Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Mon Sep 26, 2022 9:13 am
One thing I will say that's really starting to stick out to me, I think this offensive line is really starting to gel. As bad as Bradbury has been, he's not even sticking out like a sore thumb to me. Not that he's been great by any means but it doesnt seem like he's having severe lapses. Darrisaw and O'Neill have been studs. Cleveland has been solid. Ingram has a few lapses but been solid for a rookie and is exceptional in the run game. And Bradbury for the most part has blended in. We're still giving up more pressures than I'd like, but this is the best the OL has looked in a while (knock on wood).
Bradbury was the second best offensive lineman according to PFF, with the best being Darrisaw. That is both overall and pass blocking. Ingram was awful at run blocking and pass blocking, grading out at 40.6 and 41.9 respectively. Cleveland was also bad at pass blocking, much better at run blocking, but the rest of the line graded at 70 or better at pass blocking.
It is pretty much the same line as last year once Darrisaw took over for Hill. Ingram has been just as bad as Udoh minus the holds.
Texas Vike wrote: ↑Mon Sep 26, 2022 7:37 am
Anyone else notice Bullard in a good way yesterday? Seemed like he was getting pressure in the middle more than I expected. OTOH, the Lions' RBs gashed us pretty well, as I expected they would. Overall, our DL got less pressure than I would have hoped.
Our D absolutely sucked on 3rd and especially 4th down (which makes Campbell's fateful decision all the more confusing). We got very little pressure and our secondary just couldn't stay with Detroit's receivers, even after Amon-Ra got hurt. We made Josh freaking Reynolds look amazing.
We need to get pressure on Jameis. He will make mistakes if we hit him, but he can also play well against crappy Ds. I'm afraid we aren't that great and he might find the right conditions to cook.
The Lions Oline was supposed to be one of the worst in the NFL going into the game, but it sure didn't seem like it. I thought Hunter played well but haven't seen the pressure stats yet. Wonnum did nothing except be a liability in the run game and Z had his most quiet game of the season so far. The interior guys didn't seem like they got any push at all.
Surprisingly, the Vikings were actually very good on 3rd down yesterday on defense, with the Lions going 3-16. The issue was 4th down, but even there the two stops on 4th were game changers.
People had a lot of expectations for this defense that aren't being met, but it came up big yesterday at times, creating multiple short fields to give the offense an easier shot at scoring. This is a bend don't break defense that breaks far too often early on, but seems to play better as the game goes on.
I had seen your post earlier in the week saying that Detroit had a weak OL and nearly answered saying that it was ANYTHING but weak. They actually have one of the better OLs in the league, IMO. They have invested in it and it shows. It is one of the things I really like about the Lions: they understand the importance of the trenches.
Yes, I knew as soon as I typed it someone would bring up 3rd downs... it was, indeed, 4th downs that we ABSOLUTELY stunk at yesterday. Even more maddening, IMO. It was as if our D had spent all their energy on 3rd to get a stop; everyone comes up with that fist gesture celebrating that they got it to 4th down and then the Lions just nonchalantly picked us apart on 4th down, over and over. This is why Dan Campbell is an idiot. Why attempt a 56 yard FG when your team has been so successful at 4th downs all day?
fiestavike wrote: ↑Sun Sep 25, 2022 8:14 pm
This one wasn't televised in my area, and I'm not spending any money for NFL products. Sounds like it started ugly and ended well.
Yeah, most of the game was NOT quality football, definitely not worth paying for.....the nfl app for 9.99$ a month lets you watch all games, albeit, many times after its finished. This game deserves only to be watch in the condensed for, no commercials....
What NFL app is that? I have a friend in Montana that doesnt get any games but has FOX and CBS, they just dont show any games. He would be willing to see Vikings games for sure, even if they were on at later times.
Texas Vike wrote: ↑Mon Sep 26, 2022 7:37 am
Anyone else notice Bullard in a good way yesterday? Seemed like he was getting pressure in the middle more than I expected. OTOH, the Lions' RBs gashed us pretty well, as I expected they would. Overall, our DL got less pressure than I would have hoped.
Our D absolutely sucked on 3rd and especially 4th down (which makes Campbell's fateful decision all the more confusing). We got very little pressure and our secondary just couldn't stay with Detroit's receivers, even after Amon-Ra got hurt. We made Josh freaking Reynolds look amazing.
We need to get pressure on Jameis. He will make mistakes if we hit him, but he can also play well against crappy Ds. I'm afraid we aren't that great and he might find the right conditions to cook.
The Lions Oline was supposed to be one of the worst in the NFL going into the game, but it sure didn't seem like it. I thought Hunter played well but haven't seen the pressure stats yet. Wonnum did nothing except be a liability in the run game and Z had his most quiet game of the season so far. The interior guys didn't seem like they got any push at all.
Surprisingly, the Vikings were actually very good on 3rd down yesterday on defense, with the Lions going 3-16. The issue was 4th down, but even there the two stops on 4th were game changers.
People had a lot of expectations for this defense that aren't being met, but it came up big yesterday at times, creating multiple short fields to give the offense an easier shot at scoring. This is a bend don't break defense that breaks far too often early on, but seems to play better as the game goes on.
I love the fact it was Mike Hughes who couldnt keep up with KJ on the final play. Its so nice after the beat down the Eagles gave us, to win a game a lot of people, including myself, thought the Lions could win. But never ever forget if the Lions have a chance to screw something up, they usually will.
If Dan Campbell wasnt the Lions coach, we would have lost the game. No other coach in the NFL would have kicked a FG. There was no reason to. Its completely insane.
The Lions Oline was supposed to be one of the worst in the NFL going into the game, but it sure didn't seem like it. I thought Hunter played well but haven't seen the pressure stats yet. Wonnum did nothing except be a liability in the run game and Z had his most quiet game of the season so far. The interior guys didn't seem like they got any push at all.
Surprisingly, the Vikings were actually very good on 3rd down yesterday on defense, with the Lions going 3-16. The issue was 4th down, but even there the two stops on 4th were game changers.
People had a lot of expectations for this defense that aren't being met, but it came up big yesterday at times, creating multiple short fields to give the offense an easier shot at scoring. This is a bend don't break defense that breaks far too often early on, but seems to play better as the game goes on.
I had seen your post earlier in the week saying that Detroit had a weak OL and nearly answered saying that it was ANYTHING but weak. They actually have one of the better OLs in the league, IMO. They have invested in it and it shows. It is one of the things I really like about the Lions: they understand the importance of the trenches.
I only said they were bad because after 3 weeks they have the 29th best pass blocking Oline in the NFL and tied with the Vikings for 23rd best in pass blocking efficiency.
It may be that they have just faced a tough schedule so far and are better than those rankings indicate, but as of now they are struggling to protect Goff. Much better at run blocking based on the results, but lousy at pass protection.
I was wrong about Z too. The guy apparently had a good game, pressuring Goff 5 times and winning on 23+% of his pass rush attempts. I think the biggest issue after looking at the numbers, was that the pressure was getting there from the Dline, but the secondary was so bad it didn't matter.
Dantzler in particular was bad, and if he continues to have games like the last two, Evans might take his starting spot.
StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Sep 26, 2022 12:55 pm
I was wrong about Z too. The guy apparently had a good game, pressuring Goff 5 times and winning on 23+% of his pass rush attempts. I think the biggest issue after looking at the numbers, was that the pressure was getting there from the Dline, but the secondary was so bad it didn't matter.
Was it though? Seems like Goff had plenty of time to sit back and look for targets.
Also, almost no blitzes that I remember from the Vikings. They vary their short cover schemes by dropping linemen back and sending linebackers, but as far as extra rushers go, I don't recall seeing much of that at all for the second game in a row. Thankfully the coverage tightened up as the game went on, but it sure didn't seem like the rush was getting to Goff all that often.
StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Sep 26, 2022 12:55 pm
Dantzler in particular was bad, and if he continues to have games like the last two, Evans might take his starting spot.
This is surprising because Dantzler's struggles were supposedly related to Zimmer's schemes last year. This year, he's still playing soft coverage and I thought that was due to Donatelli's schemes. His getting benched suggests maybe that isn't the case?
Donatelli's schemes in general strike me as very soft. As the game wound down and the Vikings needed to come back they got more aggressive on both sides of the ball thankfully and forced the Lions into mistakes and errors and that made the difference. However, those changes were forced and came almost too late against the Lions. Meanwhile, against the Eagles they seemed to stiffen earlier in the 2nd half, but with the way the offense continued to play for most of that game, it wasn't nearly enough.
I'd like to see both the offense and the defense be much more aggressive early. Both are struggling to sustain drives (in the case of the offense) and get off the field (in the case of the defense) early in games and are getting taken to the woodshed by opponents who are being aggressive. KOC and Donatelli either have the players to be explosive and aggressive or they don't. If they don't believe they have those players, fine, this is the best they can do. But that isn't what we heard all summer on either side of the ball. We heard the Vikings offense would be "explosive" and the defense aggressive in their new 3-4. So which is it going to be? Passive, "win-by-screwing-up-less-than-your-opponents" football, or aggressive, "we-dictate-the-pace" football? Against the Packers it looked much more aggressive. The last two games, save in the last drive or two by the offense at least, it's looked a lot more passive.
Either they have the players they need to exert their will on both sides of the ball or they don't. The way they've schemed for most of the last two games, it seems like neither KOC nor Donatelli have a lot of faith in their players to exert their will. Maybe I'm reading it wrong but teams with superior talent go on the attack and try to dictate the game to their opponents. Teams with inferior talent don't do that because if they try to do that they usually get burnt. The Vikings of the last two games have played like a team trying not to get burnt.
JJBreaksRecords wrote: ↑Mon Sep 26, 2022 12:49 pm
I thought the Vikings were 2-9 on 3rd downs.
Vikings offense converted 2 out of 9 on their 3rd downs.
Vikings defense limited the Lions to 3-16 on their 3rd downs. That sounds pretty good until one considers the Lions then converted on 4 of their 6 4th down conversion attempts, mostly because those attempts were very short yardage situations in favorable field position. In essence, the Lions converted on 7 of 16 downs where they needed to keep their offense on the field.
Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Mon Sep 26, 2022 11:08 am
I dont think that's necessarily the case when it comes to Cousins looking downfield. When they showed zoomed out replays on TV you noticed a lot of WRs going deep but nothing really being there. Sometimes I get worried that we often send too many deep and have no safety net underneath. This happened on at least one of those zero blitzes against Philly. But either way, the announcers said it as well as Kapp. There just wasnt much downfield yesterday. I definitely saw multiple instances where Cousins was looking to them but nothing was there. Supposedly rumor has it KOC and Phillips were drawing up their own off-script plays mid game to adjust to what they were doing and scheme other guys open.
This kind of hearkens back to another post I made in that maybe the Vikings don't have the players to be truly explosive in the passing game on offense?
I mean, both the Eagles and now the Lions have effectively taken away not just the deep routes, but even attempts at hitting those routes? What does that say about the level of talent the Vikings have at WR if two teams can erase the deep and middle parts of the field in the Vikings passing game?
That may be just how it is this year for the Vikings. Maybe they won't be able to attempt a lot of deep or mid-range passes for long stretches of most games because they just lack the talent to open up those routes. That isn't what we heard about the new KOC offense, nor does it reflect the things we heard from KAM about the Vikings talent on offense. Regardless, the offense has to start sustaining drives. What they're doing so far is not going to get it done. They were fortunate to come back against the Lions and had no hope against Philly. We'll see if this continues against the Saints.
Dantzler was bad in coverage, but he made up for it with poor tackling, except for one play where he must have closed his eyes and got the solo tackle. On a serious note, he lacks the size to take on bigger receivers (or TE's, or RB's) and he's not exceptionally quick. I don't see the upside.
And PP on the other side just looks slow and is consistently behind the play. He's first to arrive after a tackle has been made.
I had seen your post earlier in the week saying that Detroit had a weak OL and nearly answered saying that it was ANYTHING but weak. They actually have one of the better OLs in the league, IMO. They have invested in it and it shows. It is one of the things I really like about the Lions: they understand the importance of the trenches.
I only said they were bad because after 3 weeks they have the 29th best pass blocking Oline in the NFL and tied with the Vikings for 23rd best in pass blocking efficiency.
It may be that they have just faced a tough schedule so far and are better than those rankings indicate, but as of now they are struggling to protect Goff. Much better at run blocking based on the results, but lousy at pass protection.
I was wrong about Z too. The guy apparently had a good game, pressuring Goff 5 times and winning on 23+% of his pass rush attempts. I think the biggest issue after looking at the numbers, was that the pressure was getting there from the Dline, but the secondary was so bad it didn't matter.
Dantzler in particular was bad, and if he continues to have games like the last two, Evans might take his starting spot.
I haven't looked at the stats; I'm just going by what I've seen. I caught part of their games vs. Philly and Washington and their line looked solid to me. Their running game is super solid and Goff has been playing incredibly well this season.
Agreed that our secondary is a major concern. PP actually played alright yesterday. Can't wait for Booth to get some playing time. Cine too... hard to be patient when we aren't strong at those positions.
StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Sep 26, 2022 12:55 pm
I was wrong about Z too. The guy apparently had a good game, pressuring Goff 5 times and winning on 23+% of his pass rush attempts. I think the biggest issue after looking at the numbers, was that the pressure was getting there from the Dline, but the secondary was so bad it didn't matter.
Was it though? Seems like Goff had plenty of time to sit back and look for targets.
Also, almost no blitzes that I remember from the Vikings. They vary their short cover schemes by dropping linemen back and sending linebackers, but as far as extra rushers go, I don't recall seeing much of that at all for the second game in a row. Thankfully the coverage tightened up as the game went on, but it sure didn't seem like the rush was getting to Goff all that often.
StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Sep 26, 2022 12:55 pm
Dantzler in particular was bad, and if he continues to have games like the last two, Evans might take his starting spot.
This is surprising because Dantzler's struggles were supposedly related to Zimmer's schemes last year. This year, he's still playing soft coverage and I thought that was due to Donatelli's schemes. His getting benched suggests maybe that isn't the case?
Donatelli's schemes in general strike me as very soft. As the game wound down and the Vikings needed to come back they got more aggressive on both sides of the ball thankfully and forced the Lions into mistakes and errors and that made the difference. However, those changes were forced and came almost too late against the Lions. Meanwhile, against the Eagles they seemed to stiffen earlier in the 2nd half, but with the way the offense continued to play for most of that game, it wasn't nearly enough.
I'd like to see both the offense and the defense be much more aggressive early. Both are struggling to sustain drives (in the case of the offense) and get off the field (in the case of the defense) early in games and are getting taken to the woodshed by opponents who are being aggressive. KOC and Donatelli either have the players to be explosive and aggressive or they don't. If they don't believe they have those players, fine, this is the best they can do. But that isn't what we heard all summer on either side of the ball. We heard the Vikings offense would be "explosive" and the defense aggressive in their new 3-4. So which is it going to be? Passive, "win-by-screwing-up-less-than-your-opponents" football, or aggressive, "we-dictate-the-pace" football? Against the Packers it looked much more aggressive. The last two games, save in the last drive or two by the offense at least, it's looked a lot more passive.
Either they have the players they need to exert their will on both sides of the ball or they don't. The way they've schemed for most of the last two games, it seems like neither KOC nor Donatelli have a lot of faith in their players to exert their will. Maybe I'm reading it wrong but teams with superior talent go on the attack and try to dictate the game to their opponents. Teams with inferior talent don't do that because if they try to do that they usually get burnt. The Vikings of the last two games have played like a team trying not to get burnt.
A little help here VL. It's Donatell. No i in the name.
fiestavike wrote: ↑Sun Sep 25, 2022 8:14 pm
This one wasn't televised in my area, and I'm not spending any money for NFL products. Sounds like it started ugly and ended well.
Yeah, most of the game was NOT quality football, definitely not worth paying for.....the nfl app for 9.99$ a month lets you watch all games, albeit, many times after its finished. This game deserves only to be watch in the condensed for, no commercials....
Well, I paid for tickets to the game, and it was worth every penny. Had a great time, as did virtually everyone in the stadium. I realize that's not the same as paying for it on TV, but this is the NFL. There are a LOT of ugly wins. Look around the league yesterday.
You take wins when you can get them, especially against a divisional opponent. Style points don't matter.
soflavike wrote: ↑Mon Sep 26, 2022 1:49 pm
Dantzler was bad in coverage, but he made up for it with poor tackling, except for one play where he must have closed his eyes and got the solo tackle. On a serious note, he lacks the size to take on bigger receivers (or TE's, or RB's) and he's not exceptionally quick. I don't see the upside.
And PP on the other side just looks slow and is consistently behind the play. He's first to arrive after a tackle has been made.
I think you're wrong about PP against the Lions. He was really good.
Dantzler on the other hand ... his worst game this year, easily.
A couple more observations following yesterday's win over the Lions.
Style points don't matter
Guys, this is the NFL. Games are won ugly every week. Look around the league yesterday. The Dolphins won despite the butt-punt. The Broncos won 11-10. Indianapolis woke from the dead and somehow beat the Chiefs. The Rams looked awful and won 20-9. Take the win and be happy. We're in first place in the division, with winnable games coming the next two weeks.
Dan Campbell pushed the refs to the limit
Anybody remember Greg Maddux pitching for the Braves in the 1990s? Maddux would start out the game and paint the outside corner for a strike. Then he'd throw the next pitch an inch off the plate. If the ump gave him that for a strike, he'd throw it 2 inches off the corner. He would keep doing this until the umpire stopped giving him the strike ... by then, he was often getting pitches 4-5 inches off the plate.
That's essentially what Dan Campbell did yesterday with our receivers. Detroit's DBs didn't just play physical. They pushed, pulled, held, grabbed. hacked and impeded. Campbell was basically pulling a Maddux ... how far would the refs let it go before they called something? He was banking on the fact that they wouldn't call something on every play, which they didn't. Yes, a few calls went against them, but not nearly as many as there could have been if the refs called every play by the book. I can't count how many times Cousins basically had nobody open. I hate to admit it, but it was a good strategy by Campbell.
Justin Jefferson is going to have to learn to beat physical press coverage
Detroit did the same thing to JJ last year in the second half of the game against the Lions in Detroit. He torched them for like 120 yards in the first half, then they shut him out in the second. They continued that trend this entire game. I think they figured out that JJ doesn't do well against really physical press coverage. If he's going to surpass Davante Adams as the best WR in the league, he's going to have to learn to do what Adams does so well ... beat press coverage. Adams has the best get-off in the league at the line. JJ will get there, I believe. But he's not there yet.
Kirk Cousins may actually do better playing street ball
I know you all will think I'm crazy, but hear me out.
For the majority of the game, Cousins is running plays as they're designed. And he's going to run them EXACTLY as they're designed. Whatever his first read is, he's going there first. Then his second. Then his third. Then his checkdown. As you guys know, Kirk is very compartmentalized, very procedure driven. This is the same guy who mapped out his day in 10-minute increments on an Excel spreadsheet. He's ... orderly.
I think that hurts him on the field. For example, if guy like KJ Osborn isn't a primary target, if he's used to clear out an area of the field to get someone else open, Kirk doesn't even see him ... even if he's open. Because the play isn't designed to go to Osborn, and Kirk is going to stick to the play design. When the play falls apart, he falls apart.
But in the 2-minute offense, it's a whole different animal. Kirk's job is to get it to whoever is open. It's less structured. How do I know? Because Kirk himself SAID SO after the game yesterday. That's why KJ is almost his "go-to" guy late in games. The defense is paying so much attention to JJ and Thielen that KJ gets open. And because Kirk's job is to throw it to whoever is open, he throws it to KJ.
I've noticed this year that whenever the Vikings go no-huddle, Kirk does better. He sees the field better. He makes better decisions and better throws. They did it in the third quarter against Philly, and he drove the ball right down the field (yes, he threw a pick, but that was the one that was JJ's fault). Yesterday in the second quarter, when the Vikes were down 14, they went no-huddle ... and they came back to tie the game. And of course at the end, Kirk was brilliant ... 2-minute drill, no huddle.
Sometimes, I think Kirk Cousins would do better with less structure ... because he's sort of a slave to structure. Almost every person in this world is creative to a degree. It's just that many don't use their creativity unless they're forced to do it. Maybe when you force Kirk to be creative, he's actually a better quarterback. Obviously I could be wrong, but he sure seems to do better when the entire play is just winging it.
