The State of the Vikings

[fiestavike]

Thanks for clarifying and I understand what you're saying but do you really think of screen plays or sweeps as gimmick plays? I don't think of them that way. Anyway, I don't think they can form the basis of a pro offense but I do think they can be part of a y sustainable offensive attack over the long term. After all, they've been around for so long for good reason.

Well, I put "gimmick" in quotes for a reason, and I certainly don't think there is anything wrong with sweeps or screens, I'm just referring to plays solely designed to get the ball in Patterson's hands as gimmick plays because I view that type of play as outside of the primary offense. I agree that they can be part of a sustainable offensive attack, and actually can be much more effective when part of an already functional offense.

We don't disagree on that point at all. It's never been my contention that not getting the ball to Patterson more often is what's wrong with the offense, only that getting the ball to him more might help it be more productive.

I suspect that my inability to clearly communicate on this created the illusion that we disagreed about this more than we did.

I agree but I think the problem here is that you (and apparently some other board members) are viewing calls to get the ball to Patterson more as a call for a "Cordarelle Ratio". I want nothing of the sort and I may be wrong, but i don't get the impression anyone else is calling for that either. I just think when a team has a player with Patterson's size, speed and open field running ability, they have to find ways to give him opportunities to use that ability. It's that simple.

[/quote]

I think that's fair, but I still believe that the best way to give him opportunity to use his ability is ultimately to coach him to be a better player within a conventional offense. But that isn't mutually exclusive from finding "ways"--whether it be "gimmicks" or just emphasizing what he does well now--to get the ball in his hands.

[Mothman]

Well, I put "gimmick" in quotes for a reason, and I certainly don't think there is anything wrong with sweeps or screens, I'm just referring to plays solely designed to get the ball in Patterson's hands as gimmick plays because I view that type of play as outside of the primary offense. I agree that they can be part of a sustainable offensive attack, and actually can be much more effective when part of an already functional offense.

Understood! Thanks for clarifying...

I suspect that my inability to clearly communicate on this created the illusion that we disagreed about this more than we did.

No problem. I'm glad we were able to sort it out.

I think that's fair, but I still believe that the best way to give him opportunity to use his ability is ultimately to coach him to be a better player within a conventional offense. But that isn't mutually exclusive from finding "ways"--whether it be "gimmicks" or just emphasizing what he does well now--to get the ball in his hands.

Exactly. To me, the key is to improve his overall game but to also get the most out of what he can currently bring to the table.

[Leafman]

It takes two to tango.

The Vikings could have the best run-blocking line in football, but Matt Asiata, who gets the lion's share of the carries, is still never going to lead the league in rushing.

Adrian Peterson was/is as good as he is/was not only because he could take it to the house, but also because of all the 8-15 yard runs he made when there was just a crease. Those were typically runs that normal backs would have gained maybe 4-5 yards -- AP was just that good.

A great back can make his line look really good -- and vice versa. Matt Asiata runs hard, but nobody is going to mistake him for Adrian Peterson. We're an OK rushing team right now, but without AP, good defenses are likely to stop us.

All very good points.

But we're wasting a lot of energy on run blocking and rushing in general. The truth is, rushing efficiency (i.e. the measure of how well a team runs the ball versus how well it defends the run) has had almost NO correlation to success at the NFL level for a very long time (and mathematically quantified since the early 2000s), while pass efficiency has a very strong correlation.

To get to the Super Bowl from their current state, the Vikings need to focus on four primary objectives, all directly related to the passing game:

1) Developing their franchise QB, which I think we've finally acquired.

2) Improving the pass-blocking skills and capabilities, and, if necessary, the personnel, on the Offensive Line.

3) Improving the effectiveness of their pass rush (already seeing this since Zimmer took over, IMO).

4) Upgrading personnel and improving man coverage skills in the secondary. Harrison and Rhodes are 2 pieces of the puzzle here ... we need to find 3 more pieces (as well as depth).


LEAFMAN THE PURPLE FAN

[J. Kapp 11]

All very good points.

But we're wasting a lot of energy on run blocking and rushing in general. The truth is, rushing efficiency (i.e. the measure of how well a team runs the ball versus how well it defends the run) has had almost NO correlation to success at the NFL level for a very long time (and mathematically quantified since the early 2000s), while pass efficiency has a very strong correlation.

To get to the Super Bowl from their current state, the Vikings need to focus on four primary objectives, all directly related to the passing game:

1) Developing their franchise QB, which I think we've finally acquired.

2) Improving the pass-blocking skills and capabilities, and, if necessary, the personnel, on the Offensive Line.

3) Improving the effectiveness of their pass rush (already seeing this since Zimmer took over, IMO).

4) Upgrading personnel and improving man coverage skills in the secondary. Harrison and Rhodes are 2 pieces of the puzzle here ... we need to find 3 more pieces (as well as depth).


LEAFMAN THE PURPLE FAN

No argument here. This sure ain't 1983. Guys like John Riggins and Marcus Allen aren't the cornerstones of today's Super Bowl contenders. Guys like Manning, Brees, Brady and Rodgers are -- and to beat them, you have to stop them.

[BGM]

Jim, I feel your frustration. It was that abysmal feeling that pushed me away last season. I couldn't watch anymore. It had become painful to know that there would be excuses and platitudes, but no adjustments and changes.

And that is why I have hope this season. Losing like the Vikes did to the Packers was devastating. It was a full team meltdown. But in a year filled with adversity, that is expected. If they march out on the field next week in disarray, then I will start to worry. However, my experience with this team this season has been one of adjustments. I see positives in many places, none moreso than in the resilience of this team. Despite everything thrown at them, they find a way to bounce back, Even though this last game was a great black hole of suckitude, with very little to take away and hang hope upon, I see it as rock bottom. I see it as their one mulligan. They fell apart completely, now it's time to get back into things.

And I think Zimmer and Turner can make that happen.

Maybe my outlook will change after next weekend, but I have hope. Terrible, terrifying hope.

[Orion]

Sell Adrian Peterson
Sell Patterson and maybe Bridgewater

just
pull the plug and start over.

[Mothman]

Jim, I feel your frustration. It was that abysmal feeling that pushed me away last season. I couldn't watch anymore. It had become painful to know that there would be excuses and platitudes, but no adjustments and changes.

And that is why I have hope this season. Losing like the Vikes did to the Packers was devastating. It was a full team meltdown. But in a year filled with adversity, that is expected. If they march out on the field next week in disarray, then I will start to worry. However, my experience with this team this season has been one of adjustments. I see positives in many places, none moreso than in the resilience of this team. Despite everything thrown at them, they find a way to bounce back, Even though this last game was a great black hole of suckitude, with very little to take away and hang hope upon, I see it as rock bottom. I see it as their one mulligan. They fell apart completely, now it's time to get back into things.

And I think Zimmer and Turner can make that happen.

Maybe my outlook will change after next weekend, but I have hope. Terrible, terrifying hope.

LOL! I like that you characterized your hope as "terrifying".

I appreciate the empathy. I'm admittedly frustrated with the team but I expect them to play much better next week. I think they've shown week-tow-wwek resilience in recent years and I expect that to continue. It's the way they respond to difficult situations and adversity in games that's starting to really concern me. There have just been too many late game collapses and blowouts since the beginning of last season. It's hard to understand because in 2012 they looked like a team that had "learned how to win" the close games. Now, with 3 blowouts in the last 7 games and a double-digit loss to NO thrown on top of that, I just can't help questioning this collection of players. I'm hoping it's just youth and that Zimmer and his staff can help pull them together into a tough-minded, winning team. Right now, as I think I said earlier, they just feel to me like a team that almost needs ideal circumstances to win. A victory over detroit would help me feel better about that. A road win @ Buffalo would help even more!

[mondry]

There's a good chance for a huge bounce back game against detroit with an injured megatron and a healthy bridgewater. If we get blown out in that one then the sky is falling! If not, we might just be 3-3 and given all that's happened I think that'd be pretty impressive.

[Thaumaturgist]

The thing that I was the most disappointed about was the blow out. That one hurt. The Vikings have a real knack of getting you to the point that you start to believe, and then pulling the rug out from under you. I keep telling myself that I'm not going to get too excited about any season/game/player, etc. Despite this I still seem to get excited that we're going somewhere good, and WHAM, SOCK, BAM... They hit me again.

[808vikingsfan]

There's a good chance for a huge bounce back game against detroit with an injured megatron and a healthy bridgewater. If we get blown out in that one then the sky is falling! If not, we might just be 3-3 and given all that's happened I think that'd be pretty impressive.

Especially for those who were predicting just 5 or 6 wins this year. 3 wins through the toughest part of the schedule would be impressive.

[chicagopurple]

I think it is absurd to see folks dumping blame on our OC. We probably have the best OC in our history since Bud Grant ran the show! The fact that he lost the cornerstone to our offensive plan at the start of the season (AP), followed by the loss of our QB and his rookie back up makes it nearly impossible to honestly judge our performance. ANY game with Ponder as QB is meaningless since there can be NO offense when executed by that gun-shy Chihuahua. Give Norv Turner a whole season with Bridgewater AND a reasonable RB before you throw him under any bus. We really couldn't do much better in choosing a coach for his position.

[Leafman]

I think it is absurd to see folks dumping blame on our OC. We probably have the best OC in our history since Bud Grant ran the show! The fact that he lost the cornerstone to our offensive plan at the start of the season (AP), followed by the loss of our QB and his rookie back up makes it nearly impossible to honestly judge our performance. ANY game with Ponder as QB is meaningless since there can be NO offense when executed by that gun-shy Chihuahua. Give Norv Turner a whole season with Bridgewater AND a reasonable RB before you throw him under any bus. We really couldn't do much better in choosing a coach for his position.

I think you mean "since Jerry Burns ran the show". Which would be quite right, as Burns had a hand in creating and developing the West Coast Offense, although I think Brian Billick was an excellent Offensive Coordinator as well.

LEAFMAN THE PURPLE FAN

[Crax]

I think turner is good, but I'd rate Billick above Turner myself. I believe the year the Ravens won the superbowl with him was when he decided to be OC as well as coach.

[PacificNorseWest]

I'm looking at the schedule here...I feel like the trend so far suggests the Vikings lay one on the Lions to get to 3-3. Then Buffalo, TB and Washington before the bye. Buffalo and TB on the road, but I think it's still realistic they can pull out 6-3 before the bye. If not, I think reaching 5 wins before the bye is very likely.

I'm intrigued to see how Zimmer the motivator gets this team rearing for Detroit. I'm also wondering the lesson learned from the first 5 games of not letting up after a big win.

[DK Sweets]

Sell Adrian Peterson
Sell Patterson and maybe Bridgewater

just
pull the plug and start over.