StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 2:42 pmThe D can't control what their offense can and can't do. You hold the Pats to 24 pts and that is a winnable game. In fact, this was the fewest points the pats have scored in a victory this season.
As for previous seasons in 2017 they held the #1 scoring offense to 7 pts and the #4 offense to 19. In 2016 they held the #4 offense to 14, and the #5 to 17. In 2015, the #1 offense to 23.
There are times when they struggled against top 5 scoring offense as well (38 versus Seattle in 2015, 38 versus the pack in 2016), but to say he can't stop good offenses is silly.
NE only scored 14 offensive points against the Titans in their week 1 victory. Anyway, they didn't put more points because they didn't need to. Instead they ran the clock. To the tune of holding onto the ball nearly 7 minutes longer than the Vikings - and not just because the offense had 3-and-outs but because NE posted really long drives including one for more than 8 minutes and one for more than 6. In other words - they completely controlled the flow of the game.
I'm not saying a Mike Zimmer led defense can't stop good teams. I am saying this year's Mike Zimmer led defense isn't/can't.
Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 10:37 amSo I guess my question is, define a "great team"
I'm not going to split hairs about it. I assume we all know what "great" means. Great, as in "considerably above the normal or average".
Great teams play up to their full potential more often than not. They beat winning teams. They play smart. They're often disciplined. They're prepared. They're well-constructed.
Lot of different "greats" out there. The Chiefs and Rams cant stop a soul but fans would call those teams "great".
The saddest thing in life is wasted talent and the choices you make will shape your life forever.
-Chazz Palminteri
It is Unbelievable to me but the talking heads on ESPN and NFL Network are hailing Flip as a very strong candidate for a vacant HC job.. i.e. Green Bay and Cleveland. I know they are the experts and are supposed to know more than us commoners know, but for the life of me I sure can't imagine what they are seeing every week. Guys, am I living in a parallel universe and and seeing different games and play calling than they are??? I sure don't see him as a HC. I'm not even able to justify his OC status anymore. Great QB coach, ok with that, but that's about it in my opinion.
I've been really let down by him this season. I was very excited when he was hired and really expected great things. I never dreamed we would be in the situation we are right now with the talent that was handed over to him.
I'm in no way trying to start arguments here. I just feel he really hasn't performed well at all as our OC. Truthfully I think his playcalling and his game plans have absolutely stunk
I just wanna die as a Super Bowl Champion Viking Fan!!
The defense definitely did not play good enough to beat NE. As evidence by the fact the team didn't win.
I know what you're getting at - the offense didn't pull their weight. However ...
The defense's stats against NE:
472 yards total given up
3 TDs
1 take away
0 Sacks
Brady had a 102.5 Passer rating
That's not "good enough" for most games and definitely not against NE.
Plus it seemed like they could score quickly whenever they wanted. The drives that stalled were typically from trying to run the ball and control the clock.
... and they rushed for about 160 yards. Again, not an indication of a strong defensive performance.
Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 3:54 pmLot of different "greats" out there. The Chiefs and Rams cant stop a soul but fans would call those teams "great".
You win, my friend. The 6-5-1 2018 Vikings are clearly a great team.
Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 3:54 pmLot of different "greats" out there. The Chiefs and Rams cant stop a soul but fans would call those teams "great".
You win, my friend. The 6-5-1 2018 Vikings are clearly a great team.
I would not call any Nfc team great right now. No one has a defense outside of Minnesota, Chicago, and maybe Seattle. With that said, neither of those three have a shut down defense by any means. So, PHP, no. I don't think your examples are great.
New England is great. That's about it.
Many in this thread have thrown out all kinds of stats. But here's what the stats don't say. They don't talk about a defense having to stop a team when it matters. When the game is on the line. They don't talk about an offense scoring in the last few seconds to take the lead and a time when they have struggled. I hate that the world has gotten so stat happy that numbers mean everything. it's the situations that count, and the execution in those situations that need to be monitored, not just the numbers... numbers are great, numbers are wonderful, but they don't tell the whole story. This Viking team, just like every other Viking team in the last 25 years, cannot execute when the game is on the line. It is not okay to say we score 14 points in the 4th quarter when you were down by 21 points going into the quarter. That is what I get upset at Zimmer for there is no reason his teams should failed to execute as often as they do when the time matters. The good teams, or great teams, do not do that. They execute when it matters.
The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." #SKOL2018
Best defense is a good offense. Last year the Vikings were ranked very high in TOP. This year they're close to the bottom. The other offense can't score if they don't have the ball. Not entirely true but that has to be taken into account. Vikings were really good at converting 3rd downs last year.
J. Kapp 11 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 10:41 amThere it is.
We have an amazingly talented running back in Dalvin Cook. He's quick. He makes people miss. He's got breakaway speed. He's got power. He's a poor man's Todd Gurley. But in a game where he's gaining big chunks every other carry, JDF gives him 9 carries. This was a tie game through three quarters. Why in the hell would we abandon the run?
For those of you who want to fire Zimmer, I ask you: What has Zimmer been preaching? That's right. Running the football.
I don't care what he preaches. I care what he does. Rather than asking "why in the hell would we abandon the run", I'm asking why in the hell he keeps whining about not running the ball enough if he's not going to do something about it. If Zimmer wanted them to keep using Cook, if he wanted more running in that game, why didn't he insist on it? He was on the same sideline as Flip. He's supposed to be in charge of the team. See that it happens.
Maybe if the offensive coordinator would establish the running game, like he's been asked to do repeatedly throughout the season, things would be different.
Maybe if the Vikings had a head coach who wasn't a glorified defensive coordinator, we wouldn't have seen so many complaints about his offensive coordinators over the last 5 seasons. I know that sounds sarcastic but Turner took the brunt of the criticism while he was here too. Zimmer's the head coach. He doesn't deserve a pass on stuff like this, especially in his fifth season, and especially when he's been wanting them to run the ball.
You want to know who got schooled yesterday? John DeFilippo got schooled by Bill Belichick in the art of stopping an offense that won't adjust. For BB, that's like taking candy from a baby.
They didn't exactly struggle mightily to put points up on the Vikings defense but if Zimmer sees that his offense is overmatched, what's he doing about it? Does he not understand football well enough to call for and contribute to those adjustments? I doubt that. I know his expertise is in defense but he's been studying offenses for decades, game-planning against them. Surely he has some understanding of what works, of what NE was doing defensively, of what might effectively counter that. Is he even interested in that or is he content to call the defense, give his OCs full autonomy and then gripe about their performance after it doesn't work out?
I get it. You want Zimmer gone. You think he's mediocre. You think he can win in the regular season but isn't a championship coach (as if we've had a steady parade of championship coaches coming through the doors in Minnesota).You've been crystal clear about that. Fine. That's your prerogative. Just as it's the prerogative of myself and others to disagree with you.
As for the defense yesterday, I totally disagree with you. New England DID struggle mightily to put up points. They scored on their opening drive, then not again until the fourth, when our top three cornerbacks were injured in one way or another. And what makes you so sure that Zimmer DIDN'T call for adjustments on offense? Were you on the sideline? Were you listening to the headset? Were you in the locker room? No? Then you're speculating. Heck, if we're speculating, then I'm going with the theory that Zimmer said, "Give the damn ball to Cook" more than once, and not terribly nicely.
And I'd bet my house that Bill Belichick has read Josh McDaniels the riot act dozens of times over the years for calling garbage plays ... which is probably why he rarely calls them anymore. Funny, but Belichick doesn't coach offense any more than Zimmer does. He does hold his coaches accountable, however, and here's where we can agree ... Zimmer needs to hold JDF accountable because that play calling was hot garbage yesterday.
We all might as well get used to the idea that Mike Zimmer won't be going anywhere. Because he won't. Not after this year.
StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 1:08 pmI don't know if I agree with that. The defense played good enough to beat the Pats today and held them to over 3 pts fewer than their average. They held Brees to 120 yards passing in his best season.
You're the third or fourth person I've seen make this point on the board and I have to say, it's not the feather in the cap of the Vikes defense it's made out to be.
The Saints dominated the Vikes. They ran the ball well and controlled that game most of the way. They got a big deep completion out of Hill. Brees never really needed to open it up because NO cruised to a pretty easy victory. The Vikings didn't "hold" him to 120 yards so much as they allowed the Saints to run it effectively and never made the game competitive enough that Brees needed to do more than manage it.
You have an interesting way of remembering things.
The Saints' offense did very little against the Vikings. They had one drive early in the game and three field goals. That should have been 16 points.
Touchdown number 2 came when Adam Thielen -- who never fumbles -- fumbled inside of 1:30 in the red zone. They returned it well into Minnesota territory, after which Laquon Treadwell got the incredibly stupid unsportsmanlike penalty to put THEM in the red zone. Instead of us going into the locker room up 17-10, they went up by the same score. A 14-point swing -- the difference in the game.
Their other touchdown came on a pick-6. Nothing to do with their offense.
We outgained them 423 to 270. Brees' passer rating was 84.8. They averaged 3.6 yards per carry with two rushing plays over 10 yards. We had 10 more first downs. We won time of possession. Time after time, we held them to field goals after giving them the ball in plus territory. Yet we lost by double digits.
Nothing about their performance was dominant. We lost, not because we shot ourselves in the foot, but because we shot ourselves in both feet.
Bowhunting Viking wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 3:56 pm
It is Unbelievable to me but the talking heads on ESPN and NFL Network are hailing Flip as a very strong candidate for a vacant HC job.. i.e. Green Bay and Cleveland. I know they are the experts and are supposed to know more than us commoners know, but for the life of me I sure can't imagine what they are seeing every week. Guys, am I living in a parallel universe and and seeing different games and play calling than they are??? I sure don't see him as a HC. I'm not even able to justify his OC status anymore. Great QB coach, ok with that, but that's about it in my opinion.
I've been really let down by him this season. I was very excited when he was hired and really expected great things. I never dreamed we would be in the situation we are right now with the talent that was handed over to him.
I'm in no way trying to start arguments here. I just feel he really hasn't performed well at all as our OC. Truthfully I think his playcalling and his game plans have absolutely stunk
Totally agree here.
I'm sorely disappointed. I really thought he was the same class of offensive mind as McVay, Shanahan, etc. Good god, was I wrong.
And what kills me is that he can call a great game on occasion, like he did against Green Bay, LA and Philly. But then he'll call 3 bad games like yesterday. I mean, Dalvin Cook was burning them on edge runs. IMO, that's because New England, while exceptionally well coached and sound fundamentally, isn't fast on defense. He was getting to the second level and beating their linebackers. We could have exploited that relative lack of speed. Establish it solidly, and then we can run play action and bootlegs off it. But instead, we had deep drops followed by check-downs because Belichick simply blitzed one or two extra guys every play, knowing most of our routes were downfield and we wouldn't have time to complete them. He just plain schooled JDF.
And why in the heck can't we execute a screen play? Isn't that a play that should work against the blitz? I suppose it's because our O-line is too un-athletic to be out there leading screen plays. I don't know. I just know it's brutal trying to watch this team run a screen.
You're the third or fourth person I've seen make this point on the board and I have to say, it's not the feather in the cap of the Vikes defense it's made out to be.
The Saints dominated the Vikes. They ran the ball well and controlled that game most of the way. They got a big deep completion out of Hill. Brees never really needed to open it up because NO cruised to a pretty easy victory. The Vikings didn't "hold" him to 120 yards so much as they allowed the Saints to run it effectively and never made the game competitive enough that Brees needed to do more than manage it.
You have an interesting way of remembering things.
The Saints' offense did very little against the Vikings. They had one drive early in the game and three field goals. That should have been 16 points.
Touchdown number 2 came when Adam Thielen -- who never fumbles -- fumbled inside of 1:30 in the red zone. They returned it well into Minnesota territory, after which Laquon Treadwell got the incredibly stupid unsportsmanlike penalty to put THEM in the red zone. Instead of us going into the locker room up 17-10, they went up by the same score. A 14-point swing -- the difference in the game.
Their other touchdown came on a pick-6. Nothing to do with their offense.
We outgained them 423 to 270. Brees' passer rating was 84.8. They averaged 3.6 yards per carry with two rushing plays over 10 yards. We had 10 more first downs. We won time of possession. Time after time, we held them to field goals after giving them the ball in plus territory. Yet we lost by double digits.
Nothing about their performance was dominant. We lost, not because we shot ourselves in the foot, but because we shot ourselves in both feet.
All of this. Turnovers and dumb penalties is what skewed the score. The Vikings defense played great.
Yeah the Vikes lost. It's going to happen. How many people here penciled this game as a win at the beginning of the season? Granted, I'm not happy they are 6-5-1. But, hey if the Eagles bet the Redskins, the Vikes take the 6th seed. And how about those Eagles. I wonder what their fans are saying right about now after last year.
Vikings fan since Nov. 6, 1966. Annoying Packer fans since Nov. 7, 1966
Some interesting discussion here, but let me ask this question - in what game this year did Zimmer's Vikings surprise in a positive way? Name a game where they were not favored and they showed up for 60 minutes and over-performed?
I can't recall a game like that this year.
Last year, they had a few, which made me optimistic about this year's team, especially on defense where I hoped the debacle against the Eagles was the result of a letdown after the stunning victory over the Saints. And while I can't say the defense has performed that poorly, they've had 2 outstandingly poor games this year against good opponents (Rams and Pats) and several more half-games where they stunk it up IMHO (Bills, Bears, 1st game against the Packers) and allowed those teams to grab decent leads. Of course, there is always a "but..." excuse for those performances, but when a defense brings back almost every starter, most of those starters are still young and in their primes, and the guy they did add has been a stud in the recent past, well, I kind of expect better than what they've shown.
Is that Zimmer's fault? Probably not all of it, but can anyone here imagine a Belichek defense doing what the Vikings defense has done this year given the same talent and continuity? Can anyone imagine a Tomlin defense doing it? At this time of the year?
And I'm pretty sure we're going to see another repeat of it on Monday at Seattle. I'll be shocked if we don't watch as Wilson scrambles away from pressure for at least a half, lobbing a couple of daggers downfield in the process. And we don't continue to watch as the Hawks plow into the second level with runs on 1st and 2nd down, putting them in the same kinds of favorable down and distance situations the Pats found themselves in on 3rd downs. Tell me who here believes this defense we've watched lay eggs a lot this year doesn't come out and do it again on Monday?
I'm sure some of you will defend the defense. I get it. The stats say they're good. They have had stretches of solid play. Just those stretches haven't been nearly enough against the better-coached offenses they've faced.
You have to draw the line somewhere with a head coach, and for me, that line is how consistent the team is week-in and week-out, and whether they exceed, meet, or fail to meet expectations (accounting for injuries, crappy refs, bad breaks, etc.). Last year, Zimmer got way more out of the team than I expected. He over-performed right up until he ran into a creative, aggressive Eagles team (although one could argue his team shouldn't have made it past the Saints and the Divisional Round). This year, I can't think of a single time his team has over-performed. Mostly, I'd say they've met expectations, except against good teams, where they have consistently failed to meet expectations. Unfortunately, the good teams are the ones that get to the playoffs.
I think it's reasonable to reassess Zimmer and Spielman at the end of this season. To those who are given much, much is expected, and this Vikings team was stacked everywhere except the offensive line heading into the season. Even with that, all teams have to deal with roster flaws and injuries, and so far, the report card isn't good. I suspect it will be worse by next Tuesday.
Raptorman wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 8:03 pm
Yeah the Vikes lost. It's going to happen. How many people here penciled this game as a win at the beginning of the season? Granted, I'm not happy they are 6-5-1. But, hey if the Eagles bet the Redskins, the Vikes take the 6th seed. And how about those Eagles. I wonder what their fans are saying right about now after last year.
That Frank Reich was the real magic man behind that offense.
Some interesting discussion here, but let me ask this question - in what game this year did Zimmer's Vikings surprise in a positive way? Name a game where they were not favored and they showed up for 60 minutes and over-performed?
That's a tough ask of a team coming of a run to the NFCCG. Some of their wins have been some good football, but even then you won't call it over-performing for a team that went so far last season. We'll see it in time this season...
J. Kapp 11 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 03, 2018 6:53 pm
I get it. You want Zimmer gone. You think he's mediocre. You think he can win in the regular season but isn't a championship coach (as if we've had a steady parade of championship coaches coming through the doors in Minnesota).You've been crystal clear about that. Fine. That's your prerogative. Just as it's the prerogative of myself and others to disagree with you.
Nobody suggested otherwise.
As for the defense yesterday, I totally disagree with you. New England DID struggle mightily to put up points. They scored on their opening drive, then not again until the fourth, when our top three cornerbacks were injured in one way or another.
7 in the first
3 in the second
7 in the third and another 7 in the fourth
And what makes you so sure that Zimmer DIDN'T call for adjustments on offense? Were you on the sideline? Were you listening to the headset? Were you in the locker room? No? Then you're speculating.
I'm inferring. When asked if they ran the ball enough in the game, Zimmer said "no" and he's still saying they need to run it more. Presumably, as HC, if he'd insisted on more running plays they would have called more. I didn't exactly make a huge leap in logic. If he was calling for them during the game and his OC ignored him, that seems highly problematic.
And I'd bet my house that Bill Belichick has read Josh McDaniels the riot act dozens of times over the years for calling garbage plays ... which is probably why he rarely calls them anymore. Funny, but Belichick doesn't coach offense any more than Zimmer does. He does hold his coaches accountable, however, and here's where we can agree ... Zimmer needs to hold JDF accountable because that play calling was hot garbage yesterday.
Exactly and Zimmer himself needs to be held accountable for that hot garbage because he's the head coach, not simply a defensive coordinator and the offensive playcalling has been a problem all season.
We all might as well get used to the idea that Mike Zimmer won't be going anywhere. Because he won't. Not after this year.
I know he's not going anywhere. Spielman isn't either. However, I don't speak my mind about it because I think the Vikes are breathlessly reading this board and awaiting my personal verdict on whether to keep their head coach or not.
