Refocused Vikes-Colts

[S197]

Pro Bowls are obviously not the greatest metric but Sharper was already a two-time Pro Bowler before he came to Minnesota. He also had another Pro Bowl appearance with Minnesota before Frazier became DC. His best years were clearly 2000 and 2009 (made first-team all pro both years) and those came in Green Bay and after leaving Frazier's defense for New Orleans.

It was obvious that Sharper struggled under Frazier's defense, the regression over time was pretty clear. His last year in Minnesota he only had 1 interception. He then goes to the Saints the following year and has an all-pro year. I find that rather telling.

[Mothman]

Pro Bowls are obviously not the greatest metric but Sharper was already a two-time Pro Bowler before he came to Minnesota. He also had another Pro Bowl appearance with Minnesota before Frazier became DC.

I wasn't suggesting Frazier made him a Pro Bowl player.

His best years were clearly 2000 and 2009 (made first-team all pro both years) and those came in Green Bay and after leaving Frazier's defense for New Orleans.

It was obvious that Sharper struggled under Frazier's defense, the regression over time was pretty clear. His last year in Minnesota he only had 1 interception. He then goes to the Saints the following year and has an all-pro year. I find that rather telling.

But what is it telling of...? It depends on why he had such a good year in 2009 and why he regressed in 2008. He had a terrific year with the Vikes in 2005. Statistically, he took a step back under Tomlin, stayed about the same under Frazier in 2007 and then took a big step back in 2008. Is that Frazier's fault? Maybe he played a part in it and maybe Tomlin did too. They both asked Sharper to freelance less and play within a different defensive concept but in a team sport like football, nothing happens in a bubble. The players around Sharper on those teams impacted his performance and he impacted theirs. He had great numbers in 2009 on a Saints pass defense that was opportunistic but not very good. There's an argument to be made that Frazier (and Tomlin) should have allowed Sharper to freelance and play outside of the system more but do you alter your defensive concept like that to let a safety freelance? It's a fair question. Tomlin and Frazier decided "no".

Continually lost in all of this is the fact that the Vikings pass defense improved under Frazier, going from dead last in the league to 18th in 2008, 19th in 2009, and 10th in 2010. They dropped back to 26th last season but we all know it was a completely makeshift unit by the end of the season and that injuries played a role in that decline. If Frazier's coaching is so detrimental to the pass defense, how were they able to climb from the absolute bottom of the league to the middle and then the top 10?

Look, I'm not in complete denial about this. I realize the secondary hasn't been particularly good at intercepting the ball under Frazier and that may have something to do with his coaching. I certainly don't think he's perfect and I don't believe the Vikings secondary has always played up to it's full potential but a definitive statement like Mondry made above ("It's not a scheme problem or player problem, it's a coaching problem") requires strong evidence to be convincing. I could buy it a lot easier if he had said it's a scheme problem, a player problem and a coaching problem. Placing the blame in one area seems excessive.

[mondry]

I wasn't suggesting Frazier made him a Pro Bowl player.
But what is it telling of...? It depends on why he had such a good year in 2009 and why he regressed in 2008. He had a terrific year with the Vikes in 2005. Statistically, he took a step back under Tomlin, stayed about the same under Frazier in 2007 and then took a big step back in 2008. Is that Frazier's fault? Maybe he played a part in it and maybe Tomlin did too. They both asked Sharper to freelance less and play within a different defensive concept but in a team sport like football, nothing happens in a bubble. The players around Sharper on those teams impacted his performance and he impacted theirs. He had great numbers in 2009 on a Saints pass defense that was opportunistic but not very good. There's an argument to be made that Frazier (and Tomlin) should have allowed Sharper to freelance and play outside of the system more but do you alter your defensive concept like that to let a safety freelance? It's a fair question. Tomlin and Frazier decided "no".

Continually lost in all of this is the fact that the Vikings pass defense improved under Frazier, going from dead last in the league to 18th in 2008, 19th in 2009, and 10th in 2010. They dropped back to 26th last season but we all know it was a completely makeshift unit by the end of the season and that injuries played a role in that decline. If Frazier's coaching is so detrimental to the pass defense, how were they able to climb from the absolute bottom of the league to the middle and then the top 10?

Look, I'm not in complete denial about this. I realize the secondary hasn't been particularly good at intercepting the ball under Frazier and that may have something to do with his coaching. I certainly don't think he's perfect and I don't believe the Vikings secondary has always played up to it's full potential but a definitive statement like Mondry made above ("It's not a scheme problem or player problem, it's a coaching problem") requires strong evidence to be convincing. I could buy it a lot easier if he had said it's a scheme problem, a player problem and a coaching problem. Placing the blame in one area seems excessive.

Call me crazy but I just don't think it's enough. They "improved" to 18th, 19th, and barely cracked the top 10, and most of the time they were playing behind a defensive line of Allen, K.will in his prime, and a fat pat with enough in the tank to command double teams on every play. That certainly should have made things a bit easier.

what's telling about Sharper having some of his worst years of his career here under frazier? Well it tells me good players don't seem to "fix" the problem, and yet that's what we're suppose to do? Just wait till we have better players right? Reminds me of chili, "he couldn't win the superbowl with the NFC probowl team." As far as Tomlin goes well at least he was smart enough to ditch his cover 2 and let the steelers do what they do best.

The telling thing for me is how many games we blew leads in last year. Then what happens first two games this year? They give up points like candy on Halloween near half time and at the end of the game. Jim's right in that I shouldn't have said it's a pure coaching problem, what I meant is that Fraziers cover2 (so his scheme I suppose) combined with his coaching is not an effective way to play defense in today's NFL. If we need better players to stop a rookie quarterback from driving 45 yards in 22 seconds to kick the game winning field goal then I'm sorry but it's time to wake up. I guess we needed better players when the exact same thing happened in the 2009 NFC championship game. Let's not forget that even after the 12 man penalty and all that, the defense still had an entire series to stop them, of course they didn't.

Speaking of better players, that's going to be a major problem because we're obsessed with players that can tackle, but do very little else. Chad Greenway is the perfect example of this, a guy we spent a #1 pick on. Don't get me wrong, as a player I really like the guy, but if you look at his game you'll notice that he can't cover, he doesn't have any ball skills, is a poor blitzer, and rarely creates any turnovers.

Speaking of turnovers...

Turnover ratio for the past 5 years

2011 - -3
2010 - -11
2009 - +6
2008 - -6
2007 - +1

Turnover ratio is a much more important stat to a defense (and thus for a team to win games) and this year we're at -1, might be worse if we asked Ponder to throw more than 10 yards down field. Anyway to put things in perspective, the last 3 superbowl winners turnover ratio are Giants +7, Packers +24, saints +10. Fraziers best year was 2009 at +6 and guess what, we made it to the NFCC! Obviously I know the offense plays a role in your turnover ratio as well but you can't get 5+ without getting take aways and I think it's a shame they aren't a bigger portion of fraziers coaching and scheme.

One final thing I'll say cause it really bothers me is how I think we've used winfield on the CB blitz 4 times in the past few years, yet on 3 of those 4 times he's gotten the trifecta strip sack returned for touchdown and yet we don't even try it! I mean cmon, at least get burnt once before it falls out of the playbook!

[Mothman]

Call me crazy but I just don't think it's enough. They "improved" to 18th, 19th, and barely cracked the top 10, and most of the time they were playing behind a defensive line of Allen, K.will in his prime, and a fat pat with enough in the tank to command double teams on every play. That certainly should have made things a bit easier.

So you agree that the quality of the players makes a big difference when they're on the defensive line?

what's telling about Sharper having some of his worst years of his career here under frazier? Well it tells me good players don't seem to "fix" the problem, and yet that's what we're suppose to do? Just wait till we have better players right? Reminds me of chili, "he couldn't win the superbowl with the NFC probowl team." As far as Tomlin goes well at least he was smart enough to ditch his cover 2 and let the steelers do what they do best.

Maybe Frazier would do likewise if he went to a team with an all-time great defensive coordinator like Dick LeBeau on the staff and with Troy Polamalu in the secondary.

Regarding this idea of Sharper having "some of his worst years" under Frazier: he basically had one of his worst years under Frazier. He only played for the man for two seasons and one of them was one of 4 Pro Bowl seasons out of a much longer career. I don't see how that can be called "worst". When we talk about a secondary player having one of his worst seasons, we need to look beyond one stat (interceptions). My problem with this kind of thinking about Sharper is it absolves players of far too much responsibility. Coaching matters but it doesn't matter so much that a coach should be held responsible for every player's year to year performance. Sharper had more to do with his gradual decline in performance as a Viking than anybody else (not that he could be expected to rack up 9 INTs a year anyway—that's unrealistic).

The telling thing for me is how many games we blew leads in last year. Then what happens first two games this year? They give up points like candy on Halloween near half time and at the end of the game. Jim's right in that I shouldn't have said it's a pure coaching problem, what I meant is that Fraziers cover2 (so his scheme I suppose) combined with his coaching is not an effective way to play defense in today's NFL. If we need better players to stop a rookie quarterback from driving 45 yards in 22 seconds to kick the game winning field goal then I'm sorry but it's time to wake up.

Speaking of better players, that's going to be a major problem because we're obsessed with players that can tackle, but do very little else. Chad Greenway is the perfect example of this, a guy we spent a #1 pick on. Don't get me wrong, as a player I really like the guy, but if you look at his game you'll notice that he can't cover, he doesn't have any ball skills, is a poor blitzer, and rarely creates any turnovers.

Speaking of turnovers...

Turnover ratio for the past 5 years

2011 - -3
2010 - -11
2009 - +6
2008 - -6
2007 - +1

Turnover ratio is a much more important stat to a defense (and thus for a team to win games) and this year we're at -1, might be worse if we asked Ponder to throw more than 10 yards down field. Anyway to put things in perspective, the last 3 superbowl winners turnover ratio are Giants +7, Packers +24, saints +10. Fraziers best year was 2009 at +6 and guess what, we made it to the NFCC! Obviously I know the offense plays a role in your turnover ratio as well but you can't get 5+ without getting take aways and I think it's a shame they aren't a bigger portion of fraziers coaching and scheme.

Again, what we're really talking about here is interceptions, not takeaways, because Frazier's defenses have tended to be among the best in the league at forcing and recovering fumbles.

Turnovers come out of playcalling and scheme to some extent but I still believe they have more to do with players and performance.

One final thing I'll say cause it really bothers me is how I think we've used winfield on the CB blitz 4 times in the past few years, yet on 3 of those 4 times he's gotten the trifecta strip sack returned for touchdown and yet we don't even try it! I mean cmon, at least get burnt once before it falls out of the playbook!

It's not the kind of thing you can do every week without teams beginning to expect and stop it. The element of surprise is one of the things that makes it effective. However, I'm with you and I'd like to see them do it more. Winfield missed most of last season and we're only two games into this season so hopefully, we'll see that blitz again soon. We might even see a bunch of INTs if the young secondary starts to gel and improve as a unit.

I'd love to see what would happen if Frazier could add one top notch cover corner to his defense, a player like Champ Bailey in his prime or Revis. Maybe it wouldn't make a difference and it would confirm theories that the Vikings never-much-better-than-mediocre secondary is a result of poor coaching but when a defense has a player they can isolate on an opponent's best receiver and count on for 4 quarters, it provides the secondary with an anchor that gives them much more flexibility.

To wrap this up: I'll gladly concede that a zone defense is a more conservative choice and it's never been my favorite choice. I'd love to see something different too but I still think players make the biggest difference in any scheme. They've added some fresh faces to the secondary. Let's see what they do over the course of this season and if they improve and begin making more plays.

[mansquatch]

Now this is a discussion I've been waiting all off season for!

Mondry that take give stat line tells the whole story IMO. The Frasier era of defenses have been terrible at creating the big play and I agree with your take that some of it has to be coaching.

I'm generally not a fan of the whole "is the 4-3 or Tampa 2 scheme out dated". I think that argument is far too simplistic. When you hear defensvie players talk scheme they will say that the nuances of how a scheme is run are why you see differences. I think this is what is telling about Frasier. His nuances are leading us to be a defense that seems to focus on the 3 and out. In 2009 we led the league in "fewest plays against" or something like that. In other words, while we were not getting big turnovers, we were forcing a lot of punts. Favre also had what 7 picks the entire year? That to me was the bigger reason we had positive take give. The offense made fewer mistakes.

However, that worked because we had the Gunslinger and AP to keep drives alive. No Sidney Rice/ No Gunslinger and now you are asking your defense to not just get you off the field, but also make plays to keep the take give positive. Now they have to offset a young QB and generally young offense. They are not up to the task.

I think this teams gets a lot better if it can figure out how to generate more turnovers on defense. They need to get aggressive and take more chances. I think they are playing highly conservative because they are afraid the offense can't bail them out if they give up the big play, but what is happeneing is the offense isn't able to get them a lead and thus they get worn down or just do not have any mroe wrinkles to show in the 4th quarter and the zones get picked apart. They need to do something earlier in the game. I think they need to be more aggressive to give the offense better opportunities.

[Mothman]

Now this is a discussion I've been waiting all off season for!

Mondry that take give stat line tells the whole story IMO. The Frasier era of defenses have been terrible at creating the big play and I agree with your take that some of it has to be coaching.

Guys, I'm begging you, can we please make it clear that we're talking about INTs here and not fumbles? Frazier's defenses have been ranked in the league's top 10 in fumble recoveries every season but one (and that year they were still in the top 15). Fumbles are still turnovers and still big plays so if we're going to criticize Frazier's defenses for the lack of interceptions, we need to also give them credit for excelling at forcing fumbles. It's the lack of INTs that's the real killer.

Let's flip this around: why has the Vikings d-line been a relative strength for most of the past 5-7 years? Is it because of the coaching, the defensive strategy or the personnel? It's probably not one single thing but would anybody deny that personnel has been a huge part of it? When they were lining up Allen, Williams, Williams and Edwards, sacking QBs and stuffing the run at a near record pace, what percentage of that was due to coaching and what percentage was due to the quality of the personnel?

I think Mansquatch has a good point when he says the nuances of how a scheme is implemented make a difference and maybe the Vikings aren't getting some of those nuances right. However, I think it's undeniable that players make a big difference and other than Sharper, what top players have the Vikings had in their secondary since 2007? Frazier has not been working with the kind of talent on the back end of the defense that he's had on the front. Is it a coincidence that the front has excelled most of the time and the back has been mediocre or worse (much, much worse last year)?

I understand and share the frustration being expressed. I'm sick of poor pass defense and the Vikes have struggled in that area for a long time, long before Frazier ever arrived. I'll concede that coaching could be part of the problem. I just don't see how it can be considered THE problem when the Vikings have probably only had one great player in the secondary over the past 10-15 years (maybe two if we count Winfield as great). I'm not saying the whole secondary needs to be composed of Pro Bowl players to succeed but there's rarely even been one player of that caliber back there. How can that not be having a significant impact?

Maybe scouting and drafting are more of a problem than coaching here. Perhaps the Vikes need to invest a first round pick in a CB and emphasize drafting ball hawks, DBs with a track record of creating turnovers and big plays in college.

I don't have the answer but when I look at the secondary and LBs, I see 1 player that would start for the majority of NFL teams: Greenway. That speaks volumes. Winfield would start for quite a few teams but his age might give others pause. None of the rest would be handed a starting job, although a few might earn one, depending on the circumstances. Maybe we'll get lucky and Jefferson will make a difference.

Sorry I keep making such long posts about this. I guess I just want to know, from those who primarily blame the coaching, where does talent figure into the equation? It must figure in somewhere, right?

[dead_poet]

Some fun stats:

The #Vikings 54 sacks since the the start of the 2011 season is tied for 1st in the NFL.

During that same time span, the #Vikings rank 1st in the NFL with 16 fumble recoveries.

From 2003-12, #Vikings DT Kevin Williams (54.5 sacks) trails only #49ers DT Justin Smith (57.5 sacks) in sacks by defensive tackles.

[mosscarter]

here is a fact, our defense is horrible. you fail to mention that allen had 22 sacks in one season, and i was in high school the last time our secondary had an interception.

[Mothman]

Some fun stats:

Thanks! Where did you get those? I want more.

[dead_poet]

Thanks! Where did you get those? I want more.

@VikingsFootball on Twitter posted those.

[dead_poet]

here is a fact, our defense is horrible.

That's a very opinion-y sounding fact.

you fail to mention that allen had 22 sacks in one season

You're right. We shouldn't count those. They are in a special Jared Allen category, one reserved for guys we should've traded away that feel like they are horrible against the run and get all their sacks from bad players, unlike the rest of the top defensive linemen.

[Crax]

Guys, I'm begging you, can we please make it clear that we're talking about INTs here and not fumbles?

Absolutely, being clear helps with the confusion.

Continually lost in all of this is the fact that the Vikings pass defense improved under Frazier, going from dead last in the league to 18th in 2008, 19th in 2009, and 10th in 2010. They dropped back ... If Frazier's coaching is so detrimental to the pass defense, how were they able to climb from the absolute bottom of the league to the middle and then the top 10?

I was actually confused when you called the Vikings pass defense top 10 in 2010. I then realized you were solely talking about yards.

The 2010 defense gave up 25 passing TD's which had them tied for #21st in the league. If you look at passing TD's 2008 was actually the only decent year. I can't recall things that far back very well, but I do remember us giving up big passing plays in 2010 and don't recall considering that pass defense good. I do recall some good defensive play in 2010, but I also recall guys getting absolutely burned for TD's. Might have kept the yards down, but the big plays were still there.

2008 - #5 - 15 TD's
2009 - #23 - 26 TD's
2010 - #21 - 25 TD's
2011 - #32 - 34 TD's

[Crax]

Our run defense has been pretty solid, it's the pass defense that scares me. I'd like to see how our line handles Gore. He's averaging 6.1 yards a carry right now.

[Mothman]

@VikingsFootball on Twitter posted those.

Thanks!

Continually lost in all of this is the fact that the Vikings pass defense improved under Frazier, going from dead last in the league to 18th in 2008, 19th in 2009, and 10th in 2010. They dropped back ... If Frazier's coaching is so detrimental to the pass defense, how were they able to climb from the absolute bottom of the league to the middle and then the top 10?

I was actually confused when you called the Vikings pass defense top 10 in 2010. I then realized you were solely talking about yards.

The 2010 defense gave up 25 passing TD's which had them tied for #21st in the league. If you look at passing TD's 2008 was actually the only decent year. I can't recall things that far back very well, but I do remember us giving up big passing plays in 2010 and don't recall considering that pass defense good. I do recall some good defensive play in 2010, but I also recall guys getting absolutely burned for TD's. Might have kept the yards down, but the big plays were still there.

2008 - #5 - 15 TD's
2009 - #23 - 26 TD's
2010 - #21 - 25 TD's
2011 - #32 - 34 TD's[/quote]

That's a good point and yes, I was going with the default ranking of yards allowed.

Thanks for posting those TD rankings. Let's throw in 2007 too, since that was Frazier's first season as coordinator:

2007 - #16 - 15 TDs

So what happened in 2009 to start the decline in passing TDs allowed? Sharper left, Winfield missed 6 games and rookie Tyrell Johnson started 15 games. Sharper's departure clearly hurt the pass defense and it hasn't really recovered because they haven't found a good safety to replace him yet.

Of course, it's also worth noting that from 2007 to 2009, the Vikings were consistently one of the top teams against the run. In 2009, they tied GB for fewest rushing TDs allowed and they were in the top 6 in that category in the previous two seasons. They were ranked #1 or #2 against the run in all 3 seasons. There are two ways to look at that: teams were passing for more TDs because they were reluctant to run or teams were passing for TDs because the Vikes were weak in that department. It was probably a little from column A and a little from column B.

The truth is, the Vikings haven't had a truly good pass defense in a long, LONG time.

[Crax]

You'll get no argument from me that we need better pieces in the secondary. Wouldn't you also agree that passing in general has been increasing since 2007? Probably exploded around then with Brady/Moss, but many people comment on how much of a passing league it is now.

We just keep giving up TD's. Last year was obviously the worst, but giving up 25 TD's in 2010 isn't great either. Three straight years now of giving up 25+ TD's.

I'm no scheme or current talent expert, so I couldn't tell you based on the specific talent we have if some guys would be more suited for something else. Sharper was good for us, but he seemed even better elsewhere. Are we getting all we can out of the guys we have? Or are they just so terrible it doesn't matter what we run? I'd say it may be easier to change scheme then get an entirely new secondary. Even if it's not a full change, but a modified version of the existing one.