Vikings at Bears

[Cliff]

I was happy to finally see some interceptions but I would prefer to see more that are the results of play design rather than the ball gets popped up in the air or wobbles out of the QBs hands. The pressure on that play directly led to that interception which was good to see but we can't seem to get our secondary to make plays. In the end, they barely beat a horrible Bears team playing a rookie undrafted QB for half the game. I just can't feel too good about it but I'll take a win.

We're going to need a lot more from the offense to win any more games without Jefferson. Had a couple of big drops, the running game was horrible. There is so much cap and draft capital invested into the offense, it can't afford to be this bad even without Jefferson.

[VikingLord]

The Vikings defense politely said "Shove It" to your prediction.

I wasn't able to watch the game, but the stat line looked pretty ugly (and not in favor of the Vikings):

First downs
- Bears 18
- Vikings 12

Total plays
- Bears 65
- Vikings 55

Total yards
- Bears 275
- Vikings 220

Passing yards (the only statistical category where the Vikings led)
- Bears 113
- Vikings 174

Rushing yards
- Bears 162 (!)
- Vikings 46 (!!)

Time of possession
- Bears 35:11
- Vikings 24:49

Normally, if I saw a stat line like that and didn't watch the game I'd guess the Bears would have won comfortably.

I talked to a Vikings fan who did watch the game and he said the offense was super conservative (again) with Kirk throwing short all day. He said the Vikings offense was also three-and-out most of the second half, and the Bears were marching for what would have been the go-ahead score late had the Bears QB at the time not thrown a duck ball right to Murphy that Murphy then proceeded to try to return only to get it knocked out from behind.

Anyway, a win is a win I guess but did you really come away from that game feeling good about the Vikings going forward on either side of the ball? The Vikings fan I talked to thought the Vikings deserved to lose the game.

[Thaumaturgist]

The Vikings defense politely said "Shove It" to your prediction.

I wasn't able to watch the game, but the stat line looked pretty ugly (and not in favor of the Vikings):

First downs
- Bears 18
- Vikings 12

Total plays
- Bears 65
- Vikings 55

Total yards
- Bears 275
- Vikings 220

Passing yards (the only statistical category where the Vikings led)
- Bears 113
- Vikings 174

Rushing yards
- Bears 162 (!)
- Vikings 46 (!!)

Time of possession
- Bears 35:11
- Vikings 24:49

Normally, if I saw a stat line like that and didn't watch the game I'd guess the Bears would have won comfortably.

I talked to a Vikings fan who did watch the game and he said the offense was super conservative (again) with Kirk throwing short all day. He said the Vikings offense was also three-and-out most of the second half, and the Bears were marching for what would have been the go-ahead score late had the Bears QB at the time not thrown a duck ball right to Murphy that Murphy then proceeded to try to return only to get it knocked out from behind.

Anyway, a win is a win I guess but did you really come away from that game feeling good about the Vikings going forward on either side of the ball? The Vikings fan I talked to thought the Vikings deserved to lose the game.

We were +2 in the turnover margin, so that helped....

[VikingLord]

I wasn't able to watch the game, but the stat line looked pretty ugly (and not in favor of the Vikings):

First downs
- Bears 18
- Vikings 12

Total plays
- Bears 65
- Vikings 55

Total yards
- Bears 275
- Vikings 220

Passing yards (the only statistical category where the Vikings led)
- Bears 113
- Vikings 174

Rushing yards
- Bears 162 (!)
- Vikings 46 (!!)

Time of possession
- Bears 35:11
- Vikings 24:49

Normally, if I saw a stat line like that and didn't watch the game I'd guess the Bears would have won comfortably.

I talked to a Vikings fan who did watch the game and he said the offense was super conservative (again) with Kirk throwing short all day. He said the Vikings offense was also three-and-out most of the second half, and the Bears were marching for what would have been the go-ahead score late had the Bears QB at the time not thrown a duck ball right to Murphy that Murphy then proceeded to try to return only to get it knocked out from behind.

Anyway, a win is a win I guess but did you really come away from that game feeling good about the Vikings going forward on either side of the ball? The Vikings fan I talked to thought the Vikings deserved to lose the game.

We were +2 in the turnover margin, so that helped....

Even in that category, weren't the Vikings helped when the refs ruled the Bears didn't recover Kirk's failed backwards lateral/pass? I saw that highlight and it sure looked like the Vikings got away with one there.

[psjordan]

Anyway, a win is a win I guess but did you really come away from that game feeling good about the Vikings going forward on either side of the ball? The Vikings fan I talked to thought the Vikings deserved to lose the game.

Oh, we deserved to lose that game for sure. Not only is this team in complete disarray, we are horrid at the worst possible times. The Bears seemingly rushed for most of their 162 yards when they were trying to catch up in the 4th. Our run D looked like a sieve in the 2nd half.

FOUR OUT OF FIVE of our second half offensive possessions were 3-and-out! (ignoring drive #6 at the end, six-plays-one-yard). And the 5th of those was a missed 57 yd FG. We could not have been more inept in the 2nd half if it was the actual tank-the-season gameplan to do so.

The only decent drive of the game (2nd qtr) resulted in a TD and then a blocked XP.

The one and only reason we won this game was due to Fields getting hurt. Any other story from this game would be false.

And I know everyone has to toe the line, but the "it feels good to win a road game in the division" mantra from a few players is complete crap.

The NFL almost always surprises (look at the two unbeatens going down), but on paper this team is going to get [Emmit Smith voice] "blowed out" [/Emmit Smith voice] on Monday night against a depleted SF team.

Right now I can't determine who is carrying the most fault. But you can't blame every single player on the team.

[VikingLord]

Right now I can't determine who is carrying the most fault. But you can't blame every single player on the team.

If I had to highlight the areas of concern on this year's Vikings, I'd rank them in this order:

1) Cousins is playing well, but he's been very conservative, often opting for the check down route, especially on 3rd down where the ball has to be thrown past the sticks. He's piled up the yardage stats and TDs, which is ironic considering how conservatively he's played as a whole, but I just don't see the aggressiveness that needs to be there for the team to be able to put much pressure on an opposing defense. Cousins has also made a lot of costly mistakes with key turnovers being the most obvious and costly. Maybe some of this rests in KOC's lap as well for playcalling and game planning. Hard to say, but the 2023 Vikings offense is not an aggressive offense.

2) Execution, specifically on the part of the receivers, has been nothing short of a horror show, with TJ Hockenson as the poster boy of the problem, but there is plenty of blame to go around. I can't blame Cousins for all the drops and fumbles. Lots of sloppy play at the skill positions.

3) Defensive backfield has been ineffective for the most part. Receivers continue to be left wide open, sometimes for big gains and often in situations where the DBs can safely play with more aggression. Picks have been few and far between and are often the result of poor throws more than anything a particular Vikings DB has done to make a break on a route. They are a passive group that seems to lack the instincts needed to put themselves in position to make plays. Not sure if this is a defensive coordinator thing or a player talent thing, but it continues to be a weak area and a liability.

4) Spotty front seven play. Sometimes they get pressure on the QB, sometimes they don't. Sometimes they look solid against the run, sometimes they can't seem to stop it even when they know it is coming. Just not seeing the level of consistency in the front seven that is needed on a solid defense, and while the overall defensive rankings have improved compared to last year's defense, they remain solidly in the bottom half of the league's defenses overall with little prospect of improvement, at least this year.

On the bright side this year:

1) Offensive line play seems to be better overall. They struggled out of the gate against the Bucs but have steadily improved both in the run and pass game. Not an elite unit, but they have played well enough for the rest of the offense to be better than it has been.

2) Special teams have been pretty good. While not flawless, I can't say special teams has cost them any games.

3) Some young talent like Addison and Pace Jr. have done well and look like promising prospects.

Overall, last year's team was nowhere near as good as their record indicated. This year's team is probably better than their record indicates, but they have under-performed badly on offense. In their two wins, IMHO, the offense could have cost them both games were it not for the defense coming up big late. When a team has as much money invested on one side of the ball as the 2023 Vikings do, that side of the ball should not be a liability. KAM is going to have to take a long, hard look at things this offseason. The Vikings literally cannot afford to pay so much to get so little in return.

[VikingsVictorious]

The Vikings defense politely said "Shove It" to your prediction.

I wasn't able to watch the game, but the stat line looked pretty ugly (and not in favor of the Vikings):

First downs
- Bears 18
- Vikings 12

Total plays
- Bears 65
- Vikings 55

Total yards
- Bears 275
- Vikings 220

Passing yards (the only statistical category where the Vikings led)
- Bears 113
- Vikings 174

Rushing yards
- Bears 162 (!)
- Vikings 46 (!!)

Time of possession
- Bears 35:11
- Vikings 24:49

Normally, if I saw a stat line like that and didn't watch the game I'd guess the Bears would have won comfortably.

I talked to a Vikings fan who did watch the game and he said the offense was super conservative (again) with Kirk throwing short all day. He said the Vikings offense was also three-and-out most of the second half, and the Bears were marching for what would have been the go-ahead score late had the Bears QB at the time not thrown a duck ball right to Murphy that Murphy then proceeded to try to return only to get it knocked out from behind.

Anyway, a win is a win I guess but did you really come away from that game feeling good about the Vikings going forward on either side of the ball? The Vikings fan I talked to thought the Vikings deserved to lose the game.

Did the Vikings have a great game? No. Did I say anything to the effect that we did? No. Did we deserve to lose the game? No. We scored more points so we deserved to win. Was your prediction of the Bears scoring 42 against us anywhere near the realm of reality? No. I thought I'd have some fun with it.

[CharVike]

Right now I can't determine who is carrying the most fault. But you can't blame every single player on the team.

If I had to highlight the areas of concern on this year's Vikings, I'd rank them in this order:

1) Cousins is playing well, but he's been very conservative, often opting for the check down route, especially on 3rd down where the ball has to be thrown past the sticks. He's piled up the yardage stats and TDs, which is ironic considering how conservatively he's played as a whole, but I just don't see the aggressiveness that needs to be there for the team to be able to put much pressure on an opposing defense. Cousins has also made a lot of costly mistakes with key turnovers being the most obvious and costly. Maybe some of this rests in KOC's lap as well for playcalling and game planning. Hard to say, but the 2023 Vikings offense is not an aggressive offense.

2) Execution, specifically on the part of the receivers, has been nothing short of a horror show, with TJ Hockenson as the poster boy of the problem, but there is plenty of blame to go around. I can't blame Cousins for all the drops and fumbles. Lots of sloppy play at the skill positions.

3) Defensive backfield has been ineffective for the most part. Receivers continue to be left wide open, sometimes for big gains and often in situations where the DBs can safely play with more aggression. Picks have been few and far between and are often the result of poor throws more than anything a particular Vikings DB has done to make a break on a route. They are a passive group that seems to lack the instincts needed to put themselves in position to make plays. Not sure if this is a defensive coordinator thing or a player talent thing, but it continues to be a weak area and a liability.

4) Spotty front seven play. Sometimes they get pressure on the QB, sometimes they don't. Sometimes they look solid against the run, sometimes they can't seem to stop it even when they know it is coming. Just not seeing the level of consistency in the front seven that is needed on a solid defense, and while the overall defensive rankings have improved compared to last year's defense, they remain solidly in the bottom half of the league's defenses overall with little prospect of improvement, at least this year.

On the bright side this year:

1) Offensive line play seems to be better overall. They struggled out of the gate against the Bucs but have steadily improved both in the run and pass game. Not an elite unit, but they have played well enough for the rest of the offense to be better than it has been.

2) Special teams have been pretty good. While not flawless, I can't say special teams has cost them any games.

3) Some young talent like Addison and Pace Jr. have done well and look like promising prospects.

Overall, last year's team was nowhere near as good as their record indicated. This year's team is probably better than their record indicates, but they have under-performed badly on offense. In their two wins, IMHO, the offense could have cost them both games were it not for the defense coming up big late. When a team has as much money invested on one side of the ball as the 2023 Vikings do, that side of the ball should not be a liability. KAM is going to have to take a long, hard look at things this offseason. The Vikings literally cannot afford to pay so much to get so little in return.

I'm not sure what you mean by aggressive offense. Is that big play ability like throwing bombs, avg per attempt? Even with the ground game part. I know our rushing attack sucks but can you be aggressive and keep doing something that's not working? We can't break any long gainers which is less aggressive. This Hock is terrible. I would trade his lame a$$. We turn the ball over Cousins hits Oliver with a longer pass and then he coughs it up. The guy is a blocker. Sucks as a catcher.

[VikingLord]

I'm not sure what you mean by aggressive offense. Is that big play ability like throwing bombs, avg per attempt? Even with the ground game part. I know our rushing attack sucks but can you be aggressive and keep doing something that's not working? We can't break any long gainers which is less aggressive.

Aggressive offense involves more mid-range and deep pass attempts, fewer attempts where the ball is thrown within 3 yards or even behind the line of scrimmage, and more misdirection in the run game. I think Cousins is averaging a low yards-per-pass average (haven't looked up where he ranks, so I could be wrong), and I believe the Vikings offense is near the bottom of the league in explosive pass plays of 20+ yards. That wouldn't be a big problem if they otherwise weren't turning it over and were executing in the short to medium passing game, but they are and they're not, respectively, so in my view the lack of attempts to lengthen and widen the field in the passing game is not helping them.

In the run game, I see a lot of interior attempts at what are essentially quick hitters. Maybe they do that because Mattison lacks the patience and vision to cut back and improvise as he reaches the line, or maybe they do it because they lack the size and strength along the offensive line at the point of attack to open the type of holes that a north-south runner like Mattison could exploit more easily, or maybe some combination of both, but they seem very predictable in the run game on offense and have struggled to get Mattison anywhere near the second level.

I can't blame it on JJ being out, either, as they weren't doing much deep or in terms of misdirection before he went out.

Don't get me wrong - the bulk of what ails the offense is the turnovers and poor execution overall. If they clean that up they can be good or even very good without the need for more aggressive attempts. I would just like to see them back at least the defensive secondary they're facing off a bit, and that can be done by trying to get it over their heads at least a few times a game.

[CharVike]

I'm not sure what you mean by aggressive offense. Is that big play ability like throwing bombs, avg per attempt? Even with the ground game part. I know our rushing attack sucks but can you be aggressive and keep doing something that's not working? We can't break any long gainers which is less aggressive.

Aggressive offense involves more mid-range and deep pass attempts, fewer attempts where the ball is thrown within 3 yards or even behind the line of scrimmage, and more misdirection in the run game. I think Cousins is averaging a low yards-per-pass average (haven't looked up where he ranks, so I could be wrong), and I believe the Vikings offense is near the bottom of the league in explosive pass plays of 20+ yards. That wouldn't be a big problem if they otherwise weren't turning it over and were executing in the short to medium passing game, but they are and they're not, respectively, so in my view the lack of attempts to lengthen and widen the field in the passing game is not helping them.

In the run game, I see a lot of interior attempts at what are essentially quick hitters. Maybe they do that because Mattison lacks the patience and vision to cut back and improvise as he reaches the line, or maybe they do it because they lack the size and strength along the offensive line at the point of attack to open the type of holes that a north-south runner like Mattison could exploit more easily, or maybe some combination of both, but they seem very predictable in the run game on offense and have struggled to get Mattison anywhere near the second level.

I can't blame it on JJ being out, either, as they weren't doing much deep or in terms of misdirection before he went out.

Don't get me wrong - the bulk of what ails the offense is the turnovers and poor execution overall. If they clean that up they can be good or even very good without the need for more aggressive attempts. I would just like to see them back at least the defensive secondary they're facing off a bit, and that can be done by trying to get it over their heads at least a few times a game.

That's a good explanation. Let's face it Matti was a fine fill in player. Dumping it off to him is stupid. Just to catch the dam thing takes a tremendous effort. He not natural. The guy for the 49ers the catch is smooth and he's looking to bust it. Can't this Chandler catch and go? We haven't played smooth on O. Way to many miss ques and every player has contributed. Hock is the leader. Every throw to him is a huge risk. That's what we see. I wonder if he's even running the correct route. Once he did nothing in camp it was over. I seen that before. I'm surprised he's not hurt.

[psjordan]

Maybe some of this rests in KOC's lap as well for playcalling and game planning. Hard to say, but the 2023 Vikings offense is not an aggressive offense.

We are 26th in the league in 3rd down conversion rate (and about 1% away from being 30th).

To me (assuming a decent sample size), this is almost ALWAYS due to the offensive game plan. In particular, a lack of imagination - or a lack of studying film from around the league to see what the successful teams are doing on 3rd down.

Sure we've dropped passes, etc., but in the long run the player mistakes on 3rd down tend to even out with players making a play or gaining that last yard for the first.

I do like the progress the OL has made, but overall it seems to me that most of the major issues come back to (head) coaching. In our fifth game of the season we simply cannot have four 3-and-out drives in the second half of a close game.

Also as an aside, KOC seems to always get the short end of the stick with refs. I don't know if he's not vehement enough early in games, or whether the refs see him as a newbie that has to earn stripes. Having been a HC, I know the game within the game of getting in the refs ears early to get close calls later. KOC looks a bit wimpy out there. Maybe it's just me.

[VikingLord]

Also as an aside, KOC seems to always get the short end of the stick with refs. I don't know if he's not vehement enough early in games, or whether the refs see him as a newbie that has to earn stripes. Having been a HC, I know the game within the game of getting in the refs ears early to get close calls later. KOC looks a bit wimpy out there. Maybe it's just me.

That's a really interesting observation. While I don't think the Vikings have been overly shafted by the refs this year, there is no doubt they haven't been gifted much by them either.

I just can't see KOC getting overly upset. It's not his character and I agree in some situations that could be costly. Maybe the Wilfs need to hire an "anger translator" for him like the Key and Peele skit with Obama and Luther.

[VikingsVictorious]

I wonder if the Bears can get anything by trading Fields. Bagent is clearly better.