A message board dedicated to the discussion of Minnesota Viking Football.
https://vikingsmessageboard.com/
THIS. Zimmer's comments are distrurbing, honestly. Sounds like he knew less about the play than Teddy.TSonn wrote:I still don't understand why we call a pass play that takes 3 seconds to develop in that situation unless we are going for the TD. Need a few more yards? Do quick outs. Way easier for Teddy to know to throw the ball away with quick outs.
Exactly, these are not ultra incredible concepts to grasp. Teddy had a good game against a top team, but he still has much to learn to take this team to a Super Bowl. Overall though I am glad I watched, it was a fun game. I liked that Zimmer coached more aggressive tonight, it will be needed for the post season. Congrats on a good game guys.Mothman wrote:
The point is a that a 23 year old is perfectly capable of handling these basic football concepts. After all, he's already learned an entire NFL playbook!
The thing is, I don't know if it took that long to develop. I think what we wanted was taken away and thats why Teddy double clutched.bingbing wrote:THIS. Zimmer's comments are distrurbing, honestly. Sounds like he knew less about the play than Teddy.
Zimmer's priority was to get closer, not throw it away. But just 5-10 yards would have been good instead of trying to get 15-20 yards closer. So I would say the play call was 75% of the blame but Teddy should have throw it away sooner than he tried.TSonn wrote: If throwing the ball away was a priority for Zimmer and Turner, call a different play that doesn't take as long to develop, especially when you have a shaky line.
You do not think that Zim had anything to do with that play call do youbingbing wrote:THIS. Zimmer's comments are distrurbing, honestly. Sounds like he knew less about the play than Teddy.
These calls are coming down from Turner. There was no timeout or time to discuss that play. I am sure TB was told over the headset not to throw in bounds but try and get a little bit more yardage on an out pattern and throw the ball away if nothing materializes.Hey man Im as honest as it gets. I've just wanted to see better QB play and I 100% saw that tonight. I have no problem saying he played very good tonight. He was as cool as can be and executed on a lot of 3rd downs. Now that needs to turn into consistency.TSonn wrote:
I've appreciated your optimism tonight, PHP!
The part that has me feeling that way is when Teddy says all the routes were dragging across the field, which takes several seconds to develop, and he said he had to wait for them to get far enough for them to catch it where they could get out of bounds. That has all the makings of an awful call.Pondering Her Percy wrote: The thing is, I don't know if it took that long to develop. I think what we wanted was taken away and thats why Teddy double clutched.
The one replay I saw where I could see what Teddy was seeing showed all our WRs in the same location on the right side of the field. If they all started on the left, nothing was taken away - he was waiting for them to get close enough to the sideline to complete the pass and get OB. That also explains the clutch. That's why I say it is mostly on the play call. Had Teddy gotten rid of the ball on time, we may have been tackled in bounds. If he throws it away, he has to give up on the play before the WRs get close to their break. I think Teddy throws it away if the pressure came from his front. Since it was he blindside he didn't sense it and waited to see if the play was there.Pondering Her Percy wrote: The thing is, I don't know if it took that long to develop. I think what we wanted was taken away and thats why Teddy double clutched.
That's what I'm trying to say, too! Those dragging routes are the worst call when we can't complete a pass in bounds. They take a long time (our oline can't handle that) and Teddy can't hit them early (we run out of time).bingbing wrote: The part that has me feeling that way is when Teddy says all the routes were dragging across the field, which takes several seconds to develop, and he said he had to wait for them to get far enough for them to catch it where they could get out of bounds. That has all the makings of an awful call.
Unfortunately I don't see us blowing anyone out. We tend to play either up to or down to the opponent's ability (except for the Seattle game).Pondering Her Percy wrote: If we play like this vs Chicago and the Giants, we win by a land slide and we can fight with GB
Agreed. It was definitely more the play call than anything. Norv did call a much better game tonight but I still do question him. If he sticks to a similar game plan where you have Teddy getting rid of it quick then we'll be fine.TSonn wrote: The one replay I saw where I could see what Teddy was seeing showed all our WRs in the same location on the right side of the field. If they all started on the left, nothing was taken away - he was waiting for them to get close enough to the sideline to complete the pass and get OB. That also explains the clutch. That's why I say it is mostly on the play call. Had Teddy gotten rid of the ball on time, we may have been tackled in bounds. If he throws it away, he has to give up on the play before the WRs get close to their break. I think Teddy throws it away if the pressure came from his front. Since it was he blindside he didn't sense it and waited to see if the play was there.
+1TSonn wrote:I've appreciated your optimism tonight, PHP!
In order:UK Phil wrote:Morning guys! Just catching up with the game here in England - no way I could have stayed up and watched (especially as I feared a big loss). I am really pleasantly surprised after reading the reviews and watching the highlights. Despite being on the road with a ton of injuries to key guys, we SHOULD have taken it to OT with a seriously good football team.
Let's not be negative. This team is moving forward. I have absolutely no doubt about that. No one expected this to be our year. I don't even think next year we have a realistic shot at going all the way. But keep this group together, improve the O-line and I strongly believe Zim and the Vikes will be a LEGIT threat in 2 years time. We have some really exciting talent. Keep your heads up!
I have one question though. I can't find any information on the fumbles. Of course I know about TBs fumble and I know that Peterson fumbled a reverse to Wallace. But where did the AP fumble happen? Please tell me it wasn't in the red zone? Also Wright had a fumble? Where was this? I'm hoping both didn't cost us points as it makes the loss so much tougher!
Anyway, happy friday men! Head to work this morning proud of how a banged up Vikes stuck with supposedly the class of the NFC!