If we improve the freaking OL...

[Mothman]

Great takes, Gem.

I think the O-line issue is consistency. IMO, it's not so much that they need to hold a pocket for x amount of time longer...they just need to consistently create one. I've seen TB get plenty of time to throw, but then every 3rd play, and often every other, some guy(s) come through practically untouched.
-
Even the isues with TBs arm strength, the longer routes, AD's lack of production on 3rd down etc, are not the real problems. The real problem is that Turner has done next to nothing about working to his players strengths.
I thought he did a much better job this past game. Hopefully he has his head out of his past the rest of the way.
-
If I'm CP84, I'm praying to get traded. Could you imagine what Seattle, AZ,Pitt,Philly etc, might get from that guy just by finding creative ways to get him the ball.
-
eff you, Norv

I'll say it again, if Zimmer wanted CP84 on the field, he'd be on the field. Hanging that on Norv is just passing the buck.

[The Breeze]

I'm not convinced that there is even a debate amongst them, Jim. Meaning, I don't see Norv or Zimmer lobbying to get him out there...for whatever reason.
My 'eff you' to was just a general displeasure with the whole situation. I was actually pleased with the offensive gameplan thursday, last play aside, and am looking forward to what's next. But then I read the board and am reminded of how long the writing has been on the wall in terms of what seems obviously wrong vs taking steps to adapt.
-
In my heart of hearts I think Norv is the wrong guy to develop TB...and that's not a vote for TB being the right guy. I have doubts that the FO will see it that way and concerns about what moves will be made in the draft and any changes in coaching/scheme etc.
Meanwhile, Norv called a great game against AZ.....my frustration and subsequent comment is due to how long it's taken the guru to poduce a gameplan against a quality opponent that works for his QB and RB.
I thought they displayed great balance, for the most part and only a modicum of predictability as per the norm.
-
Anyway, as for CP84, I don't think Zimmer and Norv are at odds about him and I do find that frustrating.

[Mothman]

I'm not convinced that there is even a debate amongst them, Jim. Meaning, I don't see Norv or Zimmer lobbying to get him out there...for whatever reason.

I don't get the impression there's any debate at all. If so, I assume it would have to be in the "Norv wants to use him in the offense and Zimmer doesn't direction" since Zimmer could obviously overrule Turner if he chose to do so. Now, it may be that he respects Turner enough to defer to his wishes about something like this but even then, it would be a choice Zimmer was making.

My 'eff you' to was just a general displeasure with the whole situation. I was actually pleased with the offensive gameplan thursday, last play aside, and am looking forward to what's next. But then I read the board and am reminded of how long the writing has been on the wall in terms of what seems obviously wrong vs taking steps to adapt.

In my heart of hearts I think Norv is the wrong guy to develop TB...and that's not a vote for TB being the right guy. I have doubts that the FO will see it that way and concerns about what moves will be made in the draft and any changes in coaching/scheme etc.
Meanwhile, Norv called a great game against AZ.....my frustration and subsequent comment is due to how long it's taken the guru to poduce a gameplan against a quality opponent that works for his QB and RB.

As I've said before, I think he's taken a number of steps this season in an effort to adapt. What they did against Arizona didn't look like a new adaptation to me. There may have been a few new wrinkles but overall, it looked to me like the biggest difference was better execution.

In the end, I don't think he's the right coordinator for the Vikes but i also don't expect a change in that position so I think the execution needs to continue improving and they need to build an offensive roster that's a better match for his approach.

[The Breeze]

@Jim
I felt the use of the TE screens, Wallace across the middle, AD catching that pass in stride...were things they've tried before with mixed results. Maybe not so much Wallace over the middle.
I guess my take is those types of plays should be staples rather than wrinkles until defenses relax their tendency to crowd the line. TB is not beating anyone downfield in the meantime.
It is what it is....thursday looked good against a balanced D.
-
As per retooling the offense,: that is my fear. That could/will take some time and may require a QB change ultimately.
I think I agree that Norv is not leaving anytime soon...so I hope he continues to to cultivate the kinds of success from thursday going forward, or it could be really painful to watch.

[Mothman]

@Jim
I felt the use of the TE screens, Wallace across the middle, AD catching that pass in stride...were things they've tried before with mixed results. Maybe not so much Wallace over the middle.
I guess my take is those types of plays should be staples rather than wrinkles until defenses relax their tendency to crowd the line. TB is not beating anyone downfield in the meantime.

But that was my point: they've been running those same plays for a while now but some defenses take them away, sometimes they're not executed well, etc. They have to be able to threaten teams down the field or it becomes too easy for a team with the right personnel to take those screens and swings away or limit their productivity. One of the reasons they worked against the Cardinals is because Arizona blitzed and that left gaps to be exploited.

As per retooling the offense,: that is my fear. That could/will take some time and may require a QB change ultimately.

I think I agree that Norv is not leaving anytime soon...so I hope he continues to cultivate the kinds of success from thursday going forward, or it could be really painful to watch.

I hope so too but ultimately, I think he needs as much help from the players as they do from him. Maybe a new assistant or two is needed as well. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing what a different OL coach could do for the Vikings.

[The Breeze]

@Jim
It's dysfunctional for certain...but when it's working it looks pretty good IMO.
-
My take on the line is that their woes predate Davidson. But i'm down with any change that works, whether it's coach, scheme and/or players....cause what they currently do doesn't work.
-
Regarding the offense and player execution: it's a valid point and it runs right into the impasse of: when is the coach held accountable for the ways players execute the scheme?
It seemed like that was the continual issue on D during Leslie's tenure...then bang, a new coach, scheme and players, all of a sudden it's a formidable unit in the span of a season and a half. They still have work to do in terms of depth and run stopping, but compared to where they came from, it's been a dramatic turn around.
I'd argue it's much more difficult to pull off on offense due to the scarcity of competent QBs.
My gut says we have the same issues causing the dysfunction on the current offense as we did Leslie's defense...mostly talent matching scheme. So, they have two options: get the correct talent or change it up...neither is guaranteed to work....but if they half a$$ it'll fail. So, either way I wanna see the same committment to the offense as we've seen on defense.

[Mothman]

@Jim
It's dysfunctional for certain...but when it's working it looks pretty good IMO.
-
My take on the line is that their woes predate Davidson. But i'm down with any change that works, whether it's coach, scheme and/or players....cause what they currently do doesn't work.
-
Regarding the offense and player execution: it's a valid point and it runs right into the impasse of: when is the coach held accountable for the ways players execute the scheme?
It seemed like that was the continual issue on D during Leslie's tenure...then bang, a new coach, scheme and players, all of a sudden it's a formidable unit in the span of a season and a half.

They still have work to do in terms of depth and run stopping, but compared to where they came from, it's been a dramatic turn around.

Indeed... but the "and players" part made a BIG difference.

I'd argue it's much more difficult to pull off on offense due to the scarcity of competent QBs.

My gut says we have the same issues causing the dysfunction on the current offense as we did Leslie's defense...mostly talent matching scheme. So, they have two options: get the correct talent or change it up...neither is guaranteed to work....but if they half a$$ it'll fail. So, either way I wanna see the same committment to the offense as we've seen on defense.[/quote]

I do too. They need to make that commitment and make wise personnel choices.

[losperros]

If I'm CP84, I'm praying to get traded. Could you imagine what Seattle, AZ,Pitt,Philly etc, might get from that guy just by finding creative ways to get him the ball. eff you, Norv

Not to mention what the Pats could do with him.

I'll say it again, if Zimmer wanted CP84 on the field, he'd be on the field. Hanging that on Norv is just passing the buck.

Absolutely. I love Zimmer but he's the head coach. If he tells Norv that Patterson needs to play, then Norv has to play him. The same goes with Charles Johnson.

Dang! This is frustrating!

[losperros]

I hope so too but ultimately, I think he needs as much help from the players as they do from him. Maybe a new assistant or two is needed as well. I certainly wouldn't mind seeing what a different OL coach could do for the Vikings.

I couldn't agree more.

BTW, Jim, you're right. A new OL coach really should be on Zimmer's "to do" list. The OL hasn't been right for too long. It's murder for the skill positions and it's costing the Vikings offense points on the board.

I wish Mike Tice could be our OL coach again.

[akvikingsfan]

I couldn't agree more.

BTW, Jim, you're right. A new OL coach really should be on Zimmer's "to do" list. The OL hasn't been right for too long. It's murder for the skill positions and it's costing the Vikings offense points on the board.

I wish Mike Tice could be our OL coach again.

I would love to bring Tice back as the line coach. Or even as the coordinator.

[The Breeze]

The whole issue with the line is where it all hinges.
They can't accurately diagnos much else until there is some NFL level consistency in their play. That is directly leading to all the consternation, speculation and knee jerk criticism on the board and elsewhere. The injuries were unavoidable and they were caught with their pants down regarding depth. Also, switching Fusco has been mostly a negative...
I'm not convinced health is the main issue, however. I'm sure they'd be a better unit if Berger/Harris and Clemmings were backups...but if there were a different blocking scheme that helped to narrow the drop off between starter and reserve it would go a long way toward overall success. It's pretty unrealistic to expect lineman to stay halthy all season. Especially this particular group given their history.
Davidson's success in other places came with different blocking schemes...zone blocking.
Still, Clemmings, Berger and Harris are getting valuable reps in this system, if nothing else. If the other two do come back and recover their health, the depth problem is way less of an issue.

[PurpleKoolaid]

Look what happened with the Dline with geting Griffen, Joseph, Floyd. We saw instant improvement with the entire defense. Just by upgrading and getting a little depth with the Dline.

The same will happen with the offense. We dont know, once we get Sully and Load back, if they are going to be as good as they were before they got hurt. I think we HAVE to make the first couple draft picks with the Oline. Guard or tackle. And even a FA Oline guy. I'd love to see a really good, no doubt #1 WR, but it wont be as good as a really good Oline guy in the short run. If the line doesnt give 3+ seconds most of the time, like the most passing teams get, doesnt matter who is our QB. If the Oline cant block, it doesnt matter if if are spending so much money on the best RB in football right now. (And I strongly disagree with those who dont think AD is getting better at blocks and receiving. He made some great, yes great, blocks and blitz pic-ups. Also he is there for the receptions, throw him the ball Norv! Or I guess Zimmer since he's HC and Norv is only OC lol).

It has to start with the Oline. We spend a lot of the D, we need to start with the basic Oline now.

[Mothman]

The whole issue with the line is where it all hinges.
They can't accurately diagnos much else until there is some NFL level consistency in their play. That is directly leading to all the consternation, speculation and knee jerk criticism on the board and elsewhere. The injuries were unavoidable and they were caught with their pants down regarding depth. Also, switching Fusco has been mostly a negative...
I'm not convinced health is the main issue, however. I'm sure they'd be a better unit if Berger/Harris and Clemmings were backups...but if there were a different blocking scheme that helped to narrow the drop off between starter and reserve it would go a long way toward overall success. It's pretty unrealistic to expect lineman to stay halthy all season. Especially this particular group given their history.
Davidson's success in other places came with different blocking schemes...zone blocking.
Still, Clemmings, Berger and Harris are getting valuable reps in this system, if nothing else. If the other two do come back and recover their health, the depth problem is way less of an issue.

is there any reason to believe this group of o-lineman would be better in a zone blocking scheme than they are in this blocking scheme?

[losperros]

is there any reason to believe this group of o-lineman would be better in a zone blocking scheme than they are in this blocking scheme?

Maybe. Something sure needs changing. Then again, it's remarkable how slow off the snap some of these OL players are. Wouldn't that show up in any scheme?

[The Breeze]

is there any reason to believe this group of o-lineman would be better in a zone blocking scheme than they are in this blocking scheme?

Other than it couldn't possibly be worse? May be it could...I dunno. All i know is it's getting harder and harder in this era to keep proven talent due to cap concerns. The majority of teams run a zone blocking scheme because there is a greater posibilty of taking average talent and having it excel...at least that's what I've been reading.
Davidson's fomer success stories were in a zone scheme. Who knows?
I'm not specifically advocating for the change, but there is a trend in the league and I would assume there is a reason for it.
I'm not saying Turner's system can't or won't be effective just that it's old and kown...his whole system and tendencies, not just the routes being run.
It would be ineresting to note what kind of blocking schemes are run in AZ, Giants, Oak, Balt, Cincy,.....teams that, off the top of my head use the long ball consistently rather than jut try to hit you with it when you aren't looking.
My main point though, I don't see how they would realistically justify making a big change anywhere until the line is solved. I don't necessarily agree with that...but I would wager that's what plays out. That and a 6'5" athletic freak at wideout replacing one of the incumbents.