Vikings Message Board.Com

Posted: **Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:02 am**

J. Kapp 11 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:40 am From the Brutally Optimistic Department:

According to Peter Schrager of NFL Network, the Vikings can still be the No. 1 seed in the NFC. Here’s how.

The 49ers lose to the Rams, AND
The Seahawks lose to Arizona, AND
The Packers lose their last two, AND
The Saints lose to Carolina, AND
San Francisco and Seattle tie, AND
The Vikings win out

Let’s do this thing!

Seems like a lock to me.

Posted: **Tue Dec 17, 2019 11:50 am**

J. Kapp 11 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:40 am From the Brutally Optimistic Department:

According to Peter Schrager of NFL Network, the Vikings can still be the No. 1 seed in the NFC. Here’s how.

The 49ers lose to the Rams, AND
The Seahawks lose to Arizona, AND
The Packers lose their last two, AND
The Saints lose to Carolina, AND
San Francisco and Seattle tie, AND
The Vikings win out

Let’s do this thing!

If all of that happens, I KNOW the Vikings win the Superbowl this year. It would be ordained by fate.

Posted: **Tue Dec 17, 2019 11:55 am**

Dames wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:00 am
Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:31 am And to be honest, lets say we get the 6 seed, if I had a choice who to play out of Seattle, SF, NO or GB, I take GB all day long. I hope we play them in the playoffs and ruin their season. Because many think we are a better team than them and I agree. I think we can beat any team in the NFC. Seattle being the toughest IMO. But in the end, yes this is 100% a must win for GB.
Earlier in the year I preferred going to SF over GB, but I might have flipped my stance at this point. GB is more flawed. I definitely worry about the refs influencing the game though. That's sad that we have to worry about that, but history seems to prove that out. NO is tough, but I think we would play well in the dome. We are good on turf indoors. Seattle is easily the toughest draw we could get in round 1, but we showed them we can compete there too. I sure wouldn't want to though.

The formula for beating the Seahawks has been put on display though. Get them in a hole and make them pass and you have them. They can't do it, even with Wilson running around and improvising. That is their Achille's heel.

Do the Vikings have a glaring weakness like that? Maybe their downfield pass defense has been that, but even there it's not like their DBs aren't in position. They usually are. They're just not making plays on the ball. But given that part of being able to make a play on the ball is being in position, it's fixable. The issues the Seahawks have trying to come from behind are not fixable. They have to be in the lead or close enough to credibly run the ball.

Obviously, it's not easy to get them in a deep hole, but if the Rams can do it, so can the Vikings.

Well, that and don't hand them short fields via bad turnovers.

Posted: **Tue Dec 17, 2019 12:24 pm**

VikingLord wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 11:55 am The formula for beating the Seahawks has been put on display though. Get them in a hole and make them pass and you have them. They can't do it, even with Wilson running around and improvising. That is their Achille's heel.

Do the Vikings have a glaring weakness like that? Maybe their downfield pass defense has been that, but even there it's not like their DBs aren't in position. They usually are. They're just not making plays on the ball. But given that part of being able to make a play on the ball is being in position, it's fixable. The issues the Seahawks have trying to come from behind are not fixable. They have to be in the lead or close enough to credibly run the ball.

Obviously, it's not easy to get them in a deep hole, but if the Rams can do it, so can the Vikings.

Well, that and don't hand them short fields via bad turnovers.

Oh, I agree that is the way to attack Seattle. I'm still frustrated that we didn't try to stuff the run last time. We had them were we wanted them. A lead at halftime, but we stupidly let them continue to run the ball and played the pass. Maybe they tried and failed.
Anyway, there is nobody we can't compete with, but going to Seattle is still the least favorite scenario.

Posted: **Tue Dec 17, 2019 1:27 pm**

Dames wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:00 am
Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:31 am And to be honest, lets say we get the 6 seed, if I had a choice who to play out of Seattle, SF, NO or GB, I take GB all day long. I hope we play them in the playoffs and ruin their season. Because many think we are a better team than them and I agree. I think we can beat any team in the NFC. Seattle being the toughest IMO. But in the end, yes this is 100% a must win for GB.
Earlier in the year I preferred going to SF over GB, but I might have flipped my stance at this point. GB is more flawed. I definitely worry about the refs influencing the game though. That's sad that we have to worry about that, but history seems to prove that out. NO is tough, but I think we would play well in the dome. We are good on turf indoors. Seattle is easily the toughest draw we could get in round 1, but we showed them we can compete there too. I sure wouldn't want to though.

6th seed will probably be our resting spot. I've seen the scenario of marching into Green Bay before. It could be minus something degrees and the wind blowing. Good luck scoring. I'd prefer to go to a place were weather isn't even a factor. It's not like any of these teams will steam roll us. However both Seattle and Green Bay has beat us. Could we have won? Sure. I think Seattle is the weakest. We broke down in every phase and were still in it. I also feel Wilson is less of a threat at QB than the others. Not saying he's a bum but he's not close to Rodgers & Brees. Even though some stat will show he's the greatest at this point I guess. Keep him in the pocket and he can be beat easier than the others. Once he's on the loose it's over. Complete break down. Either way it's on the road and playing a tough team. But that Green Bay weather could blow. The frozen tundra again. Good luck with that BS.

Posted: **Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:53 pm**

Taking a look at the NFC playoff teams and how the've done vs. teams with winning records. (I'm not bothering with the NFC East teams.):

SF: Opponents with winning records 5: Record 3-2, Lost @ Home vs. SEA and @ BAL. 2 Road win vs. NO & LAR
NO: Opponents with winning records 3: Record 1-2 Lost @LAR, SF, won @ SEA
GB: Opponents with winning records 3: Record 2-1 Lost @ SF, won @ KC and MIN
SEA: Opponents with winning records 6: Record 3-3 Lost @LAR, home vs. BAL and NO, won MIN, @49ers, LAR
MIN: Opponents with winning records: 3 Record 0-3 Lost @KC, @GB, @ SEA

Analysis/Opinion:
IMO, SF has the most impressive record. They manhandled GB. They played the Ravens to the wire @BAL. They beat the Saints in a shootout. Loss vs. SEA is in division which is understandable, although it was at home. Looking at these results, I think they are still the scariest team in the NFC. Upcoming game vs. SEA is must watch IMO.

NO: I think this team is less impressive than their record and hype indicates. Their signature win is vs. SEA on the road which is a solid win, but it was in week 3. IMO, September wins are dubious as indicators. The team you face then is often not the same in December/January. (See us vs. GB) NO is likely closer to GB than it is to SF/SEA.

GB: As I've been saying, this is the biggest poser of the 5. They beat us in week 2 @ home. They won @KC the first week of Mahomes' injury. All other wins are vs. an extremely soft schedule. They've also benefited more from referees than any other team.

SEA: This is the other juggernaut in the NFC. They have some solid, competitive wins, including a road win in SF. However, they just got handled by LAR. IMO, SEA is a team that statistically may not be as good as it's record indicates, their point differential is weak. (So is the Packers') However, they are likely buoyed by getting to play at home in the playoffs. We were competitive there when we lost, but that is TOUGH place to get a win.

MIN: No way to sugar coat it, We've yet to prove it on the road vs. a winning team. However, it is worth noting that we are the only team on the list without a home game vs. an NFL team with a winning record. That is not insignificant, in fact our MNF showdown vs. GB is our first home game of the season vs a team with a winning record. This doesn't mean a whole lot, our record is what it is, but it continues to show the point that we've faced a difficult schedule in terms road games vs. home games. Both NO and GB have benefited from far easier schedules this year and that is a big contributor to our playoff seeding. Still I think if we lose vs. GB then this team has shown it is most likely also a playoff poser and benefiting from feasting on the NFC East all season. Above all else, Vikings need to prove it.

Playoff thoughts:
Irrespective of scheduling issues, the fact is we are most likely to be playing on the road in the playoffs. Our offense has shown that it can travel, plus we now have Thielen back. Recently the ST have also shown they can get it done. So the question becomes, as it has been in all competitive games this season: Can the defense get it together against the pass?

Don't be so quick to jump to conclusions here, things are developing. Both Trey Waynes and Xavier Rhodes played very limited snap counts vs. SD on Sunday, both under 20 snaps each. Zimmer is making changes and as we saw in the 2nd half vs LAC, it made a difference.

Here are the questions I'm thinking about heading into MNF and the post season:
1.) Just how much harder is our offense to defend with Thielen healthy?
2.) Do we get Cook back at 100% for the playoffs?
3.) Did the pass defense turn the page vs. LAC or was that an anamoly?

#3 is the biggest question heading into MNF and the Playoffs. .

Also worth noting: As much as DAL is an eyesore, their offense and front 7 can pose issues for certain teams, specifically SEA/SF. That first game they play will at home and likely vs. the other NFCE club. It is possible that his matchup could favor them to a degree such that they could pitch the upset. IMO the NFC playoffs are a bit less certain than they initially appear.

Posted: **Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:14 pm**

mansquatch wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:53 pm Here are the questions I'm thinking about heading into MNF and the post season:
1.) Just how much harder is our offense to defend with Thielen healthy?
2.) Do we get Cook back at 100% for the playoffs?
3.) Did the pass defense turn the page vs. LAC or was that an anamoly?

#3 is the biggest question heading into MNF and the Playoffs. .

Also worth noting: As much as DAL is an eyesore, their offense and front 7 can pose issues for certain teams, specifically SEA/SF. That first game they play will at home and likely vs. the other NFCE club. It is possible that his matchup could favor them to a degree such that they could pitch the upset. IMO the NFC playoffs are a bit less certain than they initially appear.

My thoughts on the questions you posed:

1) I think it is harder because Thielen demands attention. With just Diggs out there defenses can afford to shift any extra attention his way, but with both Diggs and Thielen, they have to make a choice if they want to do that, and making that choice takes away other potential emphasis. Thielen also gives the Vikings a guy who can make the difficult catch and that Cousins trusts in those situations. Where Cousins might hesitate to throw a contested ball to someone else, with Thielen he's more likely to let it fly. As a result, I think having both Thielen and Diggs out there on 3rd-and-long-ish improves the Vikings chances of moving the sticks. Finally, while Thielen was injured, he also didn't take a pounding over a long stretch of games, meaning if he's truly healthy, he's also a bit fresher, and that could show up as games drag on. It definitely helps. How much does it help? I'd say in certain down-distance situations, having Thielen improves the odds of a successful play by up to half.

2) I don't think Cook is going to be 100% the rest of the way out, and I wouldn't be surprised to hear he needs surgery after the season ends. Whatever is going on with his upper body and shoulder area seems to be something he can live with and play with, but it's not something he can protect per se and when he injures it, it seems to be extremely painful. He's not been the same player for some time now. Luckily, RB is one area the Vikings have really good depth. Even if Mattison is out, they can just trot out a fresh Boone and Abdullah. The drop off from Cook to Abdullah/Boone isn't so great it worries me. If the Vikings have to go into the playoffs with just those two, I'm not going to sweat it. Obviously, having Mattison healthy is good, and hopefully if Cook can't go, Mattison can.

3) Hard to say. Rivers is known as a pocket passer who pulls the trigger quickly, but he completed a lot of big throws in the 1st half on downs where the Vikings should have been able to get off the field. The Vikings seemed to limit that better in the 2nd half, but they were also getting a lot of pressure on Rivers and he just didn't have the time he needed to make the throws he was trying to make. I guess until I see the Vikings DBs getting their heads turned around and knocking down/intercepting some deep passes consistently, I don't have a lot of confidence in them. The one unit I think can turn it up is the front 7 in terms of getting pressure. They got a lot of pressure on the Lions and Chargers and seem to have really good depth all along the defensive line. The linebackers seem to be able to consistently get home too when Zimmer sends them. We'll see what they manage against Rodgers, but if the rush is effective and disruptive, it can mitigate a lot of the sins we're seeing on the downfield coverage. It remains one of the most frustrating aspects of the defense that the DBs can be in such good position on most throws and simply fail over and over to make the play. They are SO close to shutting those deep passes down. They just have to do it. That, coupled with a disruptive pass rush, makes the Vikings defense Superbowl caliber, even in a deep NFC field. The Packers are going to really test this on Monday Night. I expect Rodgers to go downfield early and often, and we'll get a clear answer to this question.

As far as the Cowboys are concerned, that's the team that could get hot at any time. They've got talent and will get a home playoff game if they win their division. They have done a lot all year to manage to come up short, but catch that team on the wrong day and they can smoke almost anyone. If I had to choose between another visit to Dallas or Green Bay for the first playoff game, I'd take Green Bay.

Posted: **Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:25 pm**

great post mansquatch. Wow, I didn't realize the CB snap count on defensive plays!

Mac 48
Hughes 46
Hill 31
Trae 27
Rhodes 14. 14!!!!! <25% of defensive snaps! He's was the 5th CB on Sunday!

wow his play has really fallen off a cliff this year. Amazing. Looks like he will gone next year and maybe Trae too, and they will focus on extending Mac???

Posted: **Tue Dec 17, 2019 8:36 pm**

mansquatch wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:53 pm Taking a look at the NFC playoff teams and how the've done vs. teams with winning records. (I'm not bothering with the NFC East teams.):

SF: Opponents with winning records 5: Record 3-2, Lost @ Home vs. SEA and @ BAL. 2 Road win vs. NO & LAR
NO: Opponents with winning records 3: Record 1-2 Lost @LAR, SF, won @ SEA
GB: Opponents with winning records 3: Record 2-1 Lost @ SF, won @ KC and MIN
SEA: Opponents with winning records 6: Record 3-3 Lost @LAR, home vs. BAL and NO, won MIN, @49ers, LAR
MIN: Opponents with winning records: 3 Record 0-3 Lost @KC, @GB, @ SEA

Thanks for the stats-- I was thinking about exactly this stat but didn't have the time to compile it.

Worth noting though I think is the point differential of all these wins and losses:

SF: L BAL 17-20, L SEA L 24-27, W NO: 48-46, W LAR 20-7, W GB 37-8
NO: L LAR 9-27, L SF 46-48, W 33-27
GB: L SF 37-8, W KC 31-24, W MIN 21-16
SEA L LAR 12-28, L BAL 16-30, L NO 27-33, W MIN 37-30, W SF 27-24, W LAR 28-12
MIN: L KC 23-26, L GB 16-21, L SEA, 30-37

SF's 2 losses were by 3 pts each-- tightly contested games.
NO's losses-- 18pts to LAR anomaly I'd say-- Teddy thrown in cold, SF 2pts
GB loss 29pts (pairs nicely with 15 pt loss to 5-10 team we just crushed)
SEA 16pts, 14pts, 6 pts (under Teddy, not Drew)
MIN KC 3 pts (no Mahomes) 5pts, 7pts

As far as losing to winning teams goes, I'd say our keeping it to a single score in our 3 losses was better than not. GB's loss to SF and SEA's losses to BAL and LAR would indicate some separation from the pack by virtue of susceptibility to be beaten badly.

Another close win or loss between GB/MIN won't shed much light on how we stand relative to the 2 teams we haven't played, but a 2-3 score win might indicate some separation between MN and GB WRT the others. Our worst loss thus far has only been 10 points and that was a long time ago..

Posted: **Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:04 pm**

mansquatch wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 3:53 pm Taking a look at the NFC playoff teams and how the've done vs. teams with winning records. (I'm not bothering with the NFC East teams.):

SF: Opponents with winning records 5: Record 3-2, Lost @ Home vs. SEA and @ BAL. 2 Road win vs. NO & LAR
NO: Opponents with winning records 3: Record 1-2 Lost @LAR, SF, won @ SEA
GB: Opponents with winning records 3: Record 2-1 Lost @ SF, won @ KC and MIN
SEA: Opponents with winning records 6: Record 3-3 Lost @LAR, home vs. BAL and NO, won MIN, @49ers, LAR
MIN: Opponents with winning records: 3 Record 0-3 Lost @KC, @GB, @ SEA

Analysis/Opinion:
IMO, SF has the most impressive record. They manhandled GB. They played the Ravens to the wire @BAL. They beat the Saints in a shootout. Loss vs. SEA is in division which is understandable, although it was at home. Looking at these results, I think they are still the scariest team in the NFC. Upcoming game vs. SEA is must watch IMO.

NO: I think this team is less impressive than their record and hype indicates. Their signature win is vs. SEA on the road which is a solid win, but it was in week 3. IMO, September wins are dubious as indicators. The team you face then is often not the same in December/January. (See us vs. GB) NO is likely closer to GB than it is to SF/SEA.

GB: As I've been saying, this is the biggest poser of the 5. They beat us in week 2 @ home. They won @KC the first week of Mahomes' injury. All other wins are vs. an extremely soft schedule. They've also benefited more from referees than any other team.

SEA: This is the other juggernaut in the NFC. They have some solid, competitive wins, including a road win in SF. However, they just got handled by LAR. IMO, SEA is a team that statistically may not be as good as it's record indicates, their point differential is weak. (So is the Packers') However, they are likely buoyed by getting to play at home in the playoffs. We were competitive there when we lost, but that is TOUGH place to get a win.

MIN: No way to sugar coat it, We've yet to prove it on the road vs. a winning team. However, it is worth noting that we are the only team on the list without a home game vs. an NFL team with a winning record. That is not insignificant, in fact our MNF showdown vs. GB is our first home game of the season vs a team with a winning record. This doesn't mean a whole lot, our record is what it is, but it continues to show the point that we've faced a difficult schedule in terms road games vs. home games. Both NO and GB have benefited from far easier schedules this year and that is a big contributor to our playoff seeding. Still I think if we lose vs. GB then this team has shown it is most likely also a playoff poser and benefiting from feasting on the NFC East all season. Above all else, Vikings need to prove it.

Playoff thoughts:
Irrespective of scheduling issues, the fact is we are most likely to be playing on the road in the playoffs. Our offense has shown that it can travel, plus we now have Thielen back. Recently the ST have also shown they can get it done. So the question becomes, as it has been in all competitive games this season: Can the defense get it together against the pass?

Don't be so quick to jump to conclusions here, things are developing. Both Trey Waynes and Xavier Rhodes played very limited snap counts vs. SD on Sunday, both under 20 snaps each. Zimmer is making changes and as we saw in the 2nd half vs LAC, it made a difference.

Here are the questions I'm thinking about heading into MNF and the post season:
1.) Just how much harder is our offense to defend with Thielen healthy?
2.) Do we get Cook back at 100% for the playoffs?
3.) Did the pass defense turn the page vs. LAC or was that an anamoly?

#3 is the biggest question heading into MNF and the Playoffs. .

Also worth noting: As much as DAL is an eyesore, their offense and front 7 can pose issues for certain teams, specifically SEA/SF. That first game they play will at home and likely vs. the other NFCE club. It is possible that his matchup could favor them to a degree such that they could pitch the upset. IMO the NFC playoffs are a bit less certain than they initially appear.

You did a hell of a job on this. Very good work. A little more intense than my post from the head stuff. One thing that jumps out is SF and SEA had a tougher road than most. Also our record sticks out like a sore thumb. We can't beat a good team on the road. This is probably the last year for both Rhodes and Waynes. I give Zim credit for making the changes that you pointed out. I jumped on Zim big time just as I jumped on our OC after that Packer defeat. That's typically my style. Knee jerk. I'd probably be on my 5th HC if I was in charge.

Posted: **Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:46 pm**

Interesting side note.

According to an article by Bill Barnwell of ESPN, here's the Playoff Kryptonite for the SF 49ers:

Playoff kryptonite: Play-action

I always find it strange when teams whose offenses excel at something have defenses that struggle against that very same thing. Kyle Shanahan's offense is predicated upon the zone-rushing scheme and the play-action passes that come off that concept. Just over 31% of San Francisco's dropbacks have included some form of a play-fake this season, the third-highest rate in football.

On defense, though, the 49ers have struggled to stop opposing offenses when they fire up their own play-action opportunities. While the San Francisco defense has generally been great in 2019, Robert Saleh's unit has allowed teams to post a passer rating of 112.9 off play-action, which ranks 24th in the NFL. When teams haven't used play-action, the 49ers have allowed a passer rating of 66.6, which is second in the NFL behind the Patriots.

And then the kicker:

Team to avoid: Minnesota Vikings

The other team in the NFC playoff picture built off the Shanahan play-action playbook is the Vikings, who have Gary Kubiak as an offensive adviser. Kubiak played under Mike Shanahan in Denver and built his own offenses in Houston as a coach under the same tenets. Kyle, of course, was Kubiak's offensive coordinator for a time with the Texans.

The Vikings have been the league's most devastating play-action team. They've actually turned to play-action on nearly 32% of their dropbacks, which is just ahead of the 49ers for the second-highest rate. It has unlocked a career year for Kirk Cousins, who has thrown 13 touchdown passes without an interception and posted a passer rating of 136.3 off play-action. No passer with 100 play-action attempts or more has been better.

Barnwell actually thinks we have the best chance of beating the 49ers in the playoffs. Wild, but his explanation makes sense.

Link to article.

Posted: **Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:43 am**

VikingPaul73 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:25 pm great post mansquatch. Wow, I didn't realize the CB snap count on defensive plays!

Mac 48
Hughes 46
Hill 31
Trae 27
Rhodes 14. 14!!!!! <25% of defensive snaps! He's was the 5th CB on Sunday!

wow his play has really fallen off a cliff this year. Amazing. Looks like he will gone next year and maybe Trae too, and they will focus on extending Mac???

Thanks.

For me this branches in two directions: First is the question that I posed about this season, ergo does this cause the pass defense to improve. The second is equally interesting, just not relevant right now: Who does this mean for the Salary Cap? To me this question is best tabled until the offseason.

Posted: **Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:52 am**

CharVike wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 9:04 pm You did a hell of a job on this. Very good work. A little more intense than my post from the head stuff. One thing that jumps out is SF and SEA had a tougher road than most. Also our record sticks out like a sore thumb. We can't beat a good team on the road. This is probably the last year for both Rhodes and Waynes. I give Zim credit for making the changes that you pointed out. I jumped on Zim big time just as I jumped on our OC after that Packer defeat. That's typically my style. Knee jerk. I'd probably be on my 5th HC if I was in charge.

I'm not ready to get in the dumps on this yet. We haven't had a chance to play a team like this at home. All the other teams have. We also had the toughest division schedule with 3 road games in our first 6 contests of the season. As I pointed out earlier, NO didn't have a road division game until week 10. The point differential matters IMO. We lost to good teams by one score, never more. Against GB it was the offense that sputtered, week 2 of a new scheme. In the two most recent losses (KC & SEA) it was our pass defense that let us down.

To me that points at the ultimate question: Can the pass defense improve? That to me is the biggest thing to watch on MNF. How do we hold up over the long haul. Also, note we are playing Rogers who's game in recent years is predicated on throwing lots of deep balls and eventually connecting to score. I won't be upset if we get burned once, you put it up enough you are going to connect. What concerns me is can we get off the field on 3rd down consistently? That has been our issue of late. This offense is good enough to travel and so are the ST. Can the pass defense make the grade? That is the question.

FWIW, I think we are going to blow up the Packers. Their best defensive players are the ends and our tackles have held up well against strong edge rushers. The issue will be if our defense decides to let Rogers go bananas. I don't think it will, they have to know how important this game is, and really the only receiving threat is Adams.

I've said all year that the coaching moves, ie Kubiak were the biggest changes on this team. Did you guys know Cousins has been sacked something like only 30 times this season? That is elite pass protection. I know we have issues up the middle, but our OL is delivering the goods in protection more often than not. Now Zimmer needs to show us he can coach his corners out of this malaise. If he can we are likely to make a run and surprise some people.

Posted: **Wed Dec 18, 2019 10:04 am**

mansquatch wrote: ↑Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:43 am
VikingPaul73 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:25 pm great post mansquatch. Wow, I didn't realize the CB snap count on defensive plays!

Mac 48
Hughes 46
Hill 31
Trae 27
Rhodes 14. 14!!!!! <25% of defensive snaps! He's was the 5th CB on Sunday!

wow his play has really fallen off a cliff this year. Amazing. Looks like he will gone next year and maybe Trae too, and they will focus on extending Mac???
Thanks.

For me this branches in two directions: First is the question that I posed about this season, ergo does this cause the pass defense to improve. The second is equally interesting, just not relevant right now: Who does this mean for the Salary Cap? To me this question is best tabled until the offseason.

They cannot go into next year with Mac, Hill, Hughes and some rookies. A vet, whether that is Rhodes at a massive pay cut, or some other 5 million per year vet needs to be on this team as insurance for Hill failing another drug test or Hughes not taking the next step. It is also possible this means another 1st round pick on a corner in the coming draft. I can almost guarantee 1 of our top 3 picks is on a corner.

As far as cap goes, the savings from Rhodes will go to paying Mac. Which leaves the cap saved from Griffen walking to pay for Harris, Weatherly, Bailey, Colquit, Ham, and Cook's extension.

Posted: **Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:47 am**

VikingPaul73 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 17, 2019 7:25 pm great post mansquatch. Wow, I didn't realize the CB snap count on defensive plays!

Mac 48
Hughes 46
Hill 31
Trae 27
Rhodes 14. 14!!!!! <25% of defensive snaps! He's was the 5th CB on Sunday!

wow his play has really fallen off a cliff this year. Amazing. Looks like he will gone next year and maybe Trae too, and they will focus on extending Mac???

Worth noting: Rhodes got hurt (surprise!) during Sunday's game, which definitely limited his snaps. So these numbers might not reflect Zimmer's estimation of Rhodes' play, but rather that he wasn't well enough to play.

Honestly, Xavier is the X factor (see what I did there?) for the playoffs. Our pass D HAS to step up if we plan to make a run, and the guy who has the talent, but who has been psyched out and simply not playing to his potential is Xavier. We'll need Mac, Hughes, Tre and Hilton to step up too, but if Xavier can find some mojo and get well, it would go a long way to solidifying our pass D woes. We have the talent. I truly believe that. Zimmer needs to figure some things out. Something I noticed vs. the Chargers was that in the first half Rivers was diagnosing our blitzes well in the first half. Zimmer seems to have made some adjustments at halftime, because our pass rush improved immensely in the 2nd half. The failings in the secondary are not ONLY the CB and Safeties fault... we also need to get a consistent pressure. It's all connected.

Vikings Message Board.Com

Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios

Re: Vikings Playoff Scenarios