Thoughts about the debacle

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

losperros
Commissioner
Posts: 10041
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Location: Burbank, California

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by losperros »

Mothman wrote:Any thoughts or observations about the run defense?
I don't know what to think, aside from believing as I have that the Vikings defense is presently good but have a ways to go to be great. The run defense was a concern of mine coming into the season. As the season progressed, I thought the run defense showed improvement. But it looked vulnerable against the Pack. Maybe it was that way because of the focus on Rogers, which I can somewhat understand.

What's strange is the Vikings D was tackling well during their winning streak but they were blowing tackles against the Packers. They didn't read and react against the run like they were during their winning streak either. So there was an overall dip in fundamentals and team communication. I don't know why. Did the Vikings run defense have an off game? Or did Eddie Lacy finally find his groove? Or both?

One thing to note is that the Vikings as a team haven't played well before a nationwide TV audience this year. They sucked against the Niners and played beneath themselves against Pack. I don't know what that means but it's an undeniably weird dynamic.
losperros
Commissioner
Posts: 10041
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Location: Burbank, California

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by losperros »

VikingLord wrote:I don't know if that is true. Like I said, against San Fran the cameras showed Wright running a deep route and being wide open while Bridgewater had good protection, but the ball never came out. Diggs was the guy who made the circus catch on another deep ball. I think Turner has multiple guys who can get deep at the WR position and I would be shocked if his plays are designed to send just one particular receiver on deep routes. Maybe the fact Wallace seems to be the only guy has more to do with Wallace and his speed/ability to fool defenders and thus more consistently gain separation deep than it does Turner's play design.
I agree with most of what you're saying, Edward, especially about Bridgewater and the deep throws (and when he misreads a D or doesn't see an open receiver). Where we disagree is about Turner. There has to be accountability on his part. You can be shocked by the thought that Turner is close-minded about the WRs but I think it's obvious that Turner limits himself with his own dogmatism, and I think it's hurting the team.

I've said enough about this. My stand is that the passing offense is dysfunctional for a number of reasons and needs fixing.
J. Kapp 11
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9772
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
x 1857

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by J. Kapp 11 »

The only groove Eddie Lacy has found is the little crease that forms when you squeeze a Krispy Kreme chocolate long john just right.

In seriousness, the main difference between last week's defense and the previous three weeks was the addition of Eric Kendricks back into the Mike position in place of Chad Greenway in the Vikings' bade defense. Don't know if that had much to do with it, but Greenway has always played the run pretty well, while Kendricks is young and was coming off an injury. The tackle numbers don't tell that tale (Kendricks had 4 vs. Green Bay, Greenway had 4 vs. Oakland) but that doesn't always tell the whole story. I seem to recall EK overpursuing a few times.

It's all just spaghetti on the wall. Really don't know if that had anything to do with it. It may just be that we had a bad day tackling, and that's all there is to it.
Last edited by J. Kapp 11 on Tue Nov 24, 2015 2:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Go ahead. I dare you.
Underestimate this man.
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by dead_poet »

Mothman wrote:Any thoughts or observations about the run defense?
Missed tackles were the main culprit on Lacy. I don't know why Lacy seems to burn us, but he does. Starks was held to 1.8 YPC on 8 carries. The run defense has been great outside of week 1 and last week, which I take to signify those two weeks are the aberration, not the norm. I'm not concerned.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
x 117

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by mansquatch »

Mothman wrote:Any thoughts or observations about the run defense?
I think it just came down to a lot of missed tackles. Zimmer gave some good answers on this topic in his presser yesterday. He talked about how in a way this game was similar to the SF game, but also different. I'm paraphrasing here, but basically he said in the SF game guys were not where they were supposed to be (wrong spots) vs. in this game they were in the right spot but they were not making the tackle properly and it resulted in the big runs from Lacy.

I'm not Zimmer, but my eye test agrees with what he was saying for as little as that is worth. It seemed like Lacy either ran for 10 yards or 1 yard. Given what we've seen so far this season, I think we can assume that this will get fixed by Sunday.

The OL issues with blocking are another big problem, however, I think they are fixable in the running game. Going into that game we had the #1 RB in football which doesn't happen just because of #28. (although he certainly helps.) GB also wasn't the best defensive front we've faced, not when STL and DEN were already on the schedule. So IMO, that side of things should also be fixable.

The penalties were also not something we've seen in the volume we saw on Sunday. I'd say this is also a fixable issue.

Pass Protection is something else entirely, but this is a well discussed and known ongoing problem. Of the deficiencies on Sunday, this was the least surprising IMO.

Zimmer talked about getting back to who they are what they do well in his presser. I think if we can fix the above fixable things then we will be highly competitive on Sunday against the Falcons.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by dead_poet »

Mothman wrote:Bridgewater's under pressure too often and most of the responsibility for that is on the protection. However, he also needs to help his own cause by improving his ability to recognize where blitz pressure is likely to come from (Aikman pointed this out during the broadcast) and by being decisive and getting rid of the ball more quickly.
He's normally adequate in this department (and from what I understand it's a strength), especially considering his inexperience. There's one thing identifying it, there's another picking it up (in addition to adequately picking up the regular rush).
On Sunday, his own play sometimes compounded problems created by the pressure.
I'll agree with that, but for me that's like worrying about a slight rain when there's a Loadholt-sized hole in your boat. One thing that's hard for me is when I can't see the receivers in relation to the pressure. Is there anyone to throw to? If so, how often does he have a receiver he misses by the time the pressure gets to him? This is part of the reason why I'm absolving Teddy somewhat. I can see the glaring errors from the offensive line. I can't always see Teddy not pulling the trigger on an open receiver. It's just my assumption that he's at fault at some times for not being decisive before the pressure gets to him.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
x 117

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by mansquatch »

One thing I've never understood is why they do not try to hit AP in stride in the passing game. You've got arguably the hardest RB in the game to bring down, why not hit him in stride via a quick oass and see if he can't make 1 DB miss to take it to the house. Same thing with CP84. Those two players seem custom built for such a play, yet we never see it.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by Mothman »

dead_poet wrote: Missed tackles were the main culprit on Lacy. I don't know why Lacy seems to burn us, but he does. Starks was held to 1.8 YPC on 8 carries. The run defense has been great outside of week 1 and last week, which I take to signify those two weeks are the aberration, not the norm. I'm not concerned.
I guess we see it differently. I think the missed tackles probably concern all of us but I don't think the run defense has been great outside of week 1 and last week. They allowed 144 rushing yards to the Broncos and they've now allowed well over 100 yards rushing in two of their last 3 games. Admittedly, the Rams are a very good running team and the Vikes managed to do better against Gurley than anybody else had to that point but the 160 yards they gave up on the ground in that game still isn't good. I'm inclined to think this is an area in which they're still a pretty vulnerable against an opponent with the personnel and determination to stick with the run.
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by dead_poet »

@brettAnderson87] Working on an article regarding Teddy holding onto the ball too long. Watching the All-22 now. Through the first quarter, avg. time 1.72 sec
@Andy_Benoit Film: #Vikings after opening series went to more deep-dropping play-action stuff. #Packers coverage superb. Pass rush also factored at times
@Andrew_Garda Andrew Garda Retweeted Andy Benoit Definitely what I have seen as well so far.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by Mothman »

dead_poet wrote:He's normally adequate in this department (and from what I understand it's a strength), especially considering his inexperience. There's one thing identifying it, there's another picking it up (in addition to adequately picking up the regular rush).
It doesn't seem like one of his strengths to me. It looks like something he clearly needs to work on.
On Sunday, his own play sometimes compounded problems created by the pressure.
I'll agree with that, but for me that's like worrying about a slight rain when there's a Loadholt-sized hole in your boat. One thing that's hard for me is when I can't see the receivers in relation to the pressure. Is there anyone to throw to? If so, how often does he have a receiver he misses by the time the pressure gets to him? This is part of the reason why I'm absolving Teddy somewhat. I can see the glaring errors from the offensive line. I can't always see Teddy not pulling the trigger on an open receiver. It's just my assumption that he's at fault at some times for not being decisive before the pressure gets to him.[/quote]

It's a correct assumption but there are definitely times when he has nowhere to go with the ball too.

All of this is just a little too familiar to me. :( I'm seeing more and more of the same problems Ponder had in Bridgewater's game. Thankfully, he takes better care of the ball but I still don't like where this seems to be heading.
The Breeze
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4016
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 8:14 pm
Location: So. Utah

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by The Breeze »

I feel it's really easy for us to overlook how linked the running game is to passing game and vice versa.
The Vikes shutting down the run in recent weeks is helped by the fact that they were able to get pressure on the good passing attacks they faced (Lions\Raiders who aren't good ground teams) and when they faced a good back (rams) there wasn't much to wrry about in the QB they faced.
The Packers run game is at it's best when Lacey is healthy and I would guess that Rodgers' abilities has much to do with that over the course of a game. The guy can connect with receivers all over the field from many throwing positions. Defenses are back on their heels some.
The Vikes are still trying to strike that tone on their offense.
-
I think the run D suffers when we face a smart QB that handles pressure and has a good RB because our LBs are really young and still learning.
-
I truly believe that a healthy AD leads the league, or is close to it, on any team in this league, given enough carries. Put him on the Packers or some other team with a potent passing attack he won't need the carries. The fact that he leads the league right now says more about Minny's reliance on him than there being anything special, at all, about the blocking up front. Lineman are paid to open holes...Peterson is gifted at exploiting basic openings into very large gains.
-
This line is not that good. TBs mechanics and downfield accuracy are not that good and niether is the way Norv is utilizing the talent of this unit vs it's physical shortcomings. I really believe that Musgrave and Bevell would be getting much more outa this group, which is weird to say.
I think the consistencey in the run defense is just a matter of time and taking their lumps...provided they stay healthy.
Opinion and such~
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24788
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
x 108

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by dead_poet »

Mothman wrote:I guess we see it differently.
We definitely do. Outside of week 1 and this past Sunday the Vikings' rush defense has been mostly hurt by one 72-yard TD (Hillman) and six WR rushes (Austin).
I think the missed tackles probably concern all of us but I don't think the run defense has been great outside of week 1 and last week. They allowed 144 rushing yards to the Broncos and they've now allowed well over 100 yards rushing in two of their last 3 games. Admittedly, the Rams are a very good running team and the Vikes managed to do better against Gurley than anybody else had to that point but the 160 yards they gave up on the ground in that game still isn't good. I'm inclined to think this is an area in which they're still a pretty vulnerable against an opponent with the personnel and determination to stick with the run.
The reason some teams haven't had the determination to stick with the rush is because the Vikings have been doing a good job of shut it down. Aside from Hillman's ONE 72-yard TD, they allowed 10/31 (3.1 YPC) and 11/43 (3.9) for 74 yards in that game.

As you pointed out, they held Gurley to 89 rushing yards on 24 carries (3.7 YPC). Prior to that Gurley was averaging 6.6 YPC and 142 yards/game. That's significant.

I'm not saying they're quite to the level of the Williams Wall days yet, but they've shown they can shut down a running game and be dominant. They don't allow many rushing TDs, either (5 total, which is T-7 fewest in the league). Sunday was the most frustrated I've been with the unit since week 1.
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly
Purple Reign
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1292
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 11:17 pm
Location: St. Paul, MN
x 6

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by Purple Reign »

J. Kapp 11 wrote: Very true. But remember, Brady has been doing this for 15 years. Right now, TB needs protection, and he's simply not getting it.
Not disputing that at all - I was just commenting on Jordy's belief that NE hasn't recently had a sub par OL. Brady has the experience to overcome a bad OL so it may seem like they are good in that area.
Jordysghost
Packers Suck
Posts: 2992
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:40 pm

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by Jordysghost »

Purple Reign wrote: You have to look no further back than this year. New England's offensive line is in shambles because of injuries but they are still undefeated. Did you see Monday night's game? I think Brady got knocked down about 12 times but only got sacked once and that's only because he gets rid of the ball so quick.
Yea, but have they ever ranked out of the top 15 in almost any of his years as the starter? Alot of guys get the ball out quick, Brady is no exception but I still don't think he has had the dubious honor of having to compete with sub par O lines for much of his career.
"Follow my lead today, whos goona be the big dog with me?" - Aaron Rodgers, February 6th, 2011
losperros
Commissioner
Posts: 10041
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2003 9:47 am
Location: Burbank, California

Re: Thoughts about the debacle

Post by losperros »

The Breeze wrote:I truly believe that a healthy AD leads the league, or is close to it, on any team in this league, given enough carries. Put him on the Packers or some other team with a potent passing attack he won't need the carries. The fact that he leads the league right now says more about Minny's reliance on him than there being anything special, at all, about the blocking up front. Lineman are paid to open holes...Peterson is gifted at exploiting basic openings into very large gains.
-
This line is not that good. TBs mechanics and downfield accuracy are not that good and neither is the way Norv is utilizing the talent of this unit vs it's physical shortcomings. I really believe that Musgrave and Bevell would be getting much more outa this group, which is weird to say.
I think the consistency in the run defense is just a matter of time and taking their lumps...provided they stay healthy.
Opinion and such~
Good post. I can't believe that I miss Musgrave's ability to utilize a player's strengths, which is why he got so much out of Patterson in a short time. Musgrave wasn't great at adjusting during games but I liked his approach in other areas. And yes, at this point I'd take him over a tired out Turner.
Post Reply