Vikings Message Board.Com

The Breeze wrote: I would guess all of them? The 2nd hald was brutal.

I was curious so...

First pass: 1st and 10. 11 yard gain to Wright.
Second pass: 3rd and 5. INT.
Third pass: 2nd and 12. 2 yard loss to Ellison.
Fourth pass: 3rd and 14. 10 yard gain to Wright.

We ran 19 total plays in the second half.

I get that Teddy didn't really instill confidence in the coaches with his missed deep throws in the first half and the INT at the start of the second, but at some point the coaches need to show Teddy some confidence in him and not shackle him like they did in the second half last night. Obviously I'm happy we got the win last night, but that doesn't seem to be a recipe for sustained success in the league. I was also pretty fumed that we didn't go for the win on 3rd and 5 with a PA pass on our last offensive play of the game. I thought it would be the perfect opportunity to grab the win and give Teddy some more confidence (if, of course, he completed the pass).

@Jim
I think TB played like absolute crap last night, in comparison to the last 3 wks. He was scared again and made a horrible throw to McKinnon on an absolutely great playcall. Then followed it up with a less horrible but equally ineffective pass to Pruitt. Which was then followed by a beautiful on the money throw to Wright, who ran a bad route. Other than the one pass in the middle of the field to Wallace, I can't recall another legit attempt past the sticks. There must have been 1 or 2?
Anyway, I don't expect the kid to be perfect, and he struggled in the beginning. It looked like they turtled after that and the D won the game fo them.
Bring on Seattle? lol

@TSonn
I agree that it would have been cool to see TB get more support in the form of more opportunities. For example: the 11 yd pass to Wright was off play action on first down. I would literally run play after play like that...at different depths to different guys, until the defense committed to stopping it with the same effort as they do AD.
But it really seemed that there was a lot riding on this game for the culture Zimmer is creating. That was his 1st win vs the pack. They weren't willing to put the game in TB's hands with the lead. Shaun Hill could've played the 2nd half with the same result IMO. It would've been different if they weren't leading...or if the game was less meaningful too... I assume anyway.
The rode the D and it worked out. Ultimately, possibly as soon as next week, they will need to trust TB to make some plays against high caliber teams.

The Breeze wrote: That's basically what I see. Mcarthy made a significant adjustment by going no huddle...it shifted the flow in the Vikes secondary and put them on their heels some. Kudos to the D for a downright stellar effort, but it will be much more difficult to maintain against the seahawks. I hope we see a different pattern on offense, because I think we can beat them if we can score some points.

Agreed, they have to come up with a game plan that get's Teddy involved early and often. They can't just be content to hand off twice to Peterson and hope for the best on 3rd down. I was hoping Norv wouldn't revert to that power running / strike deep down the field offense that was so unsuccessful but here it is again.

mondry wrote:I was excited but cautious after the ARI and CHI games where Norv was calling much better plays that really helped everyone out and played to our strengths but it doesn't look like that will be sustainable.

Every QB needs to have plays called for him to get him into a rhythm, high percentage stuff to help them establish it. That's what Norv did so well in the ARI game and you can see the opposite of that from BOTH of the QB's this game, Rodgers was freaking awful while they tried to force feed Lacy and be a "run first" team and as soon as they got into pass first mode Rodgers caught fire throwing it 44 times. Teddy doesn't have that luxury, he threw the ball 19 times NINE-TEEN TIMES and a few of them were low percentage deep balls with little chance for success.

"Little chance for success", my heinie.

He missed wide open receivers and made bad decisions.

It's "great" that we ran the ball 27 times and threw it 19 times but that kind of predictability and game plan won't work against SEA and it's hard to say it "worked" against GB as we had like what, 6 points at half time? They'll smash Peterson on first and second down and we'll have a cold Teddy with no Rhythm try to pass on 3rd and long. I don't think we'll have any answer to them dropping 7 guys into coverage like they did last time and if Norv brings a similar game plan as last night against SEA it will be another slaughter.

He called a run to Peterson on the first play of the game, as usual. Then, after peterson picked up a first down on the next play, Turner called a deep shot to McKinnon on first down that was WIDE open and Bridgewater just missed it. After that, the drive stalled, was revived by a fake punt, Turner called another passing play on first down that resulted in a scramble for no gain. He called another on second down and Bridgewater overthrew Pruitt who was open heading into the end zone. Then, on third down, Wright ran his route too close to the sidelines so that when TB finally hit a receiver downfield, the pass was completed out of bounds. Turner went against tendencies on that first drive and the execution wasn't there.

As far as Teddy making Norv look better, that's not how this works. It's Norv's job to put teddy in a position to use his strengths and skills with a high chance of success while avoiding his short comings, (aka the deep ball) not the other way around.

If his shortcoming is that he can rarely complete a pass 20+ yards downfield than maybe he's not NFL starting material. Come on, you can't reasonably ask an NFL coordinator to run an offense where his starting QB, (heck, let's call Bridgewater what the Vikes clearly consider him, a franchise QB) isn't expected to hit a reasonable number of those throws, especially on well-designed plays that leave players open.

Bridgewater can't just throw short all the time. Good defenses aren't going to allow him to do that week after week, play after play.

That kind of thinking just STINKS of the ol Leslie Frazier mentality "well if the players just executed better it would work!"

It's not a "Leslie Frazier" mentality, it's a coaching mentality. Don't you think Mike Zimmer expects his players to execute his schemes? That's how football works. Coaches design plays, call them and players have to perform. When Kalil misses a block or Sendejo misses a tackle, is suggesting they be able to execute the fundamentals of their respective positions unreasonable, the sign of a "Leslie Frazier mentality"? Did they miss because they weren't put in position to succeed?

Players have to execute. You seem to want Bridgewater coddled.

J. Kapp 11 wrote:I like Teddy. I really do, and I want him to succeed.

But man, that was a horror show against Green Bay. That overthrow to McKinnon ... cripes, I could have made that throw. Carr would've hit that throw 10 times out of 10. A.J. McCarron would've hit that throw. Bortles would've hit that throw. They're all second-year guys. The lefty throw is barely worth mentioning. And once again, he held the ball too long.

The kid is very likable and seems to be someone his teammates want to follow. But he's got to step it up, especially against better opposition. There can be no more "young quarterback" excuses. He's had 29 starts, and we're now in the playoffs against a pass rush that makes Green Bay's look like a Pop Warner team. It's time to start hitting guys downfield who are wide open, and it's time to start trusting receivers to make plays on contested passes. This is the NFL. "Open" doesn't mean nobody within five yards.

Again, I'm rooting for this kid. But he's got to play better. We're on the verge of becoming an elite defense, we can run the ball, and we have tons of speed at the wide receiver position. The future is bright, but only if Teddy steps up his game on a consistent basis.

The Packers really managed to do a number on the Vikings offense this year both times they played them. AD was pretty well contained too despite the fact the Vikes stuck with the run game.

That isn't to excuse Teddy's performance, but it seems like certain defenses (or defensive schemes) are more capable of seriously disrupting what the Vikings like to do on offense. The Packers are one of the teams that have the personnel/scheme to gum up the works, and unfortunately so do the Seahawks.

As for Bridgewater, I'm a lot more surprised now when he attempts a deeper ball, much less completes one, than I am if he doesn't. This is in general, much less against aggressive defenses that are begging to be hit over the top. If Teddy continues to be unable or unwilling to try to hit on those opportunities, it's going to be 1-and-done in the playoffs. On the flip side, if he can get that aspect of the offense going it could be a real problem for a Seahawks team that I'm sure expects to see the same limited offense they saw earlier in the year.

@Jim & Mondry
I think there is a middle groundto your debate...between 'coddling' and 'playing to your players strengths'. The frustration erupts because it's not black and white, game to game. It's literally half to half.
Can they do more to help TB succeed without coddling him and how is that all defined? Throw in the O-line situation...and it resembles some bizzare form of performance yoga on the deck of an old boat in a storm.

The Breeze wrote:@Jim & Mondry
I think there is a middle groundto your debate...between 'coddling' and 'playing to your players strengths'. The frustration erupts because it's not black and white, game to game. It's literally half to half.
Can they do more to help TB succeed without coddling him and how is that all defined? Throw in the O-line situation...and it resembles some bizzare form of performance yoga on the deck of an old boat in a storm.

For me, the expectation should be pretty simple - the coaches should be able to expect Bridgewater to execute plays when he should be able to hit a deep receiver (aka, see, and hit in stride, a wide open Jerrick McKinnon, for example). I would not hold it against Teddy if he didn't evade 4 rushers on a single play and then thread a needle between 2 defenders 60 yards down the field ala Brett Favre. The line is drawn between what is reasonable given the play call and the circumstances of that play call. Another example is the game earlier this year at the 49ers when there were several instances of wide open receivers running deep where Bridgewater had time and either didn't see or didn't attempt to make the throw. That, in my opinion, is something the offensive coordinator should be able to reasonably expect Bridgewater to execute.

What is unreasonable to me is to force the offensive coordinator to adjust his playcalls so only short and medium routes are viable. This is even more unreasonable given the speed the Vikings have at WR (and even tight end with Rudolph) and the investment that has been made in those positions. Heck, Spielman shipped Jennings off and brought Wallace in to expand the depth of the field that defenses should have to worry about. If Bridgewater's limitations make that pointless, then it is reasonable to start looking for alternatives that can bring the 30+ yard part of the field back into play, because right now I don't think anyone defending the Vikings worries about that at all.

The Breeze wrote:@Jim & Mondry
I think there is a middle groundto your debate...between 'coddling' and 'playing to your players strengths'. The frustration erupts because it's not black and white, game to game. It's literally half to half.

I think there's a middle ground too and I think Turner's actually trying to call within that but I'm talking about the middle ground, not about throwing deep all the time.

Can they do more to help TB succeed without coddling him and how is that all defined?

I think that's exactly what they did on the opening drive last night. Could we have a better example than that missed throw to McKinnon? They threw on first down so it was unexpected. They sent McKinnon deep (also unexpected), got the mismatch they wanted, had him wide open and Bridgewater had time to throw. That play was an almost ideal example of putting Bridgewater in position to succeed!

I was tough on Mondry above because I'm tired of seeing excuses for poor play from Bridgewater. An NFL QB, and a an NFL offense, have to be able to threaten defense down the field. It's essential. They have to hit on a reasonable number of those or a suggestion like the one you made to TSonn below won't work.

The Breeze wrote:@TSonn
I agree that it would have been cool to see TB get more support in the form of more opportunities. For example: the 11 yd pass to Wright was off play action on first down. I would literally run play after play like that...at different depths to different guys, until the defense committed to stopping it with the same effort as they do AD.

It's a fine idea but the defense will only make that commitment if the offense is truly hurting them on a good percentage of those passes.

VikingLord wrote: For me, the expectation should be pretty simple - the coaches should be able to expect Bridgewater to execute plays when he should be able to hit a deep receiver (aka, see, and hit in stride, a wide open Jerrick McKinnon, for example). I would not hold it against Teddy if he didn't evade 4 rushers on a single play and then thread a needle between 2 defenders 60 yards down the field ala Brett Favre. The line is drawn between what is reasonable given the play call and the circumstances of that play call. Another example is the game earlier this year at the 49ers when there were several instances of wide open receivers running deep where Bridgewater had time and either didn't see or didn't attempt to make the throw. That, in my opinion, is something the offensive coordinator should be able to reasonably expect Bridgewater to execute.

What is unreasonable to me is to force the offensive coordinator to adjust his playcalls so only short and medium routes are viable. This is even more unreasonable given the speed the Vikings have at WR (and even tight end with Rudolph) and the investment that has been made in those positions. Heck, Spielman shipped Jennings off and brought Wallace in to expand the depth of the field that defenses should have to worry about. If Bridgewater's limitations make that pointless, then it is reasonable to start looking for alternatives that can bring the 30+ yard part of the field back into play, because right now I don't think anyone defending the Vikings worries about that at all.

In theory I agree...but the fact that you didn't metion what might be the worst o-line in the league in terms of pass blocking, suggests to me some bias.
Seattle was becoming a bit of a joke until Bevell switched up the offense to suit Wilson's game, they're line was much maligned too. And last night Rogers very nearly brought his team back from 17 down against one of the leagues top scoring defenses in large part because of halftime adjustments to the offense. His line has been horrible.
Teddy gets no pass from me for missing those two throws on the first drive...nor the left handed Int.....but there is plenty of room for Norv to improve his talent vs scheme vs what the defense is doing dynamic. And it's not out of the realm of posibility that he and Davidson have been outcoached/schemed more han once this season. Last night being a prime example.
The relationship between OC/HC/QB needs to be a fluid dynamic thing to expect success , not a static absolute. That is why Zimmer recently expressed that TB be more vocal to coaches about what works better for him playwise.
Frankly, I don't think it's totally fair to judge the situation until the line is at least average.
Last night and in Frisco I can see nerves being natural....just part of maturing. But even Rogers looked like capwhen he had no time/comfort in the pocket.
Not sold on either one honestly.

Mothman wrote:
"Little chance for success", my heinie.

Okay, so tell me how many times have those deep side line "go routes" been completed? I'll wait, it shouldn't take long because there aren't many! They are low percentage plays in this offense, they leave little chance for success because they're essentially a waste of a play.

He called a run to Peterson on the first play of the game, as usual. Then, after peterson picked up a first down on the next play, Turner called a deep shot to McKinnon on first down that was WIDE open and Bridgewater just missed it. After that, the drive stalled, was revived by a fake punt, Turner called another passing play on first down that resulted in a scramble for no gain. He called another on second down and Bridgewater overthrew Pruitt who was open heading into the end zone. Then, on third down, Wright ran his route too close to the sidelines so that when TB finally hit a receiver downfield, the pass was completed out of bounds. Turner went against tendencies on that first drive and the execution wasn't there.

Sounds to me like all deep side line type throws which I've already gone over have a very low % chance of being successful. Look when I say that I'm not talking about like "hey it was open so it should have worked" what I'm saying is it doesn't matter if the guys wide open or not, Teddy can't make that throw, it's so freaking obvious at this point that I wouldn't even waste a play trying to do it!!!!!!!!!!

If his shortcoming is that he can rarely complete a pass 20+ yards downfield than maybe he's not NFL starting material. Come on, you can't reasonably ask an NFL coordinator to run an offense where his starting QB, (heck, let's call Bridgewater what the Vikes clearly consider him, a franchise QB) isn't expected to hit a reasonable number of those throws, especially on well-designed plays that leave players open.


Bridgewater can't just throw short all the time. Good defenses aren't going to allow him to do that week after week, play after play.

He can complete 20+ yard throws on the regular, we've seen that, but the sample size is large enough now that the timing routes to the side line 20+ yards down the field and the side line go routes aren't very likely to yield results. 1. Bridgewater SUCKS at them, we KNOW that already, as a teddy supporter I'm even willing to admit that at this point!!! 2. The WR's can make mistakes like Wright not leaving enough field to work with to come down with it in bounds. 3. Sometimes the O-line gets destroyed and the pocket breaks down forcing Teddy to scramble which essentially kills the timing and the routes. It's those 3 things that make those low %'s plays and when they make up a lot of the play calls we're doomed.

Could you pray and hope and sacrifice a goat that Teddy and the guys will actually complete them, sure! But to me it seems ridiculously dumb to center the game plan around that kind of stuff.

Mean while the area of the field Teddy is capable of lighting up often gets ignored for long stretches time. Go back to the bears game and you'll see a beautiful 34 yard throw to mike wallace near the middle of the field. http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201512200 ... &tab=recap Watch Rudolphs TD on the seam route http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/201512270 ... &tab=recap or a vast majority of Wright's catches

It's not a "Leslie Frazier" mentality, it's a coaching mentality. Don't you think Mike Zimmer expects his players to execute his schemes? That's how football works. Coaches design plays, call them and players have to perform. When Kalil misses a block or Sendejo misses a tackle, is suggesting they be able to execute the fundamentals of their respective positions unreasonable, the sign of a "Leslie Frazier mentality"? Did they miss because they weren't put in position to succeed?

Obviously but you have to be able to look deeper than that otherwise no coach should be fired under any circumstance because after all they came up with a plan and the players just didn't execute it. Clearly using your players properly and putting them in the best spot to succeed is the difference between a bill belichik and eric mangini, a mike zimmer and leslie frazier.

When Kalil misses a block and allows the QB to be strip sacked to end the game not once but twice, don't you think it might have made some sense to have Peterson stay in and chip block the DE on that side?

Look, here is my gripe, at some point as OC you have to understand what you're working with, that if you let Kalil go 1 on 1 on those types of plays with a ware or freeney there's a none negligible chance something HORRIBLE will happen so yes it's Kalil's fault for screwing up but at the end of the day it's up to the OC to give him help on such a crucial play, in not doing so Norv's essentially gambling. That's where I draw the line and what I'm not okay with, if you're happy just pinning that on kalil and giving Norv a pass then fine, that's your opinion, that's okay.

Players have to execute. You seem to want Bridgewater coddled.

Nope, if that was the case I'd be praising Norv for a magnificent job of only allowing Teddy to throw the ball 19 times which clearly isn't the case. I just want more routes and play designs that have a bit higher % chance of actually being completed and for Teddy to be allowed to heat up / get into a rhythm.

Clearly the power running and deep shots down the sideline offense hasn't worked particularly well this season and that's what I'm against. The couple games we've had success offensively (ARI, CHI) have had vastly different tactics for which parts of the field we attacked and at what depth it was done.

To further add to my last post, we've heard how Peterson and Bridgewater came out to the media after ARI and said "this was a game plan we could all get behind" and we've now heard how Zimmer WANTS TEDDY to be more vocal about the plays he likes and the plays he isn't comfortable with.

It seems there is enough evidence to show that Teddy is NOT comfortable with the game plan or confident in his ability to execute it for some of these games and that seems undeniable at this point given what we know and what the results have been on the field.

Saying Teddy is scared (like after the SEA game) is one way to put it but when you see what the game plan calls for and you know the O-line can't protect and you aren't comfortable with it I think we're starting to get a pretty clear picture of what the issue is.

The Breeze wrote: In theory I agree...but the fact that you didn't metion what might be the worst o-line in the league in terms of pass blocking, suggests to me some bias.
Seattle was becoming a bit of a joke until Bevell switched up the offense to suit Wilson's game, they're line was much maligned too. And last night Rogers very nearly brought his team back from 17 down against one of the leagues top scoring defenses in large part because of halftime adjustments to the offense. His line has been horrible.
Teddy gets no pass from me for missing those two throws on the first drive...nor the left handed Int.....but there is plenty of room for Norv to improve his talent vs scheme vs what the defense is doing dynamic. And it's not out of the realm of posibility that he and Davidson have been outcoached/schemed more han once this season. Last night being a prime example.
The relationship between OC/HC/QB needs to be a fluid dynamic thing to expect success , not a static absolute. That is why Zimmer recently expressed that TB be more vocal to coaches about what works better for him playwise.
Frankly, I don't think it's totally fair to judge the situation until the line is at least average.
Last night and in Frisco I can see nerves being natural....just part of maturing. But even Rogers looked like capwhen he had no time/comfort in the pocket.
Not sold on either one honestly.

Yeah, Seattle looked like an 8-8 team until that change and rodgers was very mediocre until their adjustments last night as well. Tom Brady early season MVP candidate can't even beat the Dolphins now without his weapons / O-line in tact. That's not an excuse that's just the facts and QB's aren't the isolated one man shows so many people seem to think they are.

Yup...i totally agree. The only downside to your point is that its blatantly obvious that these are the only good routes that Teddy completes. So, every team in the league knows this. The Defensive Coordinators are far more sharper then you and I about this, so they should be ready to shut this down first and foremost. Even so, you dance with girl that you brought to the dance, as the saying goes....the mid range game is all we have and we need to make use of it......99 yards passing isnt going to win us any more playoff games. We just beat the weakest defense we will face for the rest of the season. Basically, its time to put up or shut up for both Teddy and Norv...neither of em are going to get a better OL this year so they better make due with the hand they are given.

mondry wrote:Sounds to me like all deep side line type throws which I've already gone over have a very low % chance of being successful. Look when I say that I'm not talking about like "hey it was open so it should have worked" what I'm saying is it doesn't matter if the guys wide open or not, Teddy can't make that throw, it's so freaking obvious at this point that I wouldn't even waste a play trying to do it!!!!!!!!!!

If he can't make that throw at all they might as well just toss him on the scrap heap and move on.

He can complete 20+ yard throws on the regular, we've seen that, but the sample size is large enough now that the timing routes to the side line 20+ yards down the field and the side line go routes aren't very likely to yield results. 1. Bridgewater SUCKS at them, we KNOW that already, as a teddy supporter I'm even willing to admit that at this point!!! 2. The WR's can make mistakes like Wright not leaving enough field to work with to come down with it in bounds. 3. Sometimes the O-line gets destroyed and the pocket breaks down forcing Teddy to scramble which essentially kills the timing and the routes. It's those 3 things that make those low %'s plays and when they make up a lot of the play calls we're doomed.

Could you pray and hope and sacrifice a goat that Teddy and the guys will actually complete them, sure! But to me it seems ridiculously dumb to center the game plan around that kind of stuff.

It didn't look like the game plan was centered around those plays but if he can't hit them at all, the Vikes offense is in trouble because NFL defenses are too good to allow them to be productive week after week without a downfield passing game. Being able to hit those throws is a pretty integral part of playing QB in the NFL.

Nope, if that was the case I'd be praising Norv for a magnificent job of only allowing Teddy to throw the ball 19 times which clearly isn't the case. I just want more routes and play designs that have a bit higher % chance of actually being completed and for Teddy to be allowed to heat up / get into a rhythm.

Clearly the power running and deep shots down the sideline offense hasn't worked particularly well this season and that's what I'm against. The couple games we've had success offensively (ARI, CHI) have had vastly different tactics for which parts of the field we attacked and at what depth it was done.

... and defenses that foolishly allowed Bridgewater to play to his strengths.

mondry wrote:To further add to my last post, we've heard how Peterson and Bridgewater came out to the media after ARI and said "this was a game plan we could all get behind" and we've now heard how Zimmer WANTS TEDDY to be more vocal about the plays he likes and the plays he isn't comfortable with.

It seems there is enough evidence to show that Teddy is NOT comfortable with the game plan or confident in his ability to execute it for some of these games and that seems undeniable at this point given what we know and what the results have been on the field.

Saying Teddy is scared (like after the SEA game) is one way to put it but when you see what the game plan calls for and you know the O-line can't protect and you aren't comfortable with it I think we're starting to get a pretty clear picture of what the issue is.

Last night's game occurred not long after Zimmer's remarks and less than a month after the Arizona game. If Bridgewater wasn't comfortable with the game plan yesterday that's on him at this stage of the season. At this point, I think he's had just about every imaginable excuse made for his poor performances this year. He looks great when he gets into his comfort zone but that comfort zone appears far too narrow to be viable week in and week out at the pro level. He has to be able to execute a wider variety of plays. They can't just stop throwing down the sidelines. That's going to show up on film and make it even easier for defenses to defend them by focusing on the middle of the field.

There's a range of plays a starting NFL QB needs to be able to make in order to be a viable long term option. Bridgewater has to get better.

Mothman wrote:If he can't make that throw at all they might as well just toss him on the scrap heap and move on.

Cripes. He can make that throw (the ability is there and he's done it before). We shouldn't be debating that frankly ridiculous notion. Can he make it more consistently is the bigger question.

It didn't look like the game plan was centered around those plays but if you can't hit at all, you;re in trouble as an offense because NFL defenses are too good to allow you to win and be productive week after week without a downfield passing game. being able to hit those throws is a pretty integral part of playing QB in the NFL.

No question.

He looks great when he gets into his comfort zone but that comfort zone appears far too narrow to be viable week in and week out at the pro level.

I'm not ready to go there yet.