovered which put the Browns in FG position).

Not sure what people see in Ryan's record:
Ryan with the Raiders, 2004-08
2004: 26th overall defense (30th pass, 28th run)
2005: 20th overall (27th, 14th)
2006: 8th overall (4th, 17th)
2007: 22nd overall (13th, 32nd)
2008: 19th overall (13th, 26th)

Ryan with the Browns, 2009-10
Browns, 2009: 30th overall (28th, 30th)
Browns, 2010: 18th overall (18th, 22nd)

Ryan with the Cowboys, 2011-12
2011: 16th overall (20th, 8th)
2012: 23rd overall (25th, 19th)

Ryan with the Saints, 2013-
Saints, 2013: 10th overall (6th, 20th)
Saints, 2014: 32nd overall (30th, 24th)

I don't know why the Saints have struggled defensively like they have (as people saw on Thursday night, though, the Falcons offense is pretty good). But in Ryan's defense, the 2012 Saints defense set the NFL record for most yards allowed in a single season— they allowed 7,042 yards, shattering the Baltimore Colts' 31-year-old record of 6,793 yards. They were 31st or 32nd in the league in yards allowed, points allowed, passing and rushing yards allowed. Ryan took a lot of the same players and made that a very good team, defensively. Going from 32nd in the league to the top-10 in one season? That's impressive no matter how you slice it. They'll probably end up in the top-20 this year when it's all said and done. As much as I hate to say it, they'll probably get back on track Sunday against Turnover Matt Cassel and a Vikings team missing Adrian Peterson.

Mothman wrote: The Saints defense has been atrocious but the problem is, that word could also be accurately ascribed to the performance of the Vikings offense last week. Something has to give...

The Viking offense was excellent against the Rams. And it wasn't atrocious versus the Pats, but two key players were (Cassel and Kalil). Throw in a couple drops by Rudolph and a missed assignment on Sully, and it looked much worse than it actually was. The entire unit wasn't atrocious like the whole Saints defense has been for two entire games, so I think that matchup favors us by a reasonable margin. Mistakes are, of course, always key.

Meanwhile, I'm not sure the Vikes defense matches up all that well against the Saints. They need to get pressure on Brees and pressure on Brady was in short supply last week.

True, but they were all over the Rams even before they had to play catch up, so there is reason for optimism, particularly given that they are in the process of adopting a new system and gave up only 149 yards to Brady. Belichick clearly wanted to beat the Vikings on the ground (which he did after that stupid blocked FG), so sack opportunities weren't there ... I think the Rams game was more indicative of what we can expect from the Viking pass rush.

The Vikes gave up 150 yards rushing to the Patriots and while everyone thinks of passing when they think of the Saints, New Orleans is averaging an impressive 5.7 yards per carry through two games and that's on 55 attempts, so it's not like they've been shy about running the ball. Their longest run of the season is 28 yards so their average isn't being inflated by a 75 yard run or anything.

This is definitely the bigger concern ... again, not gonna put too much stock in to the results of the Pats game, but the Saints have definitely been able to run the ball so far ... BUT, that has been against Cleveland and Atlanta. Cleveland has one of the worst front 7s in football, and Atlanta, while improved, is also still a lower-half run defense. They haven't faced an interior lineman of Linval Joseph's caliber yet. I think the Viking D played superbly against the Rams and very well against the Patriots ... the Aints will have their hands full.

To me, Graham is by far the biggest concern, if for no other reason than the Viking D has been torched by TEs in recent years. I am hopeful the new system and emergence of Harrison Smith change that starting this week!

LEAFMAN THE PURPLE FAN

Leafman wrote: The Viking offense was excellent against the Rams. And it wasn't atrocious versus the Pats, but two key players were (Cassel and Kalil). Throw in a couple drops by Rudolph and a missed assignment on Sully, and it looked much worse than it actually was. The entire unit wasn't atrocious like the whole Saints defense has been for two entire games, so I think that matchup favors us by a reasonable margin. Mistakes are, of course, always key.

We'll have to disagree about the matchup favoring the Vikes by a considerable margin. I think the Vikings offensive ranking speaks for itself. They're 28th in offense, 25th in points scored (and that's with a defensive TD in week 1). I thought they looked pretty shaky on offense in the first half of the Rams game, although they played well in the second half. They also had Peterson drawing the attention of the Rams defense at that point.

I know it sounds harsh but I feel the offense was exactly as bad as it looked last week. They came out with a great drive to start the game and then put up a goose egg the rest of the way. True, we can look at drops and missed assignments as mitigating circumstances but every team and every unit can look at close calls and say "If we had just... we would have been better".

It looks to me like weakness vs. weakness in the matchup of Vikes offense vs. Saints defense. I'm not sure which unit will prevail but I can't help lacking faith in the Vikes offense, especially on the road, with AD gone and Cassel at QB.

True, but they were all over the Rams even before they had to play catch up, so there is reason for optimism, particularly given that they are in the process of adopting a new system and gave up only 149 yards to Brady.

Belichick clearly wanted to beat the Vikings on the ground (which he did after that stupid blocked FG), so sack opportunities weren't there ... I think the Rams game was more indicative of what we can expect from the Viking pass rush.

I think Brady's numbers were as much a function of turnovers, field position and 150 yards rushing from the Pats ground game as good pass defense by the Vikes, which isn't to say they didn't do a decent job of defending the pass. I just don't take much solace in that 149 yards allowed when they gave up another 150 on the ground. That said, you're right that the Rams game provides reason for some optimism in regard to the pass rush.

This is definitely the bigger concern ... again, not gonna put too much stock in to the results of the Pats game, but the Saints have definitely been able to run the ball so far ... BUT, that has been against Cleveland and Atlanta. Cleveland has one of the worst front 7s in football, and Atlanta, while improved, is also still a lower-half run defense. They haven't faced an interior lineman of Linval Joseph's caliber yet. I think the Viking D played superbly against the Rams and very well against the Patriots ... the Aints will have their hands full.

To me, Graham is by far the biggest concern, if for no other reason than the Viking D has been torched by TEs in recent years. I am hopeful the new system and emergence of Harrison Smith change that starting this week!

I'm just worried about all of it.

Mothman wrote: I'm just worried about all of it.

I just don't see how the Vikings are going to keep up with the Saints. Sure, their defense has been atrocious, but when one looks at the current state of the Vikings offense, I have a feeling the Saints are going to suddenly look a LOT better on defense. Sure, Cassel can take better care of the ball and needs to do that, but the Vikes are still missing any vertical threat in the passing game and until they get one they're going to be even more hamstrung on offense than usual with AD out.

Defensively I think they'll do OK, but given that I expect the defense to be on the field for the majority of the game as I expect the Vikings offense to have a lot of 3-and-outs, I don't see how this game is close. I'd love to agree with Leafman, but an offense that was already playing with one hand tied behind it's back is now playing with that hand still behind it's back and a free hand that is broken. The result will be just too much pressure on the defense, especially on the road and especially against a Drew Brees-led team in desperate need of a big win.

VikingLord wrote: I just don't see how the Vikings are going to keep up with the Saints. Sure, their defense has been atrocious, but when one looks at the current state of the Vikings offense, I have a feeling the Saints are going to suddenly look a LOT better on defense. Sure, Cassel can take better care of the ball and needs to do that, but the Vikes are still missing any vertical threat in the passing game and until they get one they're going to be even more hamstrung on offense than usual with AD out.

Defensively I think they'll do OK, but given that I expect the defense to be on the field for the majority of the game as I expect the Vikings offense to have a lot of 3-and-outs, I don't see how this game is close. I'd love to agree with Leafman, but an offense that was already playing with one hand tied behind it's back is now playing with that hand still behind it's back and a free hand that is broken. The result will be just too much pressure on the defense, especially on the road and especially against a Drew Brees-led team in desperate need of a big win.

Unfortunately, that's pretty much how I see it too.

So, is the broken hand in your analogy Greenway's hand? I'm so easily confused!

Vikes/Saints preview talk from Ben Goessling and ESPN's Saints writer Mike Triplett:

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_ ... ts-preview

Goessling: One of the ways the Saints' offense could get rolling, obviously, is Jimmy Graham. Is there any recipe to slowing him down right now? What would your advice be to the Vikings about how to cover him?

Triplett: Well, don't ask the Browns. They tried a little bit of everything last week, including Pro Bowl cornerback Joe Haden and corner Buster Skrine at times. And Graham just exploited the size mismatch.

When teams have had success against Graham, they had to devote more than one resource. The Patriots pressed him with corner Aqib Talib and played zone behind him; the Seahawks bracketed him, often using Earl Thomas as a spy; and the Eagles chipped him with defensive ends off the line. The problem, though, is that exposes teams to all of the Saints' other weapons, including their much-improved run game and dynamic new receiver Brandin Cooks. It's a pick-your-poison offense that's almost immune to double-teams.

Yikes.

It will be interesting see what tactics Zimmer chooses to use.

We don't have the talent to double Jimmy Graham and still take away Colston, Stills, and Cooks. This could get really ugly. The only way we are going to stop New Orleans is by sacking Brees. But good luck with that, considering Brees has the quickest release in the NFL.

If Cassell cannot move the ball through the air without turnovers and we cannot get established on the ground, this could get as ugly as last week. You have to hope Norv gets Cordarrelle rolling. I think it was pretty lousy that Norv was scared to run with Cordarrelle, even if the defense was 'keying' in on him. The guy is too special to not get the ball into his hands.

On the optimistic side, New Orleans' defense has been struggling. Kenny Vacaro and Jarius Byrd will take away the deep ball, but if we can get Jennings underneath and Kyle in the seam, we might have some wiggle room on offense. Matt Cassel must absolutely play mistake-free football if we want to have a chance in this game.

I don't think we have a very good chance to win, but what the hell, I say Vikings 28 New Orleans 24.

HardcoreVikesFan wrote:We don't have the talent to double Jimmy Graham and still take away Colston, Stills, and Cooks. This could get really ugly. The only way we are going to stop New Orleans is by sacking Brees. But good luck with that, considering Brees has the quickest release in the NFL.

That is definitely the conventional wisdom. Vegas has the Vikes side of the bet at a 30-21 loss ... which is really interesting because I can't find a single instance in the last 10 years when an 0-2 NFL team has been favored by more than 7.5 points. The absence of AP is obviously a major factor for the oddsmakers, thinking they will see one-sided action on the Saints at a more historically reasonably spread. Zimmer's defense is the wrench in that machinery ... I'm taking the Vikes to cover.

LEAFMAN THE PURPLE FAN

FYI, my math shows a 29-24 New Orleans win, turnover neutral. Which means the Vikings need a +2 turnover margin to win the game. On the other hand if it's a -2 turnover margin, it's a Saints blowout.

LEAFMAN THE PURPLE FAN

The Vikings defense is very good. The score from the Patriots game is not at all indicative of the way they played thanks to poor special teams (including a blocked kick TD) and 4 interceptions. The Patriots average starting field position was around the 50 yard line.

As long as you shut down Cordarralle Patterson and put any pressure at all on Cassel the offense isn't going to do anything. Cassel seems to crumble once things start getting tough, so the deck is already stacked against him playing in New Orleans. He doesn't handle pressure well, so I can see another 4 INT performance if the Saints start hitting him early.

TLDR; take the Saints to cover the spread.

This guy was the most objective of the bunch. I'm assuming Priefer being back will shore up a lot of the ST's concerns, but the defense still remains a mystery. Despite great starting field position for N.E., that doesn't have anything to do with missed tackles, which the Vikings seemed to do 180 from their week 1 game where they didn't seem to miss a single tackle all game.

Cassel definitely seems to lose all composure when things breakdown and that can't happen. The line also needs to do better.

And the Saints probably should cover this spread, but the Vikings on a good day can keep it close.

If we knock Brees out of the game we can win.

My friend in N'awlins said the game is blacked out down there. Says it happened fairly often.

Can you imagine that?