Thoughts about the debacle

[Pondering Her Percy]

Thanks. I plan on looking more into the deep and intermediate passing to see how it stacks up vs other players. Obviously the production from teddy is lacking in that category though i do believe the offensive line is definitely making it hard for these routes to have time to develop.

I just said this in another thread too but it pertains to your comment as well.

Zimmer said exactly what I've been saying. It wasnt necessarily all on the offensive line. They ran a lot of quick hitters during that game but there are times where they are dropping Teddy for 7 and a hitch but he said he has to get rid of that. Not take 7 and two hitches which he has been doing. Both the line and Teddy just aren't in sync right now.

[J. Kapp 11]

I don't understand the point of your response. It's obvious that there's more to winning football games than just throwing TDs but is there any downside to throwing TDs? It's clearly beneficial. Why shouldn't mosscarter, or any Vikings fan, want the team to have more than a measly 8 passing TDs in 10 games?

Not to put words in somebody else's mouth, but I think there IS a downside to throwing touchdowns if you're doing it just to keep up with your awful defense.

Because New Orleans' defense is historically bad, Drew Brees has no choice but to throw the ball virtually every down. The Saints often have to score 35 just to have a chance to win (they've allowed 31 ppg overall, 34 ppg in their losses, and 49 in one of their wins). Things like using the clock are not even in the picture for New Orleans. They have to score practically every possession, or they're likely to lose.

That's not to say throwing TD passes is a bad thing. I'd sure like to see more than 8 from the Vikings. But if Drew Brees doesn't throw the 20 TDs he's compiled, the Saints are likely 0-10.

Here's something really interesting. If you divide Drew Brees' attempts, completions and yards by 10 (the number of games the Saints have played) the line would be 25-of-37 for 297 yards -- almost exactly the line Teddy had yesterday (25-of-37 for 296 yards). Why did he throw so much yesterday? Because the defense wasn't very good, and the Vikings fell way behind.

I'd venture a guess that if Teddy Bridgewater had to throw 37 times a game, he'd have more than 8 TDs -- but the Vikings wouldn't have 7 wins.

[Mothman]

In order for teddy to put up the td stats you guys want we would have to cut adrians attempts in half...

... or, of course, they could be a more effective offense and score more TDs. Thank you for the research but the bigger problem is that they don't score enough TDs, not just that Teddy doesn't throw for many. It would be great to see him throw for 3, 4 or 5 TDs a game but if his passing gets them into scoring territory and they get TDs on the ground, that's just as good.

It's not the way the numbers are apportioned that matters but the need for better results. Through 10 games, the Vikings have 18 offensive TDs. That's one of the lowest totals in the league.

[VikingFan50]

I'm really not understanding some of the logic going on around here. Let's take a look at a few facts.
When does a QB throw for 4-5 TDs? Normally when a QB has a cohesive Offensive Line, that on average can give a QB at least 3-4 seconds to make a throw/completion. So my question then turns into this, why are we consistently blaming Bridgewater for having less than savvy stats? The answer? Because he is given no time to make reads/throws into completions. When you give a solid QB time to throw and to assess a Defensive Unit the QB is more than likely to put up bigger numbers. Hold on now! We expect Bridgewater to be passing like Drew Brees, Tom Brady, or the younger version of Peyton Manning? HAH. Get real guys. Let's put together Sullivan, Loadholt, perhaps Kalil, and a few better players on the OL and see how much production the guy can give. Right now I think it's impossible to judge TB on the games he's played with this Offense. Give him better protection!


It also would not negatively effect us to grab an actual #1 WR, that can and will make the big plays for us. Ahem, Mike Wallace, that isn't you... Anyway, I'm failing to understand the negativity because all it is in the end, it's all based on the Offense as a Unit. Yes, the QB is held to a higher standard, but I can guarantee you that not even Rodgers, or Brady could have great numbers with an Offensive Line like this and WR's that are extremely inconsistent. Want an example? Look at how Rodgers is doing right now. Don't get me wrong, I hate the guy as much as any other Viking Fan but he is having a slump because of the protection he's getting and the inconsistency of his WR's. Can you look someone in the eye and say that Rodgers is the main reason why the Packers Offense has been sputtering as of late?

In the end, we need to give Teddy a good line to work behind before we can deem him incapable of actually being a Franchise QB.

[randomghost11]

... or, of course, they could be a more effective offense and score more TDs. Thank you for the research but the bigger problem is that they don't score enough TDs, not just that Teddy doesn't throw for many. It would be great to see him throw for 3, 4 or 5 TDs a game but if his passing gets them into scoring territory and they get those TDs on the ground, that's just as good.

It's the not the numbers and how they're apportioned that matter but the need for better results. Through 10 games, the Vikings have 18 offensive TDs. That's one of the lowest totals in the league.

For this to change I think we would have to see one of two things to happen:

1. When we're up don't be content with the lead. The team is obviously focused on killing the clock while we're up and trust the defense to keep them off the board.

2. The defense produces more turnovers. The defense is playing well points wise but they haven't forced many turnovers. A team like Carolina are able to put up big ppg and be heavy on the run because of the defense creating short field opportunitys.

I found that we are middle of the pack in terms of yards per drive and points per drive but the style that we play limits the number of drives we have per game.

[VikingLord]

That said, while Spielman is at it, he should ask them about a porous OL that is obviously not anywhere near doing its job properly with pass protection. They're a NFL offensive line, for crying out loud, and they play as if they've never blocked before. The proof of that is in the film, so it can't be debated. And no, not every NFL team has an offensive line that can't or won't do its job.

Yeah, the offensive line hasn't been great or consistent this year. But still, AD somehow breaks off big runs and is leading the league in rushing. Unless we're willing to suspend belief, the offensive line has something to do with that. They haven't been completely incompetent.

Here's another thing that Spielman or maybe Zimmer should ask Turner: Why is Wallace running deep routes when he can't make the catch and Bridgewater can't make the throw? If "execution" really is the source of the problem, then also ask Turner why he isn't passing to Johnson, Wright, or Patterson on some deep routes? In fact, why isn't he including those guys more often at all? And then remind Turner that Diggs is the one who has chemistry with Bridgewater thus far and can probably run any route anywhere on the field.

How do we know Wallace can't make the catch when the balls being thrown to him are essentially uncatchable because they are so inaccurate?

As far as not throwing to Wright, wasn't Wright one of the obvious wide open deep routes the cameras caught on Monday Night Football against the 49ers? The one Bridgewater had plenty of time to survey the field on and yet the ball never came out?

See, I just have a hard time buying these arguments because the camera doesn't lie. Unfortunately for Teddy defenses *are* focusing on AD and his receivers (multiple receivers) *are* getting wide open deep consistently. And he *does* have time to find them and he either doesn't or he isn't pulling the trigger.

Yes, the line has had it's issues and yes, Bridgewater has been under a lot of pressure at times, and no, I won't hold him accountable for failing to deliver on those drop backs. But to imply these other issues are just as significant as what Bridgewater is obviously failing to do is, as I said before, a bridge too far for me. The QB is like the lead singer of a band. Yeah, the band might not always be "on", but even a great band can't overcome a poor lead singer.

[VikingLord]

While all of that's going on, it might be a good idea to remind them that Peterson should carry the ball more than 13 times. You would think after giving him 10 carries in a loss at SF and 16 (IIRC) in a loss at Denver, that a reminder wouldn't be necessary. Nevertheless...

For AD to get more carries the Vikings have to sustain drives and not fall very far behind later in the game. In the losses where AD didn't get a lot of carries the circumstances dictated that result rather than the result being part of some failure on the part of the coaches to recognize that AD is a strength and they need to use him.

[Jordysghost]

Yes, the QB is held to a higher standard, but I can guarantee you that not even Rodgers, or Brady could have great numbers with an Offensive Line like this and WR's that are extremely inconsistent. Want an example? Look at how Rodgers is doing right now. Don't get me wrong, I hate the guy as much as any other Viking Fan but he is having a slump because of the protection he's getting and the inconsistency of his WR's. Can you look someone in the eye and say that Rodgers is the main reason why the Packers Offense has been sputtering as of late?

Aaron Rodgers played his first 5 and a half seasons with O lines that consistently ranked among the worst in the league, also, the Packers O line has been fantastic this year, where are you getting that they are a main cause of the Packers multiple game skid? Right on the money on the WRs though.

But btw, I wholeheartedly agree that Bridgewater has not been the cause of your offensive struggles this year.

[mosscarter]

brady gets rid of the ball quicker than anyone i've ever seen; he could and has played behind sub par lines. nobody is saying teddy should throw for 4 or 5 td's a game, what i'm saying is that after 21 starts the guy hasn't thrown for even 3 td's in one game. i cannot fathom how that is not alarming on many levels. this is a passing league and sunday proved it. it was evident about mid way through the second quarter ap was having an off day, so why not switch gears, go no huddle and throw the ball? the truth is because we can't, or i think norv would have. someone on here said the defense played bad and i disagree with that. they held them to a bunch of field goals (in the past they would have all been td's). and then, when they finally let teddy throw he still couldn't get us into the end zone. in that situation brees would have easily had 2 or 3 td's in second half. teddy=0. everyone was calling for a breakout year when in reality his numbers are in close proximity to jackson and ponder. and neither of those guys had a defense half this good.

[Jordysghost]

brady gets rid of the ball quicker than anyone i've ever seen; he could and has played behind sub par lines. nobody is saying teddy should throw for 4 or 5 td's a game, what i'm saying is that after 21 starts the guy hasn't thrown for even 3 td's in one game. i cannot fathom how that is not alarming on many levels. this is a passing league and sunday proved it. it was evident about mid way through the second quarter ap was having an off day, so why not switch gears, go no huddle and throw the ball? the truth is because we can't, or i think norv would have. someone on here said the defense played bad and i disagree with that. they held them to a bunch of field goals (in the past they would have all been td's). and then, when they finally let teddy throw he still couldn't get us into the end zone. in that situation brees would have easily had 2 or 3 td's in second half. teddy=0. everyone was calling for a breakout year when in reality his numbers are in close proximity to jackson and ponder. and neither of those guys had a defense half this good.

At the risk of looking like a contrarian, how many years has Brady had an O line outside of the top 10 in the league? I know it is a little off the topic but your comment got me thinking and I really don't recall a time any time recently especially, where Brady had a subpar O line, as you put it. The Pats have been fantastic in that area.

[Mothman]

For this to change I think we would have to see one of two things to happen:

1. When we're up don't be content with the lead. The team is obviously focused on killing the clock while we're up and trust the defense to keep them off the board.

2. The defense produces more turnovers. The defense is playing well points wise but they haven't forced many turnovers. A team like Carolina are able to put up big ppg and be heavy on the run because of the defense creating short field opportunitys.

I found that we are middle of the pack in terms of yards per drive and points per drive but the style that we play limits the number of drives we have per game.

Those are excellent points (especially #2) and they both could lead to more TDs. However, If they finished more scoring drives with TDs instead of FG attempts that would also make a difference. The Vikings are 4th in the league in FG attempts this season with 26. They're 25th in TDs.

[Mothman]

Not to put words in somebody else's mouth, but I think there IS a downside to throwing touchdowns if you're doing it just to keep up with your awful defense.

Yes, but that's the downside to having an awful defense. There's really no downside to throwing TDs.

Here's something really interesting. If you divide Drew Brees' attempts, completions and yards by 10 (the number of games the Saints have played) the line would be 25-of-37 for 297 yards -- almost exactly the line Teddy had yesterday (25-of-37 for 296 yards). Why did he throw so much yesterday? Because the defense wasn't very good, and the Vikings fell way behind.

I'd venture a guess that if Teddy Bridgewater had to throw 37 times a game, he'd have more than 8 TDs -- but the Vikings wouldn't have 7 wins.

It would depend on the circumstances. As the team is currently constituted, it probably wouldn't be a good sign.

[TSonn]

Well, 1 out of 2 anyway. The Saints have more rushing TDs than the Vikes.

Dang! I've been lawyered. Good catch.

I would still wager that the Saints have quite a few more offensive plays in general than the Vikings do. They don't seem to care about TOP like we do.

[Mothman]

Dang! I've been lawyered. Good catch.

I would still wager that the Saints have quite a few more offensive plays in general than the Vikings do. They don't seem to care about TOP like we do.

That's a wager you'd win! They've run 75 more plays from scrimmage than the Vikings.

[losperros]

See, I just have a hard time buying these arguments because the camera doesn't lie. Unfortunately for Teddy defenses *are* focusing on AD and his receivers (multiple receivers) *are* getting wide open deep consistently. And he *does* have time to find them and he either doesn't or he isn't pulling the trigger.

You're right. The camera doesn't lie. It clearly, very clearly, shows a porous OL that completely let down both the passing and running game against the Pack. Go to NFL Game Pass and watch the coaches film and then tell me how the camera doesn't show that. We both know that it does.

Regarding Wallace, I'm not bashing him but the camera doesn't lie about his drops, especially when a critical one blows a chance for a first down. As for the long passes, I've posted many times that Bridgewater is overthrowing him. And he has been. Bridgewater has been downright inaccurate many times with his deep throws. I just don't understand why Turner or anyone else believes that Wallace is the only deep WR option the Vikings have. I have yet to see even a calorie of chemistry between Bridgewater and Wallace this season, whereas TB has it with Diggs, for example.

Yes, the line has had it's issues and yes, Bridgewater has been under a lot of pressure at times, and no, I won't hold him accountable for failing to deliver on those drop backs. But to imply these other issues are just as significant as what Bridgewater is obviously failing to do is, as I said before, a bridge too far for me. The QB is like the lead singer of a band. Yeah, the band might not always be "on", but even a great band can't overcome a poor lead singer.

Unless you have both with a bad lead singer and a bad band to boot. No one is denying that Bridgewater needs to up his game, but in no way does that negate the fact that the Vikings offense is a dysfunctional unit that needs plenty of work.