Vikings at Rams
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Waterboy
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2025 8:26 am
Play calling
I sure hope that our play calling gets more imaginative. Against Detroit 1st and goal inside the 7 saw four consecutive incomplete passes. The wide receiver screen pass starts 8 yards behind the line of scrimmage making first and ten is now first and eighteen! Our pitch play fools no one. You need good play action (fake hand-offs and pump fakes) to make screen plays and pitch plays work.
I hope that whoever our QB is has some mobility. Darnold was a statue in the pocket. How about a designed roll-out play once in a while? Nothing but straight qb drop backs all year.
What happened to the idea of keeping the linebackers honest with a deep shot at least 2-3 times during the game? Between the 40s and on early downs is where that play starts. It will at least gives the defense something to think about.
I wish Sam Darnold luck wherever he lands, just don't let it be here. The honeymoon is certainly over. He played well against lousy teams, but against good teams he proved to be inferior.
I hope that whoever our QB is has some mobility. Darnold was a statue in the pocket. How about a designed roll-out play once in a while? Nothing but straight qb drop backs all year.
What happened to the idea of keeping the linebackers honest with a deep shot at least 2-3 times during the game? Between the 40s and on early downs is where that play starts. It will at least gives the defense something to think about.
I wish Sam Darnold luck wherever he lands, just don't let it be here. The honeymoon is certainly over. He played well against lousy teams, but against good teams he proved to be inferior.
-
- Hall of Fame Candidate
- Posts: 3911
- Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:28 pm
- x 798
Re: Play calling
Are the Packers a lousy team? I understand the point but can't agree with can't play against good teams. Our biggest problem at the goal line was zero run game. We are one dimensional and that will make it very hard for any QB. The thing that is easy to figure out is we start off run then pass on most of our drives. Usually the run gets stuffed now everybody knows it's pass and they tee off. It just happened against the Rams. First play run of course for -1 yard. Next play O'Neil was smoked for a 10 yard sack. Now it's 3rd and 11. Here comes the rush big time. Every coach on the Rams saw that coming. JJM will be in there next season. Good luck to him and with his movement maybe he won't get sacked much at all. I doubt that very much. I've heard that over and over. Just because you can move that won't save you. The better defenses have guys that can move also.F-310 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2025 6:54 am I sure hope that our play calling gets more imaginative. Against Detroit 1st and goal inside the 7 saw four consecutive incomplete passes. The wide receiver screen pass starts 8 yards behind the line of scrimmage making first and ten is now first and eighteen! Our pitch play fools no one. You need good play action (fake hand-offs and pump fakes) to make screen plays and pitch plays work.
I hope that whoever our QB is has some mobility. Darnold was a statue in the pocket. How about a designed roll-out play once in a while? Nothing but straight qb drop backs all year.
What happened to the idea of keeping the linebackers honest with a deep shot at least 2-3 times during the game? Between the 40s and on early downs is where that play starts. It will at least gives the defense something to think about.
I wish Sam Darnold luck wherever he lands, just don't let it be here. The honeymoon is certainly over. He played well against lousy teams, but against good teams he proved to be inferior.
-
- Hall of Fame Candidate
- Posts: 3698
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
- x 644
Re: Vikings at Rams
Darnold was not sacked in under 2.5 seconds in that game and any time over 2.5 is almost always on the QB. The one sack he took where I don't know if he could have gotten rid of it was the play action where he had his back to the free rusher, but even that one I think a QB like Stafford is at least able to hit Hockenson for a positive gain or throw it at a receiver's feet to avoid grounding.VikingLord wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2025 3:57 pmAll year long, with the exception of a few games, I would have bought your argument.
But the last two games he destroyed the credibility of that argument, at least in my view. He had the weapons and the same guys around him on offense that he had all year and unless you're willing to buy the argument that it was they who suddenly failed, the blame for the dramatic dropoff in offensive performance falls squarely at Darnold's feet.
He was a one-year vet on the minimum deal. There was a good reason for that. He popped for a while, but we've seen that before with even lesser QBs than Darnold. It's really not all that rare for a guy who has a reputation or has never had a lot of success to find a spark for some period of time and enjoy success, but in the end it's never sustainable.
I think it was Stump (sorry if it wasn't you) who once posted that if a QB doesn't shine within like the first 6 games of the time he takes over the starting role, the chances of him ever shining for any period of time in the future is close to zero. In other words, a guy either shows he can get on the bike and ride it, or he will never really be able to ride it well. Darnold, at least up to this point in his pro career, has never ridden the bike well. Even this year there were many times and games where he wobbled around a lot and was saved by his defense or special teams. To his credit, he made some great plays as well. But nothing about him strikes me as sustainable. Nothing. If the Vikings don't implement their actual plan at QB going forward at this point it will be a huge disappointment and large step backwards.
I'm sure all of the sacks weren't solely his fault, but he failed to read the pressure and get rid of the ball. One could argue that any time a QB takes a sack it is the QB's fault for not getting rid of the ball. Most plays have safety valves for quick read/release and most QBs can chuck it somewhere out of reach of defenders while avoiding grounding. Heck, look at the masterful job Stafford did avoiding a sure sack on that fumble that was called back, or what Goff did to avoid the safety in the game against Detroit. The rules are designed to not only protect the QB, but to help him avoid sacks. So taking 9 in a single game is just a terrible performance by the QB no matter how bad the pass blocking was or how many times the defense sent extra rushers.
Along those lines he also threw a bad pick, was terribly inaccurate on multiple throws (that throw to Addison in the 1st quarter was TERRIBLE. Amazing play by Addison to bring that down. I watched that route develop. Addison was open out of the break. Pass should have come out sooner and was a very normal throw that should been into the numbers or even a bit out in front of him so he could maintain momentum out of his break. Instead, he has to wait for it and leap way up to grab it with the defender bearing down on him the whole time. And so it would go like that most of the rest of the night), and just generally looked like he had never seen anything the Rams did. There were multiple times when receivers were open in NFL windows. Not wide open, but open. Darnold would not let it go. The fact he took only 9 sacks is actually a testament to the OL more than an indictment of them, at least from the row where I was sitting.
It is like he doesn't know where his outlets are when he is blitzed and I think that is just symptom of what has made him a poor QB his entire career. That being his processing speed is just too slow.
The stats back that up with him having the most dropbacks over 2.5 seconds of any QB this season and it is highlighted when he is blitzed and his primary read isn't immediately open. Stafford completes a pass in those situations, Darnold just cannot.
-
- Hall of Fame Candidate
- Posts: 3698
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
- x 644
Re: Vikings at Rams
The biggest takeaway from this season, is not about whether Darnold is viable option at QB next season or not, it isn't about Darnold at all.
It is that we have a passing offense that is up there with the best in the NFL, on par with the Bengals and superior even to the Chiefs because of the talent at receiver (not because of the play caller, Reid is arguably the best in the business). The Vikings build up the interior of their Oline in free agency, find a workhorse running back in the draft, and if JJM is even competent at QB, we will make a run in the playoffs next year.
The future is bright, and these past two losses should not take away from that potential.
It is that we have a passing offense that is up there with the best in the NFL, on par with the Bengals and superior even to the Chiefs because of the talent at receiver (not because of the play caller, Reid is arguably the best in the business). The Vikings build up the interior of their Oline in free agency, find a workhorse running back in the draft, and if JJM is even competent at QB, we will make a run in the playoffs next year.
The future is bright, and these past two losses should not take away from that potential.
-
- All Pro Elite Player
- Posts: 1514
- Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 am
- x 90
Re: Vikings at Rams
Unfortunately, the odds of the Vikes actually creating a good OL is near zero. They have either ignored it or mismanaged it for 2 decades. Nothing seems to change in MN.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9726
- Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:51 pm
- Location: Kentucky
- x 517
Re: Vikings at Rams
They're really not that far away from it in my opinion. They lost their best player on the line who also plays at the most important position on the line, and one of the best LTs in the league. That loss has a trickledown effect across the rest of the line. It would be like saying the Vikings are terrible at WR if Jefferson gets injured.chicagopurple wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2025 8:32 am Unfortunately, the odds of the Vikes actually creating a good OL is near zero. They have either ignored it or mismanaged it for 2 decades. Nothing seems to change in MN.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9726
- Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:51 pm
- Location: Kentucky
- x 517
Re: Vikings at Rams
It comes back to the WRs getting "jammed" to the point of a hold call that seemed to only get called about one out of ten times. How can they throw a "quick hit" pass if the WRs can't get in position for one? The offensive line was definitely getting pushed around on top of that.Barry wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2025 3:36 pmEach of these scream either play calling (need quick hits), Sam spooked and holding the ball, the O-line getting pushed around, or a combination.Cliff wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2025 2:20 pm I just watched a video of all 9 sacks and they seem to break down like this:
#1 linemen are pushed into him within 2 seconds
#2 Darnold steps into the pocket after about 2 seconds. He is seemingly prepared to throw on the 3rd second when the center let a man up the gut
#3 Man runs free to Darnold, no time to respond
#4 Darnold avoids pressure from his right, TE misses the chip on the left, free run to the QB from blindside, roughly 3 seconds, fumble
#5 Darnold dances around and holds the ball too long
#6 Interior lineman misses the block on a stunt, hilariously dives at the rusher from behind, roughly 3 seconds
#7 Darnold dances around and holds the ball too long
#8 Left guard literally stops blocking his man to help the LT, LG's man runs free, roughly 3 seconds
#9 Darnold is about to throw it at 3ish seconds and realizes the LT has lost. This is on Darnold, had an open man and chose to pull it down rather than throw it and take the hit.
The Rams copied the Lions. Play man against the WRs and have them jam/hold and eat any measly five yard penalties that come your way. Especially on first down where the only negative is giving up 5 yards. In the meanwhile, send rushers knowing the offensive line will give way before the receivers can get into position.
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9726
- Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 5:51 pm
- Location: Kentucky
- x 517
Re: Vikings at Rams
He may not be a very good QB in the end, but it's not just an argument that this is his first year with even decent weapons. That is a fact. It could be he would have been just as terrible with good receivers on the Jets and Panthers but we'll never know.VikingLord wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2025 3:57 pmAll year long, with the exception of a few games, I would have bought your argument.
But the last two games he destroyed the credibility of that argument, at least in my view. He had the weapons and the same guys around him on offense that he had all year and unless you're willing to buy the argument that it was they who suddenly failed, the blame for the dramatic dropoff in offensive performance falls squarely at Darnold's feet.
There definitely was, but a lot of that reason in retrospect is tied to his supporting cast and the teams he was on. It's also because the NFL is a "what have you done for me lately" type of league. After just one good season people were talking about Darnold getting paid 50m per year somewhere.He was a one-year vet on the minimum deal. There was a good reason for that. He popped for a while, but we've seen that before with even lesser QBs than Darnold. It's really not all that rare for a guy who has a reputation or has never had a lot of success to find a spark for some period of time and enjoy success, but in the end it's never sustainable.
I think it was Stump (sorry if it wasn't you) who once posted that if a QB doesn't shine within like the first 6 games of the time he takes over the starting role, the chances of him ever shining for any period of time in the future is close to zero. In other words, a guy either shows he can get on the bike and ride it, or he will never really be able to ride it well. Darnold, at least up to this point in his pro career, has never ridden the bike well.
It makes a difference if the bike is a tricycle missing one wheel tho ...
If you don't expect a future Vikings QB to ever "wobble" you're in for a lot of disappointment. I agree the Vikings should stick to their original plan of going with JJ, but now they need an insurance policy. Darnold was obviously supposed to be a stop-gap and that's ok but to my mind JJ immediately having a season ending injury throws a bit of a wrench in those plans. You definitely can't "ride the bike" if you're missing a leg.Even this year there were many times and games where he wobbled around a lot and was saved by his defense or special teams. To his credit, he made some great plays as well. But nothing about him strikes me as sustainable. Nothing. If the Vikings don't implement their actual plan at QB going forward at this point it will be a huge disappointment and large step backwards.
I'd say 6 or 7 of the 9 sacks weren't on him. I've never seen any QB throw the ball away 10+ times in a game. Darnold did actually throw the ball away a few times and if he would have thrown it away every time he got sacked that's how many it would have been.I'm sure all of the sacks weren't solely his fault, but he failed to read the pressure and get rid of the ball. One could argue that any time a QB takes a sack it is the QB's fault for not getting rid of the ball. Most plays have safety valves for quick read/release and most QBs can chuck it somewhere out of reach of defenders while avoiding grounding. Heck, look at the masterful job Stafford did avoiding a sure sack on that fumble that was called back, or what Goff did to avoid the safety in the game against Detroit. The rules are designed to not only protect the QB, but to help him avoid sacks. So taking 9 in a single game is just a terrible performance by the QB no matter how bad the pass blocking was or how many times the defense sent extra rushers.
We'll also have to agree to disagree about what Stafford did being "masterful". It was a hair away from a fumble and should have definitely been intentional grounding. In reality he should have tucked the ball and taken the sack.
This is where we definitely agree. Sam got rattled and the passes that he actually could have made, he didn't. He missed some wide open shots, threw some bad passes, etc.Along those lines he also threw a bad pick, was terribly inaccurate on multiple throws (that throw to Addison in the 1st quarter was TERRIBLE. Amazing play by Addison to bring that down. I watched that route develop. Addison was open out of the break. Pass should have come out sooner and was a very normal throw that should been into the numbers or even a bit out in front of him so he could maintain momentum out of his break. Instead, he has to wait for it and leap way up to grab it with the defender bearing down on him the whole time. And so it would go like that most of the rest of the night), and just generally looked like he had never seen anything the Rams did. There were multiple times when receivers were open in NFL windows. Not wide open, but open. Darnold would not let it go.
After watching the videos of the sacks he took I can't agree with this at all. The offensive line got its #### kicked. Sam has to keep his poise in those situations if he ever has a chance of being "great", but I understand being jumpy behind that line.The fact he took only 9 sacks is actually a testament to the OL more than an indictment of them, at least from the row where I was sitting.
-
- Pro Bowl Elite Player
- Posts: 697
- Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 9:39 pm
- Location: West Palm Beach, FL
- x 32
Re: Vikings at Rams
No problem rebuilding the secondary because quite frankly, it sucked. I would like to have a thumper/ball hawk at safety and a shutdown corner on either end, but that is wishful thinkingmakila wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2025 9:26 amNot just them. Gillmore and Griffin too. Both starting CBs. We have to rebuild the entire secondary. Think Metellus is the only one who played regular snaps this year under contract for next season.CharVike wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2025 9:22 am
If they get it good for them. We have cap but Murphy and Bynum are FA and that's half our secondary. That will take some cap. Kwesi made some good FA signings but his list is very long since he came here. There's been plenty of misses also. The draft has been the killer in my eyes. It's hard to build a turnover roster when you don't draft well.
For those with wings, fly to your dreams
-
- Hall of Fame Candidate
- Posts: 3911
- Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:28 pm
- x 798
Re: Vikings at Rams
It's not wishful thinking but those 2 pieces are hard to find. No team will let a shutdown corner walk. Once they lose their top level skill they will be on the market. PP who we signed is an example. Same for the safety. Kewsi tried draft one and missed badly. Instead of cheap talent we needed to hunt the FA bin. That's not cheap and it's not always a hit either.Angels Wings wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2025 2:02 pmNo problem rebuilding the secondary because quite frankly, it sucked. I would like to have a thumper/ball hawk at safety and a shutdown corner on either end, but that is wishful thinking
-
- All Pro Elite Player
- Posts: 1315
- Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 8:52 pm
- Location: Charleston, SC
- x 35
Re: Vikings at Rams
Not at all.VikingLord wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2025 6:05 pm Do you guys really believe that KOC is at fault for what happened to the offense the last two games?.
I mentioned four things: O line, Sam holding the ball too long, KOC and play calling, and defense giving up chunks.
The not making adjustments applies to each of those.
What you say here basically covers this too.
"He has been a little stubborn at times as a playcaller, some of his clock management is questionable, and he has been slow to adjust in some situations. "
Fan of:
Hanahan Hawks
South Carolina Gamecocks
Minnesota Vikings
Charleston Battery
FC Bayern München
USMNT & Die Nationalmannschaft
Hanahan Hawks
South Carolina Gamecocks
Minnesota Vikings
Charleston Battery
FC Bayern München
USMNT & Die Nationalmannschaft
-
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 9839
- Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
- x 1886
Re: Vikings at Rams
DJ Reed of the Jets is a shutdown corner and an impending free agent. I have a hard time believing he wouldn’t want to get out of the Woody Johnson 3-ring circus.CharVike wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2025 3:34 pmIt's not wishful thinking but those 2 pieces are hard to find. No team will let a shutdown corner walk. Once they lose their top level skill they will be on the market. PP who we signed is an example. Same for the safety. Kewsi tried draft one and missed badly. Instead of cheap talent we needed to hunt the FA bin. That's not cheap and it's not always a hit either.Angels Wings wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2025 2:02 pm
No problem rebuilding the secondary because quite frankly, it sucked. I would like to have a thumper/ball hawk at safety and a shutdown corner on either end, but that is wishful thinking

Go ahead. I dare you.
Underestimate this man.
-
- Hall of Fame Candidate
- Posts: 3698
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
- x 644
Re: Vikings at Rams
I just don't understand how you can argue it is the play calling, when good plays are called and the QB just doesn't execute.Barry wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2025 9:07 pmNot at all.VikingLord wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2025 6:05 pm Do you guys really believe that KOC is at fault for what happened to the offense the last two games?.
I mentioned four things: O line, Sam holding the ball too long, KOC and play calling, and defense giving up chunks.
The not making adjustments applies to each of those.
What you say here basically covers this too.
"He has been a little stubborn at times as a playcaller, some of his clock management is questionable, and he has been slow to adjust in some situations. "
Here is one of those quick hitting screens people wanted him to "adjust" to:

Darnold takes a sack on this play, which seems impossible based on JJ being open with two blockers ahead of him in good position to pick up a first, if not more. That is basically his only read on this play, and he doesn't throw it. How do you play call around QB play like that?
Here is Darnold's interception:

He throws it to Addison where the arrow is going, but Nailor, circled in green, is wide open. That isn't on the Oline, that isn't on the play call. That isn't on the receivers. That is the QB.
He makes those two plays that any other QB in the playoffs this weekend make and there is a good chance two drives that ended in 3 total points end in TDs and maybe we are in this game.
KOC may not be good enough to win with his play calling in the playoffs, he was in his first playoff game where the plays were executed until the last drive where Cousins threw a bad throw to an open Osborn before checking down on 4th down, and we don't know if he was good enough in this game, because the QB couldn't execute simple screens. I would say he is still unknown on if he could take the right team to the Super Bowl, or if he is just a really good regular season coach like Denny was.
-
- Hall of Fame Candidate
- Posts: 3698
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
- x 644
Re: Vikings at Rams
DJ Moore is a pretty good WR, and Robbie Chosen was a 1k yard receiver the year before Darnold went to the Panthers. They were good enough that a broken Teddy Bridgewater had that offense top 10 in yards per drive and above average in scoring per drive. Darnold takes over and those numbers dropped to bottom 10.
Sometimes we see what we want to see when watching tape, but 6 of his 9 sacks occurred after 4.4 seconds, and considering the slowest QB's TTT is 3.3, the fastest is usually around 2.2, those 6 are probably on the QB.
None of the sacks occurred in under 3 seconds.
-
- All Pro Elite Player
- Posts: 1315
- Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 3:31 pm
- x 99
Re: Vikings at Rams
StumpHunter wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2025 9:25 amI just don't understand how you can argue it is the play calling, when good plays are called and the QB just doesn't execute.Barry wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2025 9:07 pm
Not at all.
I mentioned four things: O line, Sam holding the ball too long, KOC and play calling, and defense giving up chunks.
The not making adjustments applies to each of those.
What you say here basically covers this too.
"He has been a little stubborn at times as a playcaller, some of his clock management is questionable, and he has been slow to adjust in some situations. "
Here is one of those quick hitting screens people wanted him to "adjust" to:
Darnold takes a sack on this play, which seems impossible based on JJ being open with two blockers ahead of him in good position to pick up a first, if not more. That is basically his only read on this play, and he doesn't throw it. How do you play call around QB play like that?
Here is Darnold's interception:
He throws it to Addison where the arrow is going, but Nailor, circled in green, is wide open. That isn't on the Oline, that isn't on the play call. That isn't on the receivers. That is the QB.
He makes those two plays that any other QB in the playoffs this weekend make and there is a good chance two drives that ended in 3 total points end in TDs and maybe we are in this game.
KOC may not be good enough to win with his play calling in the playoffs, he was in his first playoff game where the plays were executed until the last drive where Cousins threw a bad throw to an open Osborn before checking down on 4th down, and we don't know if he was good enough in this game, because the QB couldn't execute simple screens. I would say he is still unknown on if he could take the right team to the Super Bowl, or if he is just a really good regular season coach like Denny was.
I was yelling at my tv the majority of the game over this. Most fans are critical of our coaches ability to make adjustments. During the last rams game KOC called screens to wrs, flats to the hb and we watched the qb miss them all. At that point the only correct adjustment is to start the back up qb doesn’t matter how much you scheme up.
“I remember my mistakes more than my success.” - Adrian Peterson