Tom Pelissero Talks Vikings with VikeFans.com (Interview)

[dead_poet]

http://vikefans.com/index.php?%2Fpage%2 ... nscom-r167

* Thoughts on Chris Kluwe beyond the claims he has made against Mike Preifer
* His dust-up with Jerome Simpson
* Will Chad Greenway play in the Middle?
* The defensive scheme changes
* Difference between Frazier and Zimmer styles (base on his eyewitness accounts at practice)
* Can Matt Kalil rebound in 2014?
* Anthony Barr and Brian Robison with a hand on the ground and dropping into pass coverage
* Is Teddy Bridgewater a Franchise-type QB or simply an upgrade?
* Where is Antoine Winfield?
* What happened in the Josh Freeman experiment?
* How will the North Shake out?

[S197]

Thanks for the link. For those who don't want to listen to the full thing I think you can skip the first 12 minutes or so and still get the meat of what's relevant to this upcoming season. I think the most interesting thing he mentioned was certain players showing up to practice last year in shells because they didn't want to practice in pads. I'd be curious to know who and how many players did these types of things.

[Texas Vike]

Thanks for the link. For those who don't want to listen to the full thing I think you can skip the first 12 minutes or so and still get the meat of what's relevant to this upcoming season. I think the most interesting thing he mentioned was certain players showing up to practice last year in shells because they didn't want to practice in pads. I'd be curious to know who and how many players did these types of things.

Agreed. That was very interesting to hear. The impression I have of Frazier is a bit different after listening to this. I had suspicions, but this solidified them.

Really good interview, thanks for posting it.

[jackal]

interesting ... puts Simpson in a negative light ...

[Eli]

I tend to agree with Pelissero's opinion about who's going to be the starting QB in week one. Unless Teddy Bridgewater really blows everyone away during the preseason, it's going to be Matt Cassel. The main reason being that the defense is going to be a question mark, and it could take some time to come together, if it does come together this season. You don't want to put a rookie QB into situations where the team is down by several TDs and opposing defenses go all out rushing the QB. Let Cassel deal with that.

[Eli]

Best part of the interview, though:

Asked why, although he admires Leslie Frazier, he thinks Mike Zimmer is the right coach for the Vikings:

Well, I think that you have long-running drama that's taken place at Winter Park. And this is not to say the Leslie Frazier could not have had success - I mean, they were a playoff team in 2012 - but, there was just this constant nonsense that went on behind the scenes. And it's really something that, frankly, you just follow the Vikings for the past, what, twenty, thirty years, there's always been something. I mean they've always been among the league leaders in sort of weird stuff happening off the field. They haven't necessarily had a massive scandal surrounding them, but you know you would think... You know, look again at the 2010 season. You could make a top ten list and leave some amazingly crazy things off that list.

Among the league leaders in weird stuff for twenty or thirty years!!! Oh, man, that's brutal. But it's all too true.

[Cliff]

Best part of the interview, though:

Asked why, although he admires Leslie Frazier, he thinks Mike Zimmer is the right coach for the Vikings:
Among the league leaders in weird stuff for twenty or thirty years!!! Oh, man, that's brutal. But it's all too true.

I'm not sure how Mike Zimmer "fixes" that, exactly. Maybe any "on the field" stuff would be fixed, but would he have canceled players renting out a boat and inviting the other guys in what would be billed as a way to bring them closer with their teammates? I doubt it.

It seems like people want to believe that these coaches have more power than they do. Heck, the guy who most people probably consider the best coach in the league had a player on his team that looks to be responsible for multiple homicides and other gang-related activity.

[Mothman]

I'm not sure how Mike Zimmer "fixes" that, exactly. Maybe any "on the field" stuff would be fixed, but would he have canceled players renting out a boat and inviting the other guys in what would be billed as a way to bring them closer with their teammates? I doubt it.

I doubt it too and I had the same question you did (how does Zimmer "fix" that?). After listening to the interview with Pelissero (thanks for the link dead_poet), I came away with the impression that he thinks having a coach hired by the GM will make a difference. I listened to it a few days ago so I may not be recalling everything accurately but I think he sees the difference as an ability to avoid weird situations like the Freeman mess last year. Frazier and Spielman clearly weren't on the same page about that. I still think Frazier either started Freeman as an act of self-preservation to placate management (ie" he thought that's what they wanted him to do) or he started him as an act of defiance. Either way, it may be easier to avoid a situation like that if the head coach is the GM's "guy".

I also got the impression that Pelissero thought there were some issues with Frazier's difficulty bringing in coordinators with a higher pedigree. He seemed to think the players had to be "sold" on some of those coaches.

Personally, I think winning addresses a lot of issues and the best way to address the off-the-field stuff is for the team to to do their best to avoid signing players who are likely to give them problems.

It seems like people want to believe that these coaches have more power than they do. Heck, the people who most people probably consider the best coach in the league had a player on his team that looks to be responsible for multiple homicides and other gang-related activity.

Last Fall, I heard Colin Cowherd (who may be the biggest blowhard in all of sports broadcasting) talking about some team's off-the-field issues and he stated that something like that would never happen in a Bill Belichick-run locker room. He went on about how much Belichick is able to control his players, all the while completely ignoring the fact that Hernandez had been arrested as a murder suspect! It was a hilarious example of utterly clueless broadcasting.

[Eli]

I'm not sure how Mike Zimmer "fixes" that, exactly. Maybe any "on the field" stuff would be fixed, but would he have canceled players renting out a boat and inviting the other guys in what would be billed as a way to bring them closer with their teammates? I doubt it.

It seems like people want to believe that these coaches have more power than they do. Heck, the people who most people probably consider the best coach in the league had a player on his team that looks to be responsible for multiple homicides and other gang-related activity.

I think a general attitude adjustment coming from Zimmer and a genuinely professional coaching staff could go a long way, both on and off the field, away from the weirdness that's been the norm in Minnesota for too long. We'll see. No, Zimmer can't keep guys from renting a boat and filling it with hookers, but I do think guys are much more likely now to think twice about it, unlike when a clown like Mike Tice, or a milquetoast like Leslie Frazier were in charge.

[Texas Vike]

I listened to it a few days ago so I may not be recalling everything accurately but I think he sees the difference as an ability to avoid weird situations like the Freeman mess last year. Frazier and Spielman clearly weren't on the same page about that. I still think Frazier either started Freeman as an act of self-preservation to placate management (ie" he thought that's what they wanted him to do) or he started him as an act of defiance. Either way, it may be easier to avoid a situation like that if the head coach is the GM's "guy".

I also got the impression that Pelissero thought there were some issues with Frazier's difficulty bringing in coordinators with a higher pedigree. He seemed to think the players had to be "sold" on some of those coaches.

Yes. This was the most insightful part for me. I feel like Frazier just didn't have the gravitas and reputation necessary to get coordinators, and even players at times, to fully buy in. The example about players showing up to practice in shorts instead of pads, in spite of Frazier's wishes, spoke volumes to me.

You're right that winning is the best ointment for all ails in the NFL. The notion that Zimmer is doing things differently or better means little to nothing until the results appear.

[Mothman]

Yes. This was the most insightful part for me. I feel like Frazier just didn't have the gravitas and reputation necessary to get coordinators, and even players at times, to fully buy in. The example about players showing up to practice in shorts instead of pads, in spite of Frazier's wishes, spoke volumes to me.

I'm not inclined to blame that on Frazier's personality, reputation or a lack of gravitas. I think fans who refer to him as soft, a milquetoast, etc. are mistaking a calm demeanor for weakness when they aren't the same thing at all. Personally, I think an unstable contract situation was likely the big problem. The Vikes never made much of a commitment to Frazier in the first place. Players and prospective assistant coaches knew he wasn't Spielman's hire. He only had a 3 year deal so, for example, when he wanted to hire a new DC after 2011, he had difficulty. When the Vikes didn't give him a genuine extension after 2012, they left him in an even more difficult position.

I thought Pelissero said they showed up in shells instead of full pads, not shorts, but either way, I'm betting that happened last year after the team got off to such a bad start that it became clear the coaching staff was as good as gone. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the players who did it were also players who knew they wouldn't be back with the team in 2014.

With the Zimmer hire, the Vikes not only have an actual GM in place to make the hire but hopefully, they've actually made a 4 year commitment to Zimmer. That reminds me: were the details of his contract ever revealed? How much of a commitment did they make to Zimmer?

You're right that winning is the best ointment for all ails in the NFL. The notion that Zimmer is doing things differently or better means little to nothing until the results appear.

Exactly.

[dead_poet]

That reminds me: were the details of his contract ever revealed? How much of a commitment did they make to Zimmer?

That's a good question. I don't think they've ever been released.

[Texas Vike]

I'm not inclined to blame that on Frazier's personality, reputation or a lack of gravitas. I think fans who refer to him as soft, a milquetoast, etc. are mistaking a calm demeanor for weakness when they aren't the same thing at all. Personally, I think an unstable contract situation was likely the big problem. The Vikes never made much of a commitment to Frazier in the first place. Players and prospective assistant coaches knew he wasn't Spielman's hire. He only had a 3 year deal so, for example, when he wanted to hire a new DC after 2011, he had difficulty. When the Vikes didn't give him a genuine extension after 2012, they left him in an even more difficult position.

I figured that was so. I agree with you on a lot of takes, Jim, but we differ a bit on how we evaluate Frazier. Pelissero's interview, IMO, paints a picture of a coach whose resume and way of going about things did not command respect. Whether that is due to potential personality flaws, his contract situation, his relationship with Spielman, the conditions under which he was hired, or some other factor is difficult to parse out. Though we may not agree on Frazier completely, I always appreciate your sensitivity to the complexity of things. Most posters/fans base strong opinions on minuscule evidence or superficial impressions. Fittingly, their opinions change like the wind.

I thought Pelissero said they showed up in shells instead of full pads, not shorts, but either way, I'm betting that happened last year after the team got off to such a bad start that it became clear the coaching staff was as good as gone. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the players who did it were also players who knew they wouldn't be back with the team in 2014.

Might have been shells, but the important point was that it was a gesture or act that undermined Frazier's authority. It would be interesting to know who did it. One thing that always impressed me about Frazier is that his teams didn't just give in when a season wasn't going well. He may have run the blandest and least effective cover 2 D in the league, but I never questioned his ability to get his players to play hard for him even when there was little to play for, so this detail was a bit surprising to me. I also don't think it's just anecdotal evidence plucked to really work an angle. I get the sense that Pelissero truly thought that this instance was representative of a greater underlying issue with Frazier and company.

With the Zimmer hire, the Vikes not only have an actual GM in place to make the hire but hopefully, they've actually made a 4 year commitment to Zimmer. That reminds me: were the details of his contract ever revealed? How much of a commitment did they make to Zimmer?
Exactly.

Good point. The very fact that Rick CHOSE Zimmer sets up a kind of accountability and eagerness to work together that did not seem to exist with Frazier. The Freeman situation seems to me to illustrate just how out of synch the GM and coaching staff were last year. I'd love to know more about what exactly happened there. If the details ever come out, I'm sure it'll be in 20 years when I don't care anymore! Oh well.

[Mothman]

I figured that was so. I agree with you on a lot of takes, Jim, but we differ a bit on how we evaluate Frazier. Pelissero's interview, IMO, paints a picture of a coach whose resume and way of going about things did not command respect. Whether that is due to potential personality flaws, his contract situation, his relationship with Spielman, the conditions under which he was hired, or some other factor is difficult to parse out. Though we may not agree on Frazier completely, I always appreciate your sensitivity to the complexity of things. Most posters/fans base strong opinions on minuscule evidence or superficial impressions. Fittingly, their opinions change like the wind.

Thank you and right back at ya...

It's that "sensitivity to the complexity of things" that leads me to disagree with your conclusion that Frazier's resume and way of going about things did not command respect. There ahve been a instances where his players expressed their respect for him so while I agree that players not showing up in the proper equipment indicates a lack of respect, we don't know when that happened, who did it, etc. so I think there's insufficient information from which to draw a sweeping conclusion.

To elaborate: once a coach is viewed as as a lame duck, once it becomes clear that he will be fired, I think the degree of respect he receives from his players speaks at least as much to their character as to anything else. Players who attempt to take advantage of such a situation aren't showing much professional integrity.

Anyway, if Frazier couldn't command respect from his players, I doubt he would have even been promoted to head coach in the first place and I see no way he could have guided the team to a 10 win season without their respect. Quite a few players said it was his leadership that helped them finish strong in 2012 so while he may have lost the respect of some players during the course of the 2013, I suspect it was the situation and the frustration of losing that led to that. Without more information, I find it difficult to come to any firm conclusion but they were still playing pretty hard for him late last season. That says something.

To me, it seems more likely that it was Frazier's assistants who had difficulty commanding sufficient respect. There have been reports that suggest as much and players openly criticized Alan Williams last year. Of course, that's the sort of thing that happens when teams lose, jobs are on the line, etc. As we said earlier, winning solves a lot of problems.

Might have been shells, but the important point was that it was a gesture or act that undermined Frazier's authority. It would be interesting to know who did it. One thing that always impressed me about Frazier is that his teams didn't just give in when a season wasn't going well. He may have run the blandest and least effective cover 2 D in the league, but I never questioned his ability to get his players to play hard for him even when there was little to play for, so this detail was a bit surprising to me. I also don't think it's just anecdotal evidence plucked to really work an angle. I get the sense that Pelissero truly thought that this instance was representative of a greater underlying issue with Frazier and company.

I think so too but when it happened seems very relevant to me and I'm also curious about how Frazier handled it when it did happen. I don't think Pelissero touched on that but it seems like a pretty relevant detail. Were the players disciplined? Was the problem resolved and did those players fall back in line?

Good point. The very fact that Rick CHOSE Zimmer sets up a kind of accountability and eagerness to work together that did not seem to exist with Frazier. The Freeman situation seems to me to illustrate just how out of synch the GM and coaching staff were last year. I'd love to know more about what exactly happened there. If the details ever come out, I'm sure it'll be in 20 years when I don't care anymore! Oh well.

I'd really like to know all the dirty details on that Freeman debacle. To me, it sure seemed like Frazier just stuck his middle finger up at management and said, "Here you go! If you guys want to put me in this position, I'll give you what you want. We'll let this mess of a QB take us down in a winnable game and then we can move on and you can let me coach". He'd never say it but Frazier may have seen playing Freeman for that entire Giants game, despite how terribly he performed, as the only way he could seize some control and make it clear that it was his team until they fired him. The fact that he just buried Freeman on the bench after that just reinforces my theory (for me) but perhaps I'm way off base.

The way he handled that may also have backfired and hurt the level of respect his team had for him.

Whatever happened, the situation clearly became strained and dysfunctional at some point. The Vikes moved on and now that they finally have an actual GM who has hired the head coach he wants (when was the last time that happened), maybe the team can actually get down to the business of winning consistently!

[Eli]

I'd really like to know all the dirty details on that Freeman debacle. To me, it sure seemed like Frazier just stuck his middle finger up at management and said, "Here you go! If you guys want to put me in this position, I'll give you what you want. We'll let this mess of a QB take us down in a winnable game and then we can move on and you can let me coach".

Or, Spielman said to him "See what this kid can do for us. Monday. Just make it happen." and Frazier rolled over and did it. I doubt that Frazier has ever exhibited half the sack you give him credit for. We'll likely never know, because Frazier will never talk about it. He's just not wired that way. And it certainly does Spielman no good to talk about it if he was the idiot who made the call, and is almost as damning if indeed it was Frazier throwing it in his face.

"Dysfunctional" is a gross understatement.