Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakening

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

fiestavike
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4959
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
x 395

Re: Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakeni

Post by fiestavike »

Mothman wrote:
Let's not mince words: the line has been bad thus far. Hopefully, they'll get better but after 3 games, they appear to be a genuine liability.
Again! :wallbang:

They do look marginally better than they did last year, but the step forward in pass protections seems to be accompanied by at least a half step back in run blocking.
"You like that!"
-- Cap'n Spazz Cousins
VikingHoard
Backup
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:26 pm

Re: Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakeni

Post by VikingHoard »

FirstAndTen wrote:I guess one way to look at it is "keeping this up" might mean 16-0 and regressing might mean 12-4.

I'm ok with that.
Exactly. What does "sustainable" mean anyway? I like purple kool-aid as much as the next guy, but at no time have I thought it realistic to expect us to sustain being unbeaten for the season. The article is right that it isn't realistic for a team to expect to be able to win through special teams and defensive scoring week after week. But if we can only do it for a few weeks this season than I'd pick the weeks when we're plagued with injuries, fielding a fresh QB whose had very little time to learn/work with the offense, trying to figure out who we are offensively after having just lost AP for the year, and playing some of the toughest games on our schedule. Not to mention while our OL is still in the early "gelling" phase.

So now we face the Giants and then a JJ Watt-less Houston, and after the bye week we should have more of our starters back as we take on the Eagles, Bears, Lions, and Redskins. I'm not worried. I see no reason to expect a rude awakening in this time. By then, I imagine we'll be running things a lot more smoothly and might be 7-2 at worst. If we hadn't found ways to win these early games, at that time we might've been looking at being 4-5. Go Zimmer!
This signature predicted the great 2014 - 2025 Vikings dynasty!
Nunin
Pro Bowl Elite Player
Posts: 567
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2016 12:40 am

Re: Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakeni

Post by Nunin »

Lat year aside... I thought there was noticeable improvent in both run and pass between weeks 1 and 3 of this year. Throw in the QB shuffle and the better than average defenses they've faced and it may soon be safe to say that they have weathered the storm to a satis factory degree. Houston poses a big challange even without Watt IMO.
And I feel funny saying I saw a noticeable improvement, but it speaks to how truly inept they looked week 1. Last week was nothing to hang their hats on but it was a step in the right direction considering the defense they were up against.
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakeni

Post by Mothman »

fiestavike wrote: Again! :wallbang:

They do look marginally better than they did last year, but the step forward in pass protections seems to be accompanied by at least a half step back in run blocking.
I know that's your take but I don't think there's been much of a step forward in pass protection and there's clearly been much more than a "half step back in run blocking". They averaged 4.7 ypc last season, good for second best in the league (tied with KC). This year, they're averaging 2.1 yards per carry. That's rock bottom. It's terrible, more like a step off a cliff than a half step back and "again", it's not due to a lack of talent in the backfield. Only one other team is averaging less than 3.3 ypc and the Vikes are over a full yard under that low bar.

Splash it with purple paint and dress it up however you like, it's bad.
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4959
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
x 395

Re: Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakeni

Post by fiestavike »

Mothman wrote: I know that's your take but I don't think there's been much of a step forward in pass protection and there's clearly been much more than a "half step back in run blocking". They averaged 4.7 ypc last season, good for second best in the league (tied with KC). This year, they're averaging 2.1 yards per carry. That's rock bottom. It's terrible, more like a step off a cliff than a half step back. Only one other team is averaging less than 3.3 ypc and the Vikes are over a full yard under that low bar.

Splash it with purple paint and dress it up however you like, it's bad.
I don't put much into the YPC through 3 games. They've been bad, Peterson was bad, and I don't think they were very effective run blocking last year either. Whatever the YPC, they couldn't consistently impose their will in the running game at all, and mostly got shoved around. So far, that's been even a little worse this year.

As far as pass protection, the center of the line has cearly been better in my view, and I think the change in technique at tackle has, so far, provided an almost adequate pocket. Sam needs to take better advantage of that. Its not pretty, but at least its there, and I'd call that a step forward.
"You like that!"
-- Cap'n Spazz Cousins
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
x 117

Re: Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakeni

Post by mansquatch »

I thought the last half against Carolina was their best 2 quarters of football. That is saying something since Carolina's front 7 is pretty good. However, they have to continue to prove it. Jim is exactly right in saying they have been horrible through three games.

I still think we are seeing the low point of the season, due in part to some reasons that were known before the injury bug hit. (60% starting in new positions, two completely new players not on the team in 2015.) However, I'm not convinced there is much of a ceiling. Still it is worth asking if this line become average instead of awful, would that be enough to win the title in combination with our D and Special Teams? Time will tell.

Here is a point for optimism: Right now we are allowing on avg. 13.33 points per game. By comparison, the 2015 DEN unit allowed 18.5 PA, the 2013 SEA defense allowed 14.43 points per game, the '85 Bears allowed 12.4, and the 2000 Ravens allowed 10.3. Obviously there is a lot of football left before comparing to the last 2 in the last, but we are currently ahead of the 2013 Seahawks and not far from the 85 bears on our current trend. This provides context as to the level to which our D is currently playing. It is no stretch to say we are playing truly ELITE defense so far this season.

If this continues the level to which our offense needs to play is materially reduced. We are currently averaging over 21 PF, although not all of it is the offense. Main point here is if the D continues to play at this level we only need about 15-16 points to be considered favorites to win most games. That means we can play very conservatively, it also means we don't need as much from our OL as we would if we had a more statistically average defense. The flipside to this is if we get more consistency from our offense the defense could likely become something akin to the two historic juggernauts I mentioned earlier.

I think the 538 article fails to consider how effective this defense has been as well as the quality of opponent it has successfully shut down. There is a lot of season left, but whan your PA is between the 2013 Legion of Boom and the Monsters of the Midway you are doing more than getting lucky.
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: Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakeni

Post by Mothman »

fiestavike wrote:I don't put much into the YPC through 3 games.


Well, 3 games is all we've got.
They've been bad, Peterson was bad, and I don't think they were very effective run blocking last year either. Whatever the YPC, they couldn't consistently impose their will in the running game at all, and mostly got shoved around. So far, that's been even a little worse this year.
We'll just have to disagree because I think it's been significantly worse and not just because of the ypc. I agree that it wasn't a great strength last year. They certainly weren't able to just impose their will on opponents but I don't think Peterson was bad in the first 2 games any more than I think Asiata and McKinnon have been bad so far this season. These backs have had nowhere to go most of the time and that's been painfully obvious. Not only can the line not consistently impose their will, most of the time they've allowed opposing defensive lines to impose their will on running plays.
As far as pass protection, the center of the line has cearly been better in my view, and I think the change in technique at tackle has, so far, provided an almost adequate pocket. Sam needs to take better advantage of that. Its not pretty, but at least its there, and I'd call that a step forward.
They looked better against Carolina than against Green Bay, I'll give you that, but when I take all 3 games into account, I don't see much improvement. I think the biggest difference in terms of avoiding sacks has been having QBs who get rid of the ball more quickly. Hill did a particularly good job of that in week 1.
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 409

Re: Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakeni

Post by Mothman »

mansquatch wrote:I thought the last half against Carolina was their best 2 quarters of football. That is saying something since Carolina's front 7 is pretty good. However, they have to continue to prove it. Jim is exactly right in saying they have been horrible through three games.

I still think we are seeing the low point of the season, due in part to some reasons that were known before the injury bug hit. (60% starting in new positions, two completely new players not on the team in 2015.) However, I'm not convinced there is much of a ceiling. Still it is worth asking if this line become average instead of awful, would that be enough to win the title in combination with our D and Special Teams? Time will tell.

Here is a point for optimism: Right now we are allowing on avg. 13.33 points per game. By comparison, the 2015 DEN unit allowed 18.5 PA, the 2013 SEA defense allowed 14.43 points per game, the '85 Bears allowed 12.4, and the 2000 Ravens allowed 10.3. Obviously there is a lot of football left before comparing to the last 2 in the last, but we are currently ahead of the 2013 Seahawks and not far from the 85 bears on our current trend. This provides context as to the level to which our D is currently playing. It is no stretch to say we are playing truly ELITE defense so far this season.
I agree. The question is: can they sustain it? It will be incredibly tough to maintain a ppg average that low and its worth nothing that right now there 5 teams allowing an average of 15 ppg or less. As more games are played, we'll probably only see one or two teams stay below that threshold, if any.
If this continues the level to which our offense needs to play is materially reduced. We are currently averaging over 21 PF, although not all of it is the offense. Main point here is if the D continues to play at this level we only need about 15-16 points to be considered favorites to win most games. That means we can play very conservatively, it also means we don't need as much from our OL as we would if we had a more statistically average defense. The flipside to this is if we get more consistency from our offense the defense could likely become something akin to the two historic juggernauts I mentioned earlier
My concern is that this level of defense will be unsustainable without more from the OL (and the offense as a whole), particularly the running game.
I think the 538 article fails to consider how effective this defense has been as well as the quality of opponent it has successfully shut down. There is a lot of season left, but whan your PA is between the 2013 Legion of Boom and the Monsters of the Midway you are doing more than getting lucky.
They aren't just getting lucky but at least 24 of the team's 64 total points have been the result of defensive scores and special teams plays. Without those scores, the Vikings are averaging the same 13.33 points per game on offense they're allowing on defense. The offense won't be able to remain turnover-free all season, as they have thus far and as I think the article pointed out, a team can't count on return TDs every week. The Vikes really appear to have very little margin for error. That doesn't mean they can't keep winning as they have but I think they need to start getting more from their offense soon to maintain their winning ways.
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
x 117

Re: Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakeni

Post by mansquatch »

What was interesting to me was that the Denver team last year allowed so many points. 296 on the season. That team, despite the appearance to the contrary was more in need of scoring the would initially meet the eye.

FWIW, I'm not as skeptical on the Vikings O. I'm not saying they haven't been pathetic, outside of the passing game Bradford had against GB, they have been pathetic. I just think it would take a lot for them to stay this terrible. Like a massive coaching fail of epic proportions. They are still in a place, at least until the bye, where they can cite injury issues and new players as a reasonable excuse for some of their woes. Put another way, I think they are playing below their "expected average performance level". My belief is that those issues will shake out with time, and we'll see them revert to the mean. The big question is how much of an improvement is this "average". I do not expect them to be high rolling, but I do expect more middle of the road.

If after the bye they are still this pathetic, then we have reason to really be worried.
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: Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakeni

Post by Mothman »

mansquatch wrote:What was interesting to me was that the Denver team last year allowed so many points. 296 on the season. That team, despite the appearance to the contrary was more in need of scoring the would initially meet the eye.

FWIW, I'm not as skeptical on the Vikings O. I'm not saying they haven't been pathetic, outside of the passing game Bradford had against GB, they have been pathetic. I just think it would take a lot for them to stay this terrible. Like a massive coaching fail of epic proportions.
:lol: I hear you. It would be pretty astonishing if they didn't get at least a little better and score more frequently over the course of the season.
They are still in a place, at least until the bye, where they can cite injury issues and new players as a reasonable excuse for some of their woes. Put another way, I think they are playing below their "expected average performance level". My belief is that those issues will shake out with time, and we'll see them revert to the mean. The big question is how much of an improvement is this "average". I do not expect them to be high rolling, but I do expect more middle of the road.

If after the bye they are still this pathetic, then we have reason to really be worried.
They blew out the Giants last year,. Maybe NY will help the Vikes get their offense going this year. :)
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4959
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
x 395

Re: Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakeni

Post by fiestavike »

Mothman wrote:
They looked better against Carolina than against Green Bay, I'll give you that, but when I take all 3 games into account, I don't see much improvement. I think the biggest difference in terms of avoiding sacks has been having QBs who get rid of the ball more quickly. Hill did a particularly good job of that in week 1.
Ok. I'm not really talking about avoiding sacks so much as quality of pass protection, which is visibly better, though still not good.

As far as sacks go, Bradford has not been an asset. Hill is clearly better as far as that goes. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. I wish we could combine their strengths into one player.
"You like that!"
-- Cap'n Spazz Cousins
User avatar
chicagopurple
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1498
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 10:45 am
x 88

Re: Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakeni

Post by chicagopurple »

How in the world does USA Today have the Vikes listed #1 in the NFL Power Rankings. I mean, I am purple to the core, but Come ON!....we have shown very little offense. Sure our D looked fearsome for 3 games. But, really? No team out there is more balanced and ranked higher then us??? I am no statistician but this seems kinda crazy......Parity has finally arrived?
IrishViking
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1631
Joined: Thu Oct 17, 2013 11:02 am

Re: Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakeni

Post by IrishViking »

chicagopurple wrote:How in the world does USA Today have the Vikes listed #1 in the NFL Power Rankings. I mean, I am purple to the core, but Come ON!....we have shown very little offense. Sure our D looked fearsome for 3 games. But, really? No team out there is more balanced and ranked higher then us??? I am no statistician but this seems kinda crazy......Parity has finally arrived?

All aboard the Hypelongboat.

The Patriots and undefeated Superbowl champs seem like likely teams to stay ahead of us until they stumble or we destroy back to back opponents by epic margins.
Nunin
Pro Bowl Elite Player
Posts: 567
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2016 12:40 am

Re: Five-Thirty-Eight: The Vikings Are In For A Rude Awakeni

Post by Nunin »

mansquatch wrote:What was interesting to me was that the Denver team last year allowed so many points. 296 on the season. That team, despite the appearance to the contrary was more in need of scoring the would initially meet the eye.

FWIW, I'm not as skeptical on the Vikings O. I'm not saying they haven't been pathetic, outside of the passing game Bradford had against GB, they have been pathetic. I just think it would take a lot for them to stay this terrible. Like a massive coaching fail of epic proportions. They are still in a place, at least until the bye, where they can cite injury issues and new players as a reasonable excuse for some of their woes. Put another way, I think they are playing below their "expected average performance level". My belief is that those issues will shake out with time, and we'll see them revert to the mean. The big question is how much of an improvement is this "average". I do not expect them to be high rolling, but I do expect more middle of the road.

If after the bye they are still this pathetic, then we have reason to really be worried.
I feel pretty much the same way...provided Bradford is healthy.
Post Reply