Vikings Message Board.Com

fiestavike wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 1:20 pm

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 11:16 am The online was atrocious on Sunday. So was Kirk. Him taking more time to throw could come from many factors:

1. Larger amount of play action passes than the average QB.

2. Longer routes due to being down a great deal and playaction

3. Him holding the ball longer due to panicking or having to dodge defenders

4. WRs not being open and having to work their way open.

To assume it's only 3, is shortsighted. Many organic factors affect time to throw.

If you have followed the Vikings, you know this is the best offensive line performance they have had in nearly a decade...and its not even close.

That's not going to fly as an excuse to Cousins poor play.

Week 1 - 40% pressure
Week 2- 60% pressure...

This is not the best line play we have had.

fiestavike wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 5:57 pm

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 4:40 pm

Not “attacking” anyone. Simply saying it how it is. Because I’m not gonna sit here and watch him say “I told ya so” after Sunday. Oakland’s pass rush is terrible. So chances are, the pressures will be low regardless. I think it was last year before the jets game I believe (??) where he made a similar prediction because he knew he was playing a weaker team and would probably do well. The post above is the same thing. He doesn’t like cousins, he doesn’t think he’s good, he thinks he cracks under pressure, he thinks anything and everything negative you could about a player with cousins. So for him to make a prediction that he’s going to get rid of the ball quicker and the OL (simply because he knows Oakland’s pass rush is weak as well as their secondary) is simply just him covering his rear. Kind of funny if you ask me

In all likelihood, you are going to sit there and watch him say whatever it is he is going to say. What do you get out of 'setting him straight'? We are entitled to our opinions about Cousins, good, bad, or in between.

I know he is entitled to his own opinion and he’s expressed it multiple times. He doesn’t like cousins. We all know that. Some fans do. Some fans don’t. Nothing wrong with that. But I’m calling his bluff in that post because he’s speaking out of both sides of his mouth. He does it when he knows there’s a chance he could be wrong just to cover himself. I’ve seen him do it more than once.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 8:03 pm

fiestavike wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 5:57 pm

In all likelihood, you are going to sit there and watch him say whatever it is he is going to say. What do you get out of 'setting him straight'? We are entitled to our opinions about Cousins, good, bad, or in between.

I know he is entitled to his own opinion and he’s expressed it multiple times. He doesn’t like cousins. We all know that. Some fans do. Some fans don’t. Nothing wrong with that. But I’m calling his bluff in that post because he’s speaking out of both sides of his mouth. He does it when he knows there’s a chance he could be wrong just to cover himself. I’ve seen him do it more than once.

I just reminded you yesterday in this same thread of a board rule you know well: disagree and respond to the post, do not attack the poster. "Attack" isn't meant narrowly. The point of the rule is for people to talk about football and avoid getting personal with each other. This entire "he’s speaking out of both sides of his mouth" and "he does it when he knows there’s a chance he could be wrong just to cover himself" line of discussion is about the poster, not about football. It's inappropriate. Please stop it.

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 6:39 pm

fiestavike wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 1:20 pm

If you have followed the Vikings, you know this is the best offensive line performance they have had in nearly a decade...and its not even close.

That's not going to fly as an excuse to Cousins poor play.

Week 1 - 40% pressure
Week 2- 60% pressure...

This is not the best line play we have had.

Pressures allowed is only a small part of the story.

The other parts that all point to good line play are time QB had to throw, sacks allowed, hits allowed, and nearly 200 yards rushing.

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Sun Sep 22, 2019 8:54 am

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Sat Sep 21, 2019 6:39 pm

Week 1 - 40% pressure
Week 2- 60% pressure...

This is not the best line play we have had.

Pressures allowed is only a small part of the story.

The other parts that all point to good line play are time QB had to throw, sacks allowed, hits allowed, and nearly 200 yards rushing.

A line being good at run blocking doesn't mean they are good at pass blocking. I keep seeing using our rushing stats to justify the line being good at pass blocking and it baffles me.

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Sun Sep 22, 2019 1:46 pm

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Sun Sep 22, 2019 8:54 am
Pressures allowed is only a small part of the story.

The other parts that all point to good line play are time QB had to throw, sacks allowed, hits allowed, and nearly 200 yards rushing.

A line being good at run blocking doesn't mean they are good at pass blocking. I keep seeing using our rushing stats to justify the line being good at pass blocking and it baffles me.

It is probably being used by other for the same reason I used it. To show that the line has improved over last year.

The numbers that prove the line isn't "atrocious" at pass blocking are the 1 sack allowed and only 6 hits despite the QB holding the ball longer than any QB in the NFL so far this season.

Anyone have the pressure percentage this week? Cousins got rid of the ball fairly quickly for him, despite all the bootlegs and play action...

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Sun Sep 22, 2019 9:32 pm

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Sun Sep 22, 2019 1:46 pm

A line being good at run blocking doesn't mean they are good at pass blocking. I keep seeing using our rushing stats to justify the line being good at pass blocking and it baffles me.

It is probably being used by other for the same reason I used it. To show that the line has improved over last year.

The numbers that prove the line isn't "atrocious" at pass blocking are the 1 sack allowed and only 6 hits despite the QB holding the ball longer than any QB in the NFL so far this season.

Anyone have the pressure percentage this week? Cousins got rid of the ball fairly quickly for him, despite all the bootlegs and play action...

We played a team that had 13 sacks last season.

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2019 10:05 am

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Sun Sep 22, 2019 9:32 pm

It is probably being used by other for the same reason I used it. To show that the line has improved over last year.

The numbers that prove the line isn't "atrocious" at pass blocking are the 1 sack allowed and only 6 hits despite the QB holding the ball longer than any QB in the NFL so far this season.

Anyone have the pressure percentage this week? Cousins got rid of the ball fairly quickly for him, despite all the bootlegs and play action...

We played a team that had 13 sacks last season.

Awesome that they did that last year. They had 5 coming into this game, including 2 against a Chiefs Oline that has only given up 3 total sacks in 3 games. They sacked Flacco more than the Bears did as well.

It isn't a great pass rush by any means, but it certainly looks better than last year and it has really only looked bad against us.

Next Sunday the pass rush will be great, and if Cousins doesn't get rid of the ball quickly he will be hit, pressured and sacked a lot. If he gets rid of it quickly, he won't be.

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2019 10:36 am

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2019 10:05 am

We played a team that had 13 sacks last season.

Awesome that they did that last year. They had 5 coming into this game, including 2 against a Chiefs Oline that has only given up 3 total sacks in 3 games. They sacked Flacco more than the Bears did as well.

It isn't a great pass rush by any means, but it certainly looks better than last year and it has really only looked bad against us.

Next Sunday the pass rush will be great, and if Cousins doesn't get rid of the ball quickly he will be hit, pressured and sacked a lot. If he gets rid of it quickly, he won't be.

I will agree, Cousins is holding the ball longer. I don’t see that changing. It’s inherent to the scheme really. This is a run first play action scheme. One of the primary tools in the running game is an outside zone concept and play action. Running play action out of that concept is why we are seeing so many boots.. Bootlegs get the quarterback out of the pocket and in a sense mitigate some of the shortcomings of an offense line. It also keeps the ball in the QB hand longer. Which can and has caused the Vikings some other problems. Play action in general requires a qb to hold the ball longer. That’s probly why, this season, we are seeing those statistics. It won’t change. In no way am I defending Cousins. I am not a fan of his. He is not a winner.

This is a decent write up on play action. I feel Kubiak is one of the best in the game with it today. I think this write up is really what the Vikings are trying to do. Along with Cook being the perfect back for the outside zone scheme, the play action is a big part of why the run game has been so successful this far.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/ftw.usatod ... chiefs/amp

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Sun Sep 22, 2019 9:32 pm

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Sun Sep 22, 2019 1:46 pm

A line being good at run blocking doesn't mean they are good at pass blocking. I keep seeing using our rushing stats to justify the line being good at pass blocking and it baffles me.

It is probably being used by other for the same reason I used it. To show that the line has improved over last year.

The numbers that prove the line isn't "atrocious" at pass blocking are the 1 sack allowed and only 6 hits despite the QB holding the ball longer than any QB in the NFL so far this season.

Anyone have the pressure percentage this week? Cousins got rid of the ball fairly quickly for him, despite all the bootlegs and play action...

It seems like a case of amnesia. We haven't had an offensive line play this well since at least 2009, and possibly since Mike Tice was the Head Coach.

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2019 10:36 am

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2019 10:05 am

We played a team that had 13 sacks last season.

Awesome that they did that last year. They had 5 coming into this game, including 2 against a Chiefs Oline that has only given up 3 total sacks in 3 games. They sacked Flacco more than the Bears did as well.

It isn't a great pass rush by any means, but it certainly looks better than last year and it has really only looked bad against us.

Next Sunday the pass rush will be great, and if Cousins doesn't get rid of the ball quickly he will be hit, pressured and sacked a lot. If he gets rid of it quickly, he won't be.

It doesn't look better. They have a rotational guy that has 3 of the 5. Trust me, they can't rush the passer and they will be in the bottom 5 in sacks this season.

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Sun Sep 22, 2019 9:32 pm
Anyone have the pressure percentage this week? Cousins got rid of the ball fairly quickly for him, despite all the bootlegs and play action...

And I called it....was wondering when this was going to pop up.

Oaklands pass rush and secondary is terrible. And you know this. But are now sitting here trying to defend them. There is no defending that defense. There are 4 teams in the NFL that have fewer sacks than they do and they are 25th in total defense. That is not a good defense. And they would probably be even worse if they didnt catch the Broncos and Joe Flacco week 1. They cant cover and they cant rush the passer. So making your cool little prediction doesnt really say much. You made a prediction that a QB would get rid of the ball quicker against a weak pass rush and bad secondary. Way to go. Anyone that watches football could tell you that. And now we're going to listen to you say "I told ya so"

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Tue Sep 24, 2019 8:42 pm

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2019 10:36 am

Awesome that they did that last year. They had 5 coming into this game, including 2 against a Chiefs Oline that has only given up 3 total sacks in 3 games. They sacked Flacco more than the Bears did as well.

It isn't a great pass rush by any means, but it certainly looks better than last year and it has really only looked bad against us.

Next Sunday the pass rush will be great, and if Cousins doesn't get rid of the ball quickly he will be hit, pressured and sacked a lot. If he gets rid of it quickly, he won't be.

It doesn't look better. They have a rotational guy that has 3 of the 5. Trust me, they can't rush the passer and they will be in the bottom 5 in sacks this season.

Yes and I second that.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 25, 2019 11:37 am And I called it....was wondering when this was going to pop up.

You called that I would point out Cousins got rid of the ball quicker despite more bootlegs and play action, because those weren't actually the reason he held it as long in the 2nd game? Sounds like someone was covering their a$$ by accusing me of covering my a$$.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 25, 2019 11:37 am
Oaklands pass rush and secondary is terrible. And you know this. But are now sitting here trying to defend them. There is no defending that defense. There are 4 teams in the NFL that have fewer sacks than they do and they are 25th in total defense. That is not a good defense. And they would probably be even worse if they didnt catch the Broncos and Joe Flacco week 1. They cant cover and they cant rush the passer. So making your cool little prediction doesnt really say much. You made a prediction that a QB would get rid of the ball quicker against a weak pass rush and bad secondary. Way to go. Anyone that watches football could tell you that. And now we're going to listen to you say "I told ya so"

Their secondary is indeed terrible, which is why we both knew Cousins would get rid of the ball quicker, in that game.

Their pass rush has 2/3s of the sacks on Mahomes and if they had continued on the pace set against a team that has only given up 3 sacks in 3 games, they would be tied with the lowly Buffalo Bills pass rush in sacks. The only reason they aren't around average for sacks is because our "atrocious" line held them to 0 after they had accumulated 5 in the first two games. It isn't great, it isn't as bad as last year either. Our line is the biggest reason they have so few sacks. Not KC's line, not Denver's, the Viking's offensive line.

That being said, the fact Cousins got rid of the ball almost a second faster this week than last does not prove conclusively that a non scrambling QB got pressured more because he held the ball longer than anyone else in week 2.

It does prove that the play action and bootleg plays are not the main reason he is taking so long to throw.

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Wed Sep 25, 2019 12:55 pm

You called that I would point out Cousins got rid of the ball quicker despite more bootlegs and play action, because those weren't actually the reason he held it as long in the 2nd game? Sounds like someone was covering their a$$ by accusing me of covering my a$$.

lol what?? You made that "prediction" regarding Cousins to prevent backlash and cover your butt. Given that you "predicted" he would get rid of it quicker prevented anyone from coming at you and saying "see he doesnt hold the ball that long according to your stat". And if he DID NOT get rid of it quicker and was taking sacks, you'd be sitting there saying "see I told you he sucks and holds the ball too long".

Basically it's like me saying Dalvin Cook isnt a good RB but prior to the Oakland game saying, I predict him to do well vs Oakland. Like, I'm saying he sucks but covering my butt when I know he'll probably perform given the other teams talent level at certain positions. That's exactly what you did and have done in the past. So in turn, it's a win-win for you. You predict the good but expect the bad so no matter what happens, you can sit there and say "I told ya so" with your sarcastic little whistle.

Their secondary is indeed terrible, which is why we both knew Cousins would get rid of the ball quicker, in that game.

Their pass rush has 2/3s of the sacks on Mahomes and if they had continued on the pace set against a team that has only given up 3 sacks in 3 games, they would be tied with the lowly Buffalo Bills pass rush in sacks. The only reason they aren't around average for sacks is because our "atrocious" line held them to 0 after they had accumulated 5 in the first two games. It isn't great, it isn't as bad as last year either. Our line is the biggest reason they have so few sacks. Not KC's line, not Denver's, the Viking's offensive line.

That being said, the fact Cousins got rid of the ball almost a second faster this week than last does not prove conclusively that a non scrambling QB got pressured more because he held the ball longer than anyone else in week 2.

It does prove that the play action and bootleg plays are not the main reason he is taking so long to throw.

I dont care that they got 2 sacks on Mahomes. That literally means nothing. Bottom line is, their pass rush is bad. It's not average, or even below average. It's BAD. Landing in the bottom 5 is bad and that's where they will end up. They are already there. But you'll be the one guy that says "well they had a big game vs KC....." and nobody is going to care.