Film observations Vikes-Browns

[Eli]

I see so many comments phrased in this way that I have to ask a question and since you're a reasonable guy, I'll ask you: do you really believe they don't understand the talent difference between Mitchell and Bishop? If so, why? I ask because I have a difficult time believing the difference between the two players would be lost on coaches with the experience of Frazier, Williams, Pagac, etc. It seems far more likely to me that they weren't completely comfortable with Bishop's grasp of the defense or that there's some other, logical reason why they've started Mitchell thus far. That doesn't mean they've made the right choice (I'm not in position to know) but I suspect they know what they have in those two players.

This is a good question. I have to think there's something else at play. Maybe concerns for how well Bishop knows the defense. Or maybe concerns over his recovery from hip surgery and a year out of football.

I think they're just taking it slow with him. Minnesota has an extremely conservative bunch of coaches and coordinators. It shows in the play calling, in their personnel moves, and in virtually everything else that they do on and off the field.

[mondry]

I see so many comments phrased in this way that I have to ask a question and since you're a reasonable guy, I'll ask you: do you really believe they don't understand the talent difference between Mitchell and Bishop? If so, why? I ask because I have a difficult time believing the difference between the two players would be lost on coaches with the experience of Frazier, Williams, Pagac, etc. It seems far more likely to me that they weren't completely comfortable with Bishop's grasp of the defense or that there's some other, logical reason why they've started Mitchell thus far. That doesn't mean they've made the right choice (I'm not in position to know) but I suspect they know what they have in those two players.

Let me think about how to try and explain it. Frazier's a players coach, in that sense their his guys, he want's to promise the world to them. It's kind of like a parent trying to be the "cool dad" or trying to be their friend, rather than just their father. Sometimes you have the make a hard decision that contradicts that. You want to be the cool dad (or in this case coach) but it's in your son's best interest that you keep him away from a party with drugs for example. In the short term he's not going to like it, but it's for the best.

Frazier being the players coach, the cool coach, already made his loyalty's with Mitchell. All of a sudden Bishop gets cut from the Packers and Spielman brings him in. He's obviously 100% the better player once up to speed and healthy, which Bishop has said he is. Instead Frazier is loyal to his guy, his friend, rather than the newcomer Bishop, even if it isn't what's best for the team.

We've seen it with Fusco and Schwartz, Fusco was terrible and they slowly gave Schwartz more and more snaps even though he was clearly the better guard. This year it's Mitchell and Bishop, Bishop will get a couple more reps each game while out playing mitchell. It's like we gotta ween um off slowly so they don't get their feelings hurt all at once. Robinson and Jefferson should easily have lost more time to Rhodes and Sherels with their performances so far as well but they'll only come off because they got hurt. Ponder / Cassel is another one that's going to heat up and probably linger too long.

ah well. Just the way they do it and the downside to a players friendly coach.

[dead_poet]

Let me think about how to try and explain it. Frazier's a players coach, in that sense their his guys, he want's to promise the world to them. It's kind of like a parent trying to be the "cool dad" or trying to be their friend, rather than just their father. Sometimes you have the make a hard decision that contradicts that. You want to be the cool dad (or in this case coach) but it's in your son's best interest that you keep him away from a party with drugs for example. In the short term he's not going to like it, but it's for the best.

Frazier being the players coach, the cool coach, already made his loyalty's with Mitchell. All of a sudden Bishop gets cut from the Packers and Spielman brings him in. He's obviously 100% the better player once up to speed and healthy, which Bishop has said he is. Instead Frazier is loyal to his guy, his friend, rather than the newcomer Bishop, even if it isn't what's best for the team.

We've seen it with Fusco and Schwartz, Fusco was terrible and they slowly gave Schwartz more and more snaps even though he was clearly the better guard. This year it's Mitchell and Bishop, Bishop will get a couple more reps each game while out playing mitchell. It's like we gotta ween um off slowly so they don't get their feelings hurt all at once. Robinson and Jefferson should easily have lost more time to Rhodes and Sherels with their performances so far as well but they'll only come off because they got hurt. Ponder / Cassel is another one that's going to heat up and probably linger too long.

ah well.

It's also likely due to familiarity. The coaching staff has had Mitchell on the roster for a season, while Bishop is new. They're likely more comfortable with the known Mitchell than they were with the unknown in Bishop (especially if they weren't able to get a long look at him during camp/preseason due to injury). Unless one greatly separated himself from the other, it's natural to stick with what you know.

[Mothman]

Let me think about how to try and explain it. Frazier's a players coach, in that sense their his guys, he want's to promise the world to them. It's kind of like a parent trying to be the "cool dad" or trying to be their friend, rather than just their father. Sometimes you have the make a hard decision that contradicts that. You want to be the cool dad (or in this case coach) but it's in your son's best interest that you keep him away from a party with drugs for example. In the short term he's not going to like it, but it's for the best.

Frazier being the players coach, the cool coach, already made his loyalty's with Mitchell. All of a sudden Bishop gets cut from the Packers and Spielman brings him in. He's obviously 100% the better player once up to speed and healthy, which Bishop has said he is. Instead Frazier is loyal to his guy, his friend, rather than the newcomer Bishop, even if it isn't what's best for the team.

I mean no offense by this but that sounds like speculation. Is there any evidence to suggest that Frazier plays favorites in this way and doesn't make his decisions on the basis of other, more logical, factors? With Fusco and Schwartz, it just seemed like they wanted to develop the younger player and that strikes me as a more likely explanation for the way they used them last year. Why would Frazier have more loyalty to Fusco and if he preferred Fusco, why play Schwartz at all?

This year it's Mitchell and Bishop, Bishop will get a couple more reps each game while out playing mitchell. It's like we gotta ween um off slowly so they don't get their feelings hurt all at once.

Again, is there any evidence to indicate feelings have anything to do with these choices? There are certainly other possible explanations and they strike me as more likely than concern over hurting a player's feelings.

I appreciate the nice response to my question. Thank you. I guess I just have a hard time buying the idea that Frazier is making these choices because he wants to be the "cool Dad" to his players.

[Mothman]

It's also likely due to familiarity. The coaching staff has had Mitchell on the roster for a season, while Bishop is new. They're likely more comfortable with the known Mitchell than they were with the unknown in Bishop (especially if they weren't able to get a long look at him during camp/preseason due to injury). Unless one greatly separated himself from the other, it's natural to stick with what you know.

I think familiarity with the defense and responsibilities within it is probably a big factor as well. mental mistakes in a zone scheme can be absolute killers so it's pretty crucial for players to know their assignments. Mitchell's extra year on the roster may have given him an edge in that area too. I suspect Bishop's talent will win out and he'll be starting soon. Ditto for Rhodes.

[Hunter Morrow]

I want to know how we are in coverage against tight ends.

Martellus Bennett was 9 targets, 7 receptions, 76 yards and 2 touchdowns against us.

James Cameron had 11 targets and hit us off for a very ominous 6 receptions, 66 yards and 3 touchdowns.

Meaning in 20 targets, the Vikings have given up 142 yards and 5 touchdowns just to two different tight ends!
And no offense to either of these gentlemen, but they are not league elite tight ends.
We gotta play guys like Jason Witten yet!

[The Breeze]

I want to know how we are in coverage against tight ends.

Martellus Bennett was 9 targets, 7 receptions, 76 yards and 2 touchdowns against us.

James Cameron had 11 targets and hit us off for a very ominous 6 receptions, 66 yards and 3 touchdowns.

Meaning in 20 targets, the Vikings have given up 142 yards and 5 touchdowns just to two different tight ends!
And no offense to either of these gentlemen, but they are not league elite tight ends.
We gotta play guys like Jason Witten yet!

you didn't add the 3 for 27 and a TD for the Lion TE.

It may have been a perfect storm for these guys against our LBs....but I think this is the new wave of TEs. These guys can get downfield and make big plays.
Next to a top tier QB, it's the best weapon in the league right now, IMO.

[mondry]

I appreciate the nice response to my question. Thank you. I guess I just have a hard time buying the idea that Frazier is making these choices because he wants to be the "cool Dad" to his players.

Np, I never said it would change your mind or opinion.

Realistically it's probably more about being safe and conservative perhaps to a fault. Lot of pressure on the guy with no contract extension. Following up a 10-6 playoff birth. They over achieved last year too which raised expectations a lot.

[Mothman]

Np, I never said it would change your mind or opinion.

Realistically it's probably more about being safe and conservative perhaps to a fault. Lot of pressure on the guy with no contract extension. Following up a 10-6 playoff birth. They over achieved last year too which raised expectations a lot.

I'm guessing that's closer to the mark. Perhaps only Leslie Frazier knows for sure!

[dead_poet]

While we're on the abysmal defense, it seems as though at least Allen/Robinson aren't completely sucking.