Thoughts

[DK Sweets]

What upsets me is that weaknesses that were obvious last year remained glaring weaknesses last night: poor blocking, poor tackling, terrible run defense. The LBs are taking a lot of heat for the latter (and rightly so) but I thought the defensive line was pushed around far too often last night. They were beaten at the point of attack with disturbing regularity.

The Vikes were out-coached and out-played in nearly every phase of the game last night. Bridgewater's supposedly terrific accuracy was in short supply and it's mind-boggling that Peterson only carried the ball 4 times in the first half and only touched the ball 13 times. The 49ers were clearly the more physical team. That has to trouble Mike Zimmer.

There's barely a positive thing to say about the team's performance last night, although I did love Smith's hit on Kaepernick and Priefer's special teams came up with two big plays early (creating opportunities the offense then squandered).

I hope they can re-group and play better next week because last night, the Vikes were craptastic.

R-E-L-A-X

You're right, those were some weak areas, and it was disappointing. Answer me this, though: on a scale of 1-10, how close do you think this team got to reaching its potential?

I just can't get over how much this reminded me of the Patriots/Chiefs game last year. I sat there thinking "Wow. Tom Brady looks like Christian Ponder when he doesn't have time. This defense is being shredded. Nobody seems to be on the same page."

Somehow, the Patriots pulled it together. They put together a functional O-line and adjusted the play calling. They made adjustments on defense and played to their strengths. They turned negatives into positives and we know how that season ended (with deflated footballs! They cheated!!

...sorry, I couldn't help myself...)

Look, I'm not saying Mike Zimmer is Bill Belichick. I'm not saying Teddy Bridgewater is Tom Brady. I'm just pointing out that this season does not have to be a reflection of last night, and teams are more than capable of making adjustments and fighting through adversity.

There are definitely reasons to be really, really disappointed in last nights game. I'm keeping my hand off the panic button for now, though.

(Definitely hope Zim is pressing the "#### YOU GUYS I'M GONNA KICK YOUR #### WE'RE GONNA FIX THIS #### AND WE'RE GONNA FIX IT NOW" button, though.)

[Pondering Her Percy]

First of all, I've never been so excited for a game and then so let down.

Second, I seriously question some of these observations.

Jerick McKinnon played good? Why because he had one decent run? Yeah real stellar.

People blame AP?? Did he play the best, no. But he ran the ball 10 times. Let me repeat 10 TIMES. An average workhorse runs the about 20 times a game. He caught the ball well out of the backfield and did fine in pass protection but we all want to say Jerick McKinnon looked better because he had 1 run for 15 yards? Give me a break. Where are all the fans on here that said how horrible McKinnon was when he was taking legitimate carries in the preseason and averaging about 2.5 per carry? But now all of the sudden he looked good because he ran for 15 yards on 1 play?? My goodness

Also, everyone loves to point the finger at AP, the line and this defense but how about Teddy?? If Ponder put up identical stats to Teddy tonight, every amount of offensive blame would fall on Ponders shoulders. Teddy couldn't get us in any kind of rhythm and looked completely shook in the beginning of that game but since he's our golden boy, many don't even bring his play up. How about Teddy getting in a rhythm so we can open up some holes for AP. I put this game way more on Teddy than I do AP. There were plenty of times where Teddy held onto the ball for an hour while our line blocked their butts off. We cause 2 TOs and Teddy goes 0-3 after the blocked punt. But yeah AP really cost us there Then he does very little after the next TO. Following 2 TOs AP touched the ball 1 time. ONCE!!! Who's fault is that? Not Adrian's I can tell you that. It just shows how oblivious people are when they watch these games

Defensively, run defense was bad, yeah. But we held them to 10 points most of the game. It's just our offense could go nowhere.

Individual ups and downs:

Ups:
Matt Kalil- I thought he played very well all game which is a good sign
Mike Wallace- did a good job getting separation
Xavier Rhodes- did very well in coverage all night

Downs:
Teddy Bridgewater- couldn't get in any kind of rhythm, held the ball way to long
From Joe Berger to the right- of course, it's where many of the injuries happened (Phil and Sully) but they gave up a lot of pressure on that side and couldn't pick up a blitz to save their lives.
Everson Griffen- missed way too many tackles
Chad Greenway- looked awful. Starters need to be Barr, Kendricks and Hodges
Andrew Sendejo- looked lost out there
Walsh and Locke- both looked terrible

[IrishViking]

[quote="Mothman" it's mind-boggling that Peterson only carried the ball 4 times in the first half and only touched the ball 13 times. [/quote]


I am not sure. Mckinnon looked BETTER than AP. I know that sounds laughable and I totally agree but the fact remains that just based off of the numbers from last night Mckinnon is out producing AP by DOUBLE. Its an extremely small sample size but their run styles highlight the difference. I said before (above) I don't think that APs famine famine feast style will work. I think Mckinnon's some, some, lots style will be a much better fit with Norv's offense. We all like to imagine Defenses quaking in their boots when they think about AP coming to town but bottom line is, if they can pretty much bank on AP running into his own line for a 3 yard loss roughly 20-25% of the time, I think it really reduces the "game planning for AP" thing.

[IrishViking]

First of all, I've never been so excited for a game and then so let down.

Second, I seriously question some of these observations.

Jerick McKinnon played good? Why because he had one decent run? Yeah real stellar.

People blame AP?? Did he play the best, no. But he ran the ball 10 times. Let me repeat 10 TIMES. An average workhorse runs the about 20 times a game. He caught the ball well out of the backfield and did fine in pass protection but we all want to say Jerick McKinnon looked better because he had 1 run for 15 yards? Give me a break. Where are all the fans on here that said how horrible McKinnon was when he was taking legitimate carries in the preseason and averaging about 2.5 per carry? But now all of the sudden he looked good because he ran for 15 yards on 1 play?? My goodness

Also, everyone loves to point the finger at AP, the line and this defense but how about Teddy?? If Ponder put up identical stats to Teddy tonight, every amount of offensive blame would fall on Ponders shoulders. Teddy couldn't get us in any kind of rhythm and looked completely shook in the beginning of that game but since he's our golden boy, many don't even bring his play up. How about Teddy getting in a rhythm so we can open up some holes for AP. I put this game way more on Teddy than I do AP. There were plenty of times where Teddy held onto the ball for an hour while our line blocked their butts off. We cause 2 TOs and Teddy goes 0-3 after the blocked punt. But yeah AP really cost us there Then he does very little after the next TO. Following 2 TOs AP touched the ball 1 time. ONCE!!! Who's fault is that? Not Adrian's I can tell you that

Defensively, run defense was bad, yeah. But we held them to 10 points most of the game. It's just our offense could go nowhere.

Individual ups and downs:

Ups:
Matt Kalil- I thought he played very well all game which is a good sign
Mike Wallace- did a good job getting separation
Xavier Rhodes- did very well in coverage all night

Downs:
Teddy Bridgewater- couldn't get in any kind of rhythm, held the ball way to long
From Joe Berger to the right- of course, it's where many of the injuries happened (Phil and Sully) but they gave up a lot of pressure on that side and couldn't pick up a blitz to save their lives.
Everson Griffen- missed way too many tackles
Chad Greenway- looked awful. Starters need to be Barr, Kendricks and Hodges
Andrew Sendejo- looked lost out there
Walsh and Locke- both looked terrible

I disagree, I think Bridgewater did remarkably well for what he was given. If I had to venture a guess I think Ponder would have been more in the neighborhood of 120 yards and 2 interceptions.



Sorry, AP looked bad. Period. I'll go so far as to say he was held out because he was killing momentum by being TFL. Mckinnon looked better because he got the long run by hitting his crease and running the play. Not stutter stepping behind the line a half dozen times.

[fiestavike]

Also, everyone loves to point the finger at AP, the line and this defense but how about Teddy??

I think the game plan last night hinged on Teddy being composed and quick and accurate. Spreading them out and hitting them with an efficient passing game would have opened up the run.

Unfortunately Teddy was flustered, hesitant, and inaccurate. Game plan dead.

[fiestavike]

[quote="Mothman" it's mind-boggling that Peterson only carried the ball 4 times in the first half and only touched the ball 13 times.

I am not sure. Mckinnon looked BETTER than AP. I know that sounds laughable and I totally agree but the fact remains that just based off of the numbers from last night Mckinnon is out producing AP by DOUBLE. Its an extremely small sample size but their run styles highlight the difference. I said before (above) I don't think that APs famine famine feast style will work. I think Mckinnon's some, some, lots style will be a much better fit with Norv's offense. We all like to imagine Defenses quaking in their boots when they think about AP coming to town but bottom line is, if they can pretty much bank on AP running into his own line for a 3 yard loss roughly 20-25% of the time, I think it really reduces the "game planning for AP" thing.[/quote][/quote]

Peterson left a ton of yards on the field. It was odd to see him changing direction because there was a CB in his path. There were 4 yards minimum if he keeps rolling, instead he picks up -1 trying juke himself out. Take what's there and hit the guy in front of you.

Having said that, the pass he caught that led to him pushing the pile another 8 yards with 1 leg was a play that should be on his enshrinement video. Awesome play!

[Pondering Her Percy]

I disagree, I think Bridgewater did remarkably well for what he was given. If I had to venture a guess I think Ponder would have been more in the neighborhood of 120 yards and 2 interceptions.



Sorry, AP looked bad. Period. I'll go so far as to say he was held out because he was killing momentum by being TFL. Mckinnon looked better because he got the long run by hitting his crease and running the play. Not stutter stepping behind the line a half dozen times.

Oh my goodness Take the number 5 shades off pal. How about Teddy's 1-5 passing following TOs?? And AP touching the ball 1 time during those. He gets the ball 10 times and just because he didn't break a 90 yarder, now he's bad. Just because McKinnon had 1 good run doesn't mean he played good. AP carried guys 7 yards for a first down, does that mean he played good? Not according to your standards. By not looking at the numbers and looking at how Teddy played early in that game just shows me you clearly didn't watch too close

[Pondering Her Percy]

I think the game plan last night hinged on Teddy being composed and quick and accurate. Spreading them out and hitting them with an efficient passing game would have opened up the run.

Unfortunately Teddy was flustered, hesitant, and inaccurate. Game plan dead.

Exactly but somehow people think he did "well for what he was given" and AP was horrible when he hary touched the ball

[CbusVikesFan]

The sorest spots for me are
1. Linebackers
2. Blair Walsh/Jeff Locke
3. Teddy and his awkward throwing motion.
4. Teddy and his inaccuracy
5. Lack of pass rush
6. Norv and his no Bueno imagination
7. Rick Spielman and his no drafting ####.
8. Lack of depth all around
9. The whole scouting staff
10. Linebackers
Yes I know that the LB's are there twice. Our run defense is absolutely atrocious. Let me remind everyone how I wanted CJM last year. Is Barr playing at the level of CJM? NO. Ameer Abdullah is going to run wild this Sunday and the Vikings will lose another winnable game. IF what you saw last night is the best that this team has to offer, you didn't see much at all. They only had the whole offseason to prepare for this game. And that was the product put out on the field? SHAME ON YOU RICK SPIELMAN, WILFS, AND THE WHOLE SCOUTING STAFF. I am embarrassed as a Viking fan.

[fiestavike]

Exactly but somehow people think he did "well for what he was given" and AP was horrible when he hary touched the ball

AP was terrible too.

[dead_poet]

What upsets me is that weaknesses that were obvious last year remained glaring weaknesses last night: poor blocking, poor tackling, terrible run defense. The LBs are taking a lot of heat for the latter (and rightly so) but I thought the defensive line was pushed around far too often last night. They were beaten at the point of attack with disturbing regularity.

I refuse to go back and watch this JV "game" but I thought the defensive tackles were getting some good push up front last night. I was more miffed at the lack of gap discipline of the linebackers and how god-awful the Vikings defensive ends were at setting the edge. I love Greenway but I'm officially starting a petition for Kendricks to start at WLB. That's not to say any linebacker played worth a darn but I thought Chad was particularly bad last night.

And here's my take on the offensive line: with Kalil playing better and Harris looking surprisingly serviceable this line could've been average or better. Certainly not the complete liability we saw last night. The injuries to Sullivan and Loadholt were absolute killers. It's not like Rick isn't investing in the line, either.

John Sullivan: $7 million (#4 paid center in average salary/year). When healthy, Sullivan is a top-5 center
Phil Loadholt: $4.9 million (#3 paid RT in average salary/year). When healthy, Loadholt is a top-10 right tackle
Brandon Fusco: $4.8 million/year (#6 paid guard in average salary/year). Has been a top-15 guard.

Kalil is still on his rookie contract but he's a former #4 overall pick. In terms of draft "investment" he was a high one. When healthy he was an above-average left tackle and is shockingly looking competent again.

Mike Harris is the only one that could be considered not a high "investment" but he's looking OK.

Berger has been (emphasis on "has been") a quality G/C backup. Clemmings was a fourth-rounder (some thought could be a round 1-2) but wasn't expected to start this year.

The dude the Vikings traded for has been billed as a solid swing tackle.

At full strength, the line shouldn't be a huge liability and I'd say that the depth truly isn't outside of other teams. But the injuries have been devastating, much like those to the secondary a couple of seasons ago. Everything starts there for the offense and this offense will have to adjust accordingly but it's not looking good early. I know this probably isn't realistic, but I want to trade a fifth-rounder to Cincinnati for Whitworth (free agent after the season that won't be re-signed by Cincy) and have him start at RT. I know Rick will not want to trade a sixth and now a fifth during the season when he values those picks so much but God help us. Seriously.

The Vikes were out-coached and out-played in nearly every phase of the game last night. Bridgewater's supposedly terrific accuracy was in short supply and it's mind-boggling that Peterson only carried the ball 4 times in the first half and only touched the ball 13 times. The 49ers were clearly the more physical team. That has to trouble Mike Zimmer.

I said it in another thread but the Vikings seemingly game-planning away from their best player harkens back to eras of old. It angers me so much to see this team purposefully not playing to its supposed strength. And you're right about the physicality. I don't know if it was the late start, the travel or what but the Vikings were flat and out-muscled and played with very little discipline (on defense). This was NOT a Mike Zimmer performance. I keep thinking...you know how Key & Peele have Obama's "Anger Translator" Luther? I think the Vikings might need the reverse for Zimmer. I picture Al Franken's Stuart Smalley "interpreting" a Mike Zimmer explative-filled tirade and it's about the only thing that's keeping me from punching things.

I hope they can re-group and play better next week because last night, the Vikes were craptastic.

You can say that again.

[IrishViking]

Oh my goodness Take the number 5 shades off pal. How about Teddy's 1-5 passing following TOs?? And AP touching the ball 1 time during those. He gets the ball 10 times and just because he didn't break a 90 yarder, now he's bad. Just because McKinnon had 1 good run doesn't mean he played good. AP carried guys 7 yards for a first down, does that mean he played good? Not according to your standards. By not looking at the numbers and looking at how Teddy played early in that game just shows me you clearly didn't watch too close

He also had a 70+% completion rate and only threw one interception despite being hounded all night, that is pretty good ball security.


AP wasnt bad because he didnt pull of a 90 yarder. AP was bad because he lost yards on back to back plays and wasn't producing anything. Mckinnon was EMPIRICALLY better in yards per carry and simply looked better than AP because he was hitting holes. I agree it would be insane to take mckinnon over AP but AP needs to improve his play because right now mckinnon should be in and I have no problem with it. Bridgewater looked awful early and made some poor decisions. None of which lead to a turn over. Funny enough if you apply that same standard to AP you clearly didnt watch the game because he looked like day old garbage except for that run (which was awesome) Or Bridgewater did look good because he had one 27 yard connection.


I am not saying we need to cut AP. but HE needs to improve. Is it so hard to believe that a 30+ year old back out of the league for a year might actually need to improve?

[Pondering Her Percy]

I think the game plan last night hinged on Teddy being composed and quick and accurate. Spreading them out and hitting them with an efficient passing game would have opened up the run.

Unfortunately Teddy was flustered, hesitant, and inaccurate. Game plan dead.

Exactly but somehow people think he did "well for what he was given" and AP was horrible when he hary touched the ball [/quote]

AP was terrible too.[/quote]

Pretty hard to judge when you get the ball 10 times. I could almost bet money every starting RB in the NFL out-carried him this week.

[Pondering Her Percy]

He also had a 70+% completion rate and only threw one interception despite being hounded all night, that is pretty good ball security.


AP wasnt bad because he didnt pull of a 90 yarder. AP was bad because he lost yards on back to back plays and wasn't producing anything. Mckinnon was EMPIRICALLY better in yards per carry and simply looked better than AP because he was hitting holes. I agree it would be insane to take mckinnon over AP but AP needs to improve his play because right now mckinnon should be in and I have no problem with it. Bridgewater looked awful early and made some poor decisions. None of which lead to a turn over. Funny enough if you apply that same standard to AP you clearly didnt watch the game because he looked like day old garbage except for that run (which was awesome) Or Bridgewater did look good because he had one 27 yard connection.


I am not saying we need to cut AP. but HE needs to improve. Is it so hard to believe that a 30+ year old back out of the league for a year might actually need to improve?

I don't by the 70% comp rate because you know just as well as I do, a lot of that came in garbage time. You say he was hounded all night which at times he was, but how many time did he sit back there for a solid 8 seconds and not get the ball out? I can remember about 4-5 times. That's good blocking by the OL and him not getting the ball out quick enough. Maybe guys weren't open but I find it hard to believe that on 5 plays, not 1 guy was ever open.

Also, you say McKinnon was hitting holes? McKinnon hit 1 hole. His other 2 carries totaled 5 yards. So he hit 1 hole 1 time. That still doesn't tell me anything about McKinnon. Peterson hit a couple holes as well. 2 that went for about 7-9 yards

[IrishViking]

Exactly but somehow people think he did "well for what he was given" and AP was horrible when he hary touched the ball

AP was terrible too.[/quote]

Pretty hard to judge when you get the ball 10 times. I could almost bet money every starting RB in the NFL out-carried him this week.[/quote]



I don't think Teddy was good by any means. I am simply impressed and relieved that he showed good ball security despite the S***show that was the rest of the game.


I agree but I don't think Norv's system is built for a runner like AP. It seems like their isn't the built in cushion for a few poor runs like there was under previous management. So if AP continues to run for negatives initially I don't believe that he will continue to get the ball enough to start breaking the big ones. Either the Oline needs to improve, Peterson needs to change his running style, or Norv needs to change parts of his system. All of those seem unlikely.