Sorry, I meant to reply to your post yesterday, Craig, and I got caught up in the Adrian Peterson discussion (again).
losperros wrote:I understand the necessity/design parts and I'm not disagreeing with that. However, aside from 2009, I think Chili put too much emphasis on running the ball and not rebuilding the passing game once Culpepper was out of the game. As for Favre, the Vikings were lucky he was available for the year. No way that was part of Chili's infamous 5-year plan.
I'm not trying to dump on Childress but that gives some perspective about the how long the Vikings have had an anemic passing game. Meanwhile, AD was carrying the offense on his back and the OL has usually been comprised of huge guys that aren't always the best athletes. Admittedly, I thought Kalil was a step in the right direction and now he's having issues. Can't win for losing, I guess.
Despite all the FA signings and draft picks (which I think were pretty darn good), the Vikings again have a dysfunctional offense and the passing game simply doesn't work. There is something wrong. Seems to me that once Adrian Peterson is removed from the equation, the Vikings offense becomes a rudderless boat. It has no signature, no real identity, and it has too much talent at the skill positions to be that way. The team was dependent on AD making super-human plays and despite what talent was/is available, something remains wrong.
My own theory is that it's a combination of things but you're right, without Peterson, the offense lacks identity. I think they're trying to find it and they aren't sure where to look. To me, this gets back to the problem they've had almost every year since 2005: they can never get the right mix of experience at talent on the field at once. They're always limited by inexperience, injury, off-field problems, transition to a new system... it's always
something and it's usually a combination of things. This year, all of those dynamics are at work and I believe that's a big part of the problem.
Since I'm not in on the team meetings, I can't say this for certain but from what I've seen this year I would say that some philosophical changes need to be made with the team, including a little less "power running" mantra now that AD is gone. I'm not saying this team is the Broncos or Pats, but there is some talent there at the skill positions and, as I've said before, there are coaches that are paid to fix problems. And even you agreed that a guy like Patterson simply isn't being used for his strengths.
I don't think they're doing all that much power running at this point and honestly,I think they might need to run the ball more. It seems to be what they do best this year. I said some time ago that I think that's one of the best ways to help a struggling o-line get on track and I still believe that's true.
I'd like to see them get Patterson more involved, even if it requires using the approach Musgrave used with Harvin and manufacturing touches near the line of scrimmage. Above all, they need to find a combination of plays they can execute consistently well, routes that Bridgewater is comfortable throwing, the receivers can run effectively and that develop quickly enough for the struggling line to sustain protection and allow completions. Norv may need to simplify the playbook for a while so these guys can master
something in the passing game rather than struggling with just about everything.
Something is wrong and perhaps some thinking needs to change in the Vikings brain trust. As a fan, it frustrates me to see another year with a crippled passing game.
It frustrates me too. This passing game reminds me way too much if the one we saw in 2006 and that's scary. I get the feeling Turner may be trying too hard to implement his system work and isn't adapting enough to what his personnel can do effectively. Maybe I'm wrong about that but that's my suspicion.
Will you? Is it really even worth making that comment if they both are busts? Ive been hoping I was wrong about things that's have happened since the Wilf's came to MN. But I haven't been.
