Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

StumpHunter
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
x 615

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by StumpHunter »

VikingLord wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 11:45 pm
StumpHunter wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 4:11 pm I read somewhere that Cook's snap count was what he typically averaged last year, but Cook had 48 snaps compared to Mattison's 14.
I went back and looked at the box score and you are right - it wasn't close to even in terms of snaps or carries. It seemed like it was for some reason.
I think Mattison got more carries earlier in the game than he typically gets and that might be why you thought he got more.
TSonn
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2125
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2014 11:52 am
Location: Michigan
x 132

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by TSonn »

StumpHunter wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 8:13 pm Kirk's lowest depth of target any of his seasons as a Viking: 7.9

Kirk's depth of target on Sunday: 5.1 (31st out of 33 QBs)

% of passes that were deep passes last year: 12.7

% of passes deep passes on Sunday : 6.5 (23rd)

Pass run ratio 2021: 58%

Pass run ration on Sunday: 54%

It was a much more conservative game plan Sunday than we saw on average the last couple of seasons, probably because the Vikings didn't need to be aggressive to remain in the game. My guess is we will see the training wheels come off next Sunday against an offense with much better weapons, but the myth that the offense we saw on Sunday was more explosive or aggressive than years past is just that.
This is a very basic and cherry picked way to view how aggressive or conservative the offensive game plan was and it screams that you're searching for ways to still somehow support dinoZim.
CharVike
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2581
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:28 pm
x 495

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by CharVike »

phantom wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 6:58 pm
VikingsVictorious wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 6:01 pm

Phantom all this does is prove you wrong. You said National Media at the time of the signing were calling it the worst Free Agent pickup of all time. This was not from the time he was signed. It was 4 games into the second season. Also they said it wasn't looking good, but they weren't willing to call him the biggest big money bust either. They also talked about Kirk playing great under great pressure. That season we went to the playoffs and advanced by beating a very good Saints team that few thought we could on the strength of a great game from Cousins including the OT TD pass to Rudy with two Saints defenders in his face.
Denial is so ugly. Mike Florio, not the other guy clearly said the Jets dodged a bullet (Not a good free agent pickup for the Vikes) Did he think it was the worst maybe, or at least not a good pickup at the time. Probably why he title it that way. So twist the words around so it can fit your opinion. Sorry VikingsVictorious i see you all over this site and you are clearly a want a be sports writer. Sorry SI hasn't called you yet. Sorry your blog hasn't been published yet. Sorry everyone isn't in love with Kirk. I expected way more from a guy who came into a situation like that. Comes off as I am the missing piece to the puzzle. The Vikings Organization doesn't want to admit there wrong. and don't want to eat the money.
The Viking org don't want to admit they are wrong. Why a contract extension then? One year and let him go. If they can't admit things why was Mond and the rest of those 3rd rounders cut in there 2nd year? The Jets dodge a bullet. Isn't that the same team who said they drafted a franchise QB in Darnold. They seemed confused. But they did draft a franchise QB this time around. They are spinning their wheels. You expected a guy to lift a team that just came off one of the worst champ beatings in history. Zim's great No 1 D couldn't handle a stiff like Foles when all the chips were on the table. The team collapsed. The same thing happened to us in 2000 when our team was beat 41-0 in he Champ game. The team collapsed the following year and won 5 games. When you get a beat down like Zim's team did it lingers and also points out that you are not very good when faced with all or nothing. They laid down and just took the beating. No fight in them.
Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8936
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY
x 1031

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by Pondering Her Percy »

phantom wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 2:14 pm He may have been an A hole, but Kirk can take part of the blame as well usually both sides are A holes. Your one sided and bias because Kirk can do no wrong in your eyes.
This honestly drives me nuts and is so far from the truth when people say "Kirk can do no wrong in your eyes". Huh? If Cousins does something wrong, I have no problem pointing it out. Have done it plenty of times before on here.

The problem is, the fans that never wanted him from the start and that have hated him since he's walked in the door. They just cant get past their self pride when he does well. I'll give it to JJBR because he actually specifically acknowledged Sundays game and shared the optimism. What others tend to do when he plays good and leads his team to a victory is go into hiding. I know of one for sure right now that's doing that and has always done that. Maybe make a brief statement or two about the game but nothing about Cousins directly. Will be short the entire week on the board. But then when Cousins has a bad game? LOOKOUT. He'll respond to you faster than a text message and have about 50 posts throughout the week. That's what drives me nuts. If Cousins plays bad, I dont go hide and refrain from addressing it. I'm not a coward like that.
I don't believe the Owner in WA really liked him either. Apparently Mike Zimmer. Maybe It really is Kirk.
I really hope that my vision is going and I didnt see you refer to the Washington owner. The Washington franchise has not only been the most laughable ran franchise in football but possibly all of professional sports. Their owner Dan Snyder has been involved in more scandals and bullshi# than any owner out there. He's an avid alcoholic, etc. The same owner that "let Kirk go because he didnt like him" but has not found a QB anywhere remotely close to Kirk's caliber since he left outside of Alex Smith for a short time. So honestly, you couldnt have said anything less relevant than Dan Snyder not wanting Kirk Cousins.

And when have you ever heard that Kirk is a as#hole? Maybe it really ISN'T Kirk. Tell me how this culture has COMPLETELY flipped script this year? Is the QB not the same all of the sudden? No, the problem is now gone, guys are rejuvenated, guys want to go to work, etc.

If Kirk was the problem, this team would still be in the tank like it was the last few years. They wouldnt have an entirely new culture because they still wouldnt want to be there if it was Kirk being the problem. Yet our QB stays the same and our COACH changes and look at the difference already. It's pretty sad I even have to explain this after fans seeing MULTIPLE former players come out and rip Zim and saying nothing about Kirk. WEIRD. I'm sorry but if anyone at this stage really thinks that Kirk is the problem and he was the one that brought the team down the past few years, you really are oblivious and just a downright hater through and through at this point
Last edited by Pondering Her Percy on Wed Sep 14, 2022 8:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The saddest thing in life is wasted talent and the choices you make will shape your life forever.
-Chazz Palminteri
User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7671
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Land of the Ice and Snow
x 701

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by VikingLord »

StumpHunter wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 8:13 pm It was a much more conservative game plan Sunday than we saw on average the last couple of seasons, probably because the Vikings didn't need to be aggressive to remain in the game. My guess is we will see the training wheels come off next Sunday against an offense with much better weapons, but the myth that the offense we saw on Sunday was more explosive or aggressive than years past is just that.
That seemed consistent with what I saw, but I'm not sure if that was the result of the Vikings playing with a sizeable lead and pretty effective defense or an indication that Cousins and/or KOC were playing more conservatively in general.

What alarms me a little more was the low conversion rate on 3rd down (4 of 13) and the lack of diversity in terms of targets in the passing game. Both factors could indicate that JJ and/or the Packer defense was just that good, or they might be warning signs of a bigger set of issues. Time will tell.
Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8936
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY
x 1031

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by Pondering Her Percy »

TSonn wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 8:47 am
StumpHunter wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 8:13 pm Kirk's lowest depth of target any of his seasons as a Viking: 7.9

Kirk's depth of target on Sunday: 5.1 (31st out of 33 QBs)

% of passes that were deep passes last year: 12.7

% of passes deep passes on Sunday : 6.5 (23rd)

Pass run ratio 2021: 58%

Pass run ration on Sunday: 54%

It was a much more conservative game plan Sunday than we saw on average the last couple of seasons, probably because the Vikings didn't need to be aggressive to remain in the game. My guess is we will see the training wheels come off next Sunday against an offense with much better weapons, but the myth that the offense we saw on Sunday was more explosive or aggressive than years past is just that.
This is a very basic and cherry picked way to view how aggressive or conservative the offensive game plan was and it screams that you're searching for ways to still somehow support dinoZim.
Couldnt have said that any better.
The saddest thing in life is wasted talent and the choices you make will shape your life forever.
-Chazz Palminteri
StumpHunter
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
x 615

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by StumpHunter »

TSonn wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 8:47 am
StumpHunter wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 8:13 pm Kirk's lowest depth of target any of his seasons as a Viking: 7.9

Kirk's depth of target on Sunday: 5.1 (31st out of 33 QBs)

% of passes that were deep passes last year: 12.7

% of passes deep passes on Sunday : 6.5 (23rd)

Pass run ratio 2021: 58%

Pass run ration on Sunday: 54%

It was a much more conservative game plan Sunday than we saw on average the last couple of seasons, probably because the Vikings didn't need to be aggressive to remain in the game. My guess is we will see the training wheels come off next Sunday against an offense with much better weapons, but the myth that the offense we saw on Sunday was more explosive or aggressive than years past is just that.
This is a very basic and cherry picked way to view how aggressive or conservative the offensive game plan was and it screams that you're searching for ways to still somehow support dinoZim.
Do you have some non "cherry picked" stats that prove the offense was more aggressive?

I think you are projecting a bit claiming I am defending Zimmer. I haven't brought him up once in this thread, since he is completely irrelevant to the current Vikings and it would take a really obsessed fan more concerned about being right than rooting for the team to bring him up in a thread about beating the Packers week 1.

I brought up the difference between the first game and previous seasons because people have made untrue statements about the offense Sunday and I have access to stats others don't that might help them better understand what actually happened against the Packers.

It was a much more efficient offense than the last couple of seasons, maintained ball control, and kept its defense off the field. Exactly what was needed to win the football game.
User avatar
VikingsVictorious
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3362
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 7:27 pm
x 649

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by VikingsVictorious »

phantom wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 6:58 pm
VikingsVictorious wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 6:01 pm

Phantom all this does is prove you wrong. You said National Media at the time of the signing were calling it the worst Free Agent pickup of all time. This was not from the time he was signed. It was 4 games into the second season. Also they said it wasn't looking good, but they weren't willing to call him the biggest big money bust either. They also talked about Kirk playing great under great pressure. That season we went to the playoffs and advanced by beating a very good Saints team that few thought we could on the strength of a great game from Cousins including the OT TD pass to Rudy with two Saints defenders in his face.
Denial is so ugly. Mike Florio, not the other guy clearly said the Jets dodged a bullet (Not a good free agent pickup for the Vikes) Did he think it was the worst maybe, or at least not a good pickup at the time. Probably why he title it that way. So twist the words around so it can fit your opinion. Sorry VikingsVictorious i see you all over this site and you are clearly a want a be sports writer. Sorry SI hasn't called you yet. Sorry your blog hasn't been published yet. Sorry everyone isn't in love with Kirk. I expected way more from a guy who came into a situation like that. Comes off as I am the missing piece to the puzzle. The Vikings Organization doesn't want to admit there wrong. and don't want to eat the money.
No denial on my side, but you keep digging your hole deeper. You said National Media at the time of the signing, as if it was all the national media, called it the worst in NFL history. What you provided was one person over a year later saying it may be one of the worst free agent signings in NFL history and that the Jets had dodged a bullet. All does not equal 1 and over a year later is not at the time of the signing. The Vikings and Kirk went on to have a very nice season that year advancing in the playoffs.
Last edited by VikingsVictorious on Wed Sep 14, 2022 12:41 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8936
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY
x 1031

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by Pondering Her Percy »

StumpHunter wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 12:08 pm I have access to stats others don't
Image

....even more reason for you to cherry pick. You have "access to stats others dont" so you can sit there and choose the exact ones that fit your narrative and keep the ones that dont, hidden. Sounds like a pretty Stump move to me :lol:
The saddest thing in life is wasted talent and the choices you make will shape your life forever.
-Chazz Palminteri
User avatar
VikingsVictorious
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3362
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 7:27 pm
x 649

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by VikingsVictorious »

Pondering Her Percy wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 12:36 pm
StumpHunter wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 12:08 pm I have access to stats others don't
Image

....even more reason for you to cherry pick. You have "access to stats others dont" so you can sit there and choose the exact ones that fit your narrative and keep the ones that dont, hidden. Sounds like a pretty Stump move to me :lol:
That's the very definition of the Stump Modus Operandi.
Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8936
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY
x 1031

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by Pondering Her Percy »

StumpHunter wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 12:08 pm I haven't brought him up once in this thread, since he is completely irrelevant to the current Vikings and it would take a really obsessed fan more concerned about being right than rooting for the team to bring him up in a thread about beating the Packers week 1.
Am I missing something in this thread then? Is there someone in here "not rooting for the team"? Or did you just make that up to?
The saddest thing in life is wasted talent and the choices you make will shape your life forever.
-Chazz Palminteri
User avatar
VikingsVictorious
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3362
Joined: Sat May 04, 2019 7:27 pm
x 649

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by VikingsVictorious »

TSonn wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 8:47 am
StumpHunter wrote: Tue Sep 13, 2022 8:13 pm Kirk's lowest depth of target any of his seasons as a Viking: 7.9

Kirk's depth of target on Sunday: 5.1 (31st out of 33 QBs)

% of passes that were deep passes last year: 12.7

% of passes deep passes on Sunday : 6.5 (23rd)

Pass run ratio 2021: 58%

Pass run ration on Sunday: 54%

It was a much more conservative game plan Sunday than we saw on average the last couple of seasons, probably because the Vikings didn't need to be aggressive to remain in the game. My guess is we will see the training wheels come off next Sunday against an offense with much better weapons, but the myth that the offense we saw on Sunday was more explosive or aggressive than years past is just that.
This is a very basic and cherry picked way to view how aggressive or conservative the offensive game plan was and it screams that you're searching for ways to still somehow support dinoZim.
The first half was about right on the conservative/aggressive ratio. The second half was full on play not to lose mode. The punt from the 50 yard line on 4th and 2 was about as conservative a play as you are going to see and all the analytics tell you it was the wrong choice. I don't agree with Stump on much but on the Vikings going conservative game one it's absolutely the truth.
User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7671
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Land of the Ice and Snow
x 701

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by VikingLord »

StumpHunter wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 12:08 pm It was a much more efficient offense than the last couple of seasons, maintained ball control, and kept its defense off the field. Exactly what was needed to win the football game.
Other than that low conversion rate on 3rd down I agree with you. I'm not being snarky or facetious with this comment.
StumpHunter
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
x 615

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by StumpHunter »

Pondering Her Percy wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 12:36 pm
StumpHunter wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 12:08 pm I have access to stats others don't
Image

....even more reason for you to cherry pick. You have "access to stats others dont" so you can sit there and choose the exact ones that fit your narrative and keep the ones that dont, hidden. Sounds like a pretty Stump move to me :lol:
I am more than willing to share with anyone all of these stats that don't fit my "narrative". Just ask and I will post them.
StumpHunter
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3557
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
x 615

Re: Vikings vs. Packers Postgame

Post by StumpHunter »

VikingLord wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 1:04 pm
StumpHunter wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 12:08 pm It was a much more efficient offense than the last couple of seasons, maintained ball control, and kept its defense off the field. Exactly what was needed to win the football game.
Other than that low conversion rate on 3rd down I agree with you. I'm not being snarky or facetious with this comment.
A great example of how perception often differs from reality, because I would have thought they were much better on 3rd than they actually were. It does goes in hand with the team playing conservative though, with the team throwing short on 3rd down more often than not.