12-21-2018, 07:18 PM
Quote: @Jor-El said:
That is a pretty dark view. Alternatively,@greediron said:
I know Leber isn't necessarily correct, but your alternative explanations don't make me feel more comfortable about the Vikings. Seems like you're saying:1. JDF was hired because he was the prominent OC candidate around the league - mentality of the mob@Jor-El said:
Maybe discussed elsewhere, but I heard Ben Leber make some comments on the radio this week and he had some interesting takes on why JDF was hired during the offseason instead of Stefanski. According to him, hiring JDF was an overreaction to the loss in Philadelphia, and was expected to:
1) Allow the Vikings to copy the Eagles' offense that was successful in 2017
2) Let Zimmer find out how the Eagles embarrassed his defense in the NFCC
3) Hurt the Eagles
If true, it seems like a ridiculously knee-jerk hiring, especially regarding #3 and even #2 - the Saints seemed to have cracked our 2017 defense almost as well as the Eagles. Ridiculous knee-jerk hiring? he was the next best thing. If we didn't hire him, Shurmur may have, or Indy the Eagles would have promoted him. It was largely touted as one of the best hires. Who knew he didn't have what it takes to call a game?
I like Leber, but he isn't privy to inside info so I assume most of this is speculation. We needed an OC, JDF was one of the best options. As to figuring out how the eagles beat us, I think that is pretty simple. They changed their offense in the 1st week of the playoffs. There was really no film on the plays they ran. The same reason they poured it on the Pats in the super bowl.
Most defenses rely heavily on film and tendencies to put together a game plan. The Eagles changed theirs and it caught our defense by surprise. We were playing tight coverage, trying to deny the short RPO plays that had been their staple since Foles took over. They rarely threw deep with him. Once Case threw that stupid pick 6, momentum shifted. We had held them to 3 and out on their first drive. But with the score tied, Pederson took a chance and took some shots deep on double moves. We weren't prepared for this unknown offense as our D was in a fight to limit the success of the short RPO. A couple double moves (and another turnover by the offense) and suddenly the floodgates were open.
2. Our defense couldn't stop Philadelphia because they did something different and Zimmer and staff had no film to watch in pre-game preparation
Great - Vikings management does not have an original thought in their heads. Hire whoever is popular and trendy, and build defense around the assumption opponents will keep doing the same things they did all season without trying to surprise us.
1. JDF was a leading candidate for an offensive coordinator. We were able to hire the best young dynamic guy available (although he didn't rise to the occasion, that is hindsight.)
And if you read what I wrote, defense, especially ours, rely on film and tendencies. We were clamping down on their offense which consisted of short RPO passes. Playing tight leaves a D vulnerable deep to the double moves. A D can't stop everything. This year we limit the big plays and make teams take smaller gains and methodically work their way down the field. But many bitch about that short stuff being open. Except Chicago did the same against the Rams.
I am sure the coaches tried to adjust in the second half, but by that time the emotions had left, Philly had control of the game and was at home. Face it, they won the SB that year beating the Patriots the same way they beat us.
Your view is pretty dark and narrow IMO. It doesn't account for the fact that Philly was an NFL team with NFL talent with NFL coaches trying just as hard as we were to win the game. And they were at home and after the Pick6, momentum swung hard their way and our offense shit the bed with another turnover shortly after.
You can't have it both ways. Phillys offense was too good for our D, but JDF was a horrible hire just following the herd mentality.
