Lash Man wrote:Jim do you seriously believe that if AD was healthy or even TG that they would have passed like they did ? honestly ? I am pretty sure the passing downfield was ONLY the result of the injuries to the running backs . I would love for Frazier to "get it" but I just don't have any faith in the guy to see whats obvious or to even do the right thing if he sees it even i.e. playing Ponder over and over , there is no way Ponder could possibly have looked better than Cassel in training camp and I would even say he was probably worse than MBT . The fact that this staff kept players on the bench that are clearly better than players on the field tells me all I need to know about them even without factoring their 1970's styled game plans . I do like your Led Zepp reference one of the greatest rock bands of all time without a doubt !
im4mnvikes wrote:i agree with you up to a point. They put it toghether because they had to due to injuries an a lot of starters were out, not because they became smarter overnight.
Sorry to laugh, I'm just amused at how difficult it is to pay the coaching staff a simple compliment even after the team pulls off an upset win over a first place team and scores almost 50 points.
Lash Man, we agree about Led Zeppelin. Common ground!
As for Ponder, why do you think I posted what I did about Spielman and his 3 year rule? I don't think starting him this season was ever about putting the best QB on the field each week. They were determined to evaluate him, come hell or high water.
Last edited by Mothman on Mon Dec 16, 2013 5:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Sorry to laugh, I'm just amused at how difficult it is to pay the coaching staff a simple compliment even after the team pulls off an upset win over a first place team and scores almost 50 points.
Lash Man, we agree about Led Zeppelin. Common ground!
As for Ponder, why do think I posted what I did about Spielman and his 3 year rule? I don't think starting him this season was ever about putting the best QB on the field each week. They were determined to evaluate him, come hell or high water.
fiestavike wrote:
Correct, the big difference was gouging the eagles secondary on the deep/intermediate routes.
I think this is a classic case of fans confusing results and gameplans...we passed effectively so suddenly we must have been trying to pass, when in previous games, obviously we weren't?
THAT is the biggest difference between Cassel and he who shall not be named. With HIM in there, they don't even call those deep middle routes because HE can NOT throw them. They don't even try them. They call them with Cassel because the can complete them. The offensive gameplan is very different with Cassel under center.
I think this is a classic case of fans confusing results and gameplans...we passed effectively so suddenly we must have been trying to pass, when in previous games, obviously we weren't?
I'd like to know how often we had more than 2 WRs compared to usual. And shotgun. It seemed like more spread in that single game then the rest of the season combined...
Mothman wrote:...and how would we conduct this supposedly easy test? If you have the means to ask the the other 31 head coaches in the league that question then please, by all means, do so, not that it would change the point I made at all. There's no way to prove such a hypothetical question. As I said, starting Ponder probably cost them some wins. There is no way to definitively prove that choice cost the team wins so I'm sorry, "probably" is the best I can do.
Or ever there was a quarterback to have a short career in the NFL. The test is made by the evidences, not by someone's slowness to agree or detect probabilities - such slowness as gave Ponder starts, even with the handicaps his game brings (at this point if we thought he had potential to come forth of mediocre league play, I doubt so many would have debated so heavily against him). It was not asking too much to not start the worst quarterback on the roster.
Demi wrote:
I'd like to know how often we had more than 2 WRs compared to usual. And shotgun. It seemed like more spread in that single game then the rest of the season combined...
Yeah, maybe Poet will have that article come up in his feed where it breaks down the amount of snaps with each personnel package / formation. My guess is the 3 and 4 WR sets and / or shot gun made quite a big appearance.
mondry wrote:Yeah, maybe Poet will have that article come up in his feed where it breaks down the amount of snaps with each personnel package / formation. My guess is the 3 and 4 WR sets and / or shot gun made quite a big appearance.
It seems like they've been using an increased amount of that stuff over the past few weeks so with Peterson and Gerhart both out, I imagine they decided to emphasize it. It was also a logical way to attack one of the worst pass defenses in the NFL.
Webbfann wrote:
Now, that is something to daydream about. Could you imagine Brady with our WR core? AND AP???? Boom goes the dynamite!
Didn't you get the memo yet? 31 is over the hill. Brady is what, 36?[/quote]31 is over the hill for RB's, not QB's. It's closer to 40 for QB's. Favre was 40 in '09 when he put up MVP numbers for us. Peterson is only 28 so him and Brady could have 4 very productive years together in this fantasy scenario we've created lol.
"Our playoff loss to the Vikings in '87 was probably the most traumatic experience I had in sports." -- Bill Walsh
Reignman wrote:
Didn't you get the memo yet? 31 is over the hill. Brady is what, 36?
31 is over the hill for RB's, not QB's. It's closer to 40 for QB's. Favre was 40 in '09 when he put up MVP numbers for us. Peterson is only 28 so him and Brady could have 4 very productive years together in this fantasy scenario we've created lol.[/quote] Dayum, way to bust my bubble. And for the record, I was daydreaming about Brady being here in his prime. But still, at 36, he is still better than 97% of what is out there.
Don't hate on my Buckeyes. Some of the best Vikings went to Ohio State.
Including now, HOF WR #80 Cris Carter
purpletinted66 wrote:
But dude Asiata had a big 30 carries in this pass-reliant game plan: maybe the Eagles should have tricked themselves into thinking he was Peterson, seeing that other teams kept Cassel limited by sweating the line of scrimmage when AP is anchoring the backfield. Then again, coaches often take A.P. out in short yard situations, when they should leave him on the field for most every play, let alone use him in every situation as they are wanting to be strategic: but Asiata didn't split carries with anybody.
Yeah, Asiata had a big 30 carries - but only for a pedestrian 51 yards which is only 1.7 yards a carry. Don't think that is going to scare too many defenses into stacking the box against him.
Yah, I imagine they didn't need to worry about him bursting through loose coverage. But the coaches must have had an epiphany with the playcalls and strategy going into this last game. I know it's not as simple as plugging AP in for Asiata's 30 carries, and behold 200 yards rushing after everything else, but with Cassel's passing threat, AP will have one big day after another.
I reckon we cannot have too much sizzle-lean offense, but need enough to move over tough defenses and better decide those close games when our defense is outmatched.
Brady at 45 years old is an upgrade. We don't have the worst WR corps in the world...we have one good TE, two decent WRs in Patterson and Jennings, and an elite RB. The one thing Brady has relied on though is a pass catching RB. Vereen is a monster in New England though and they line his butt up at WR sometimes.
I'm a fan of New England and Brady, so him being a Viking would be $$$
