Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Misc. Thoughts: Season
#1
Here are my miscellaneous thoughts heading into the offseason:
  • Zimmer:  I am in the same age grouping as BarrNone and PurpleFaithful, which, I think makes us measure things differently.  For me, I measure everything against the need to win a SB.  Zimmer's assets: he has cleaned up the culture of this team; he has a coherent defensive philosophy; he has hired a good staff of teachers who have maximized the talents of udfa and low draft picks and he stress and offensive philosophy that can win during the playoffs.  Liabilities: too conservative on defense especially with a lead and against inferior teams; too much draft capital spent on DBs; too loyal to players on the backside of their careers and not creative in in-game adjustments.
  • Offensive Line:  The Vikes have been slowly upgrading the talent on the Oline and, in fact, the second Bears game gave me a lot of hope.  What is diminishing my hope is the fact the Viking coaching staff didn't start to rotate in some of the back-ups throughout the season to give them some experience.  Except on the dline, this seems to be a theme of this coaching staff.  I hope the Vikes give a draft pick or a back-up a legitimate chance to unseat Elflien.  The other area that really concerns me is how poorly this OLine did in picking up stunts.  It seemed like most stunts were successful.  This is especially distressing where the Vikes fall behind and have to go to more of a passing game because teams run more stunts when they don't have run responsibilities.  This could be coaching or a failure of communications.
  • Anthony Harris:  Unless he gives a substantial home town discount, I let him go.  Here are my reasons: (1) He plays next to Smith and that elevates Harris' play.  I don't doubt Harris is a very good safety but you can't discount he benefits greatly to playing with Smith.  Teams game plan around HS, they don't around AH.  (2)  Salary Cap.  Harris is going to get paid a lot and the Vikes are already over the salary cap.  Moreover, I don't think you can justify spending 20+ million on the safety position.  It is just not that important of a position.  (3)  Draft pick compensation.  Harris signing elsewhere probably gives the Vikings an extra third round pick next year.  Don't discount that allure.
  • Defensive Backs:  Okay, so Harris is gone.  Kearse is gone (6th round draft compensation?).  Rhodes should be gone.  I think you try to sign Mac A.  It would be nice to keep one of the CB "starters."  However, I read rumors that he was pissed that he injured himself (more) in the Chicago game.  I also don't think the Vikes sign Waynes -- he will get paid (maybe 4th or 5th round compensation)?
  • Mahomes v. Garoppolo:  Their respective performances in the SB made me think:  do you want a QB who plays well for 3 quarters but plays poorly in the 4th or a QB who plays mediocre or average for 3 quarters but plays his best when in the 4th?  I think the mindset of a QB must be like that of a CB -- you have to let go of the prior play.  You look at Mahomes on the sideline; he looks confident and loose even after some very poor throws.  You look at Garoppolo and you can see him getting tighter.  Look, I understand Mahomes is incredibly physically gifted, but it is his psychological make-up that propelled them through the playoffs.  You really want that QB who can put three very mediocre quarters behind him when crunch time arrives.
  • Prevent Defenses:  I am sorry but RIP to prevent defenses in this age of arm talent and hurry-up offenses.  (I still wish the Vikes had gone to the hurry up against the 49ers).
  • The Draft:  Zim's son is now co-defensive coordinator -- do you think Zim is not going to set him up for success?  Vikes draft for defense early and often.
  • Barr:  Every year there is this implicit promise that this is the year that Zim will unleash the Kraken but yet Barr's impact plays seem to reduce every year.  He is not living up to his contract and, frankly, I don't think that is his fault.  
Reply

#2
Good summary as usual.
Couple of thoughts of my own.  I think Zim does great with in game adjustments.  We don't have to travel too far back in time to see the lack of ability to adjust.
O line, I was a supporter of Elflein.  But I agree, I hope he sees serious competition next year.  Maybe he improves this offseason after a year a guard.  But we need an upgrade there.  As to the stunts, was that a sign of a rookie center?  Or was it lack of prep.  I think having new starters at 3 positions and a rookie center had much to do with that.
I really want to keep Harris.  But you make some great points.  Can't overspend at safety when we already have one of the best there.  At DB, I hope we keep Waynes and Mac.  Would be reasonable to fill one starters position, but not 3.  And our backups are Hill and who?  Hopefully Hughes recovers, but that is a stretch IMO.
Barr?  I think he is living up to his contract.  He does what Zim asks and does it very well.  Will be interesting to see what the scheme brings next year with some new faces leading the group.
Reply

#3
You are correct about Zim being better in in-game adjustments than previous regimes.  However, in the SF game, the 49ers pounded the ball repeatedly and I didn't think we adjusted well to that.  We could have done some run blitz or move Smith closer to the line, etc.

On the offensive side, I think Stefanski did a horrible job down the stretch in making adjustments.  By week 10, teams were sitting on the screens and yet, we didn't use that defensive tendency to our advantage.  Against San Fran, with their speed, I thought we should used misdirections a lot more -- especially in the second half.  It just seemed to me that when the defense made a countermove, we didn't have a counter-counter move.
Reply

#4
Quote: @VikingOracle said:
You are correct about Zim being better in in-game adjustments than previous regimes.  However, in the SF game, the 49ers pounded the ball repeatedly and I didn't think we adjusted well to that.  We could have done some run blitz or move Smith closer to the line, etc.

On the offensive side, I think Stefanski did a horrible job down the stretch in making adjustments.  By week 10, teams were sitting on the screens and yet, we didn't use that defensive tendency to our advantage.  Against San Fran, with their speed, I thought we should used misdirections a lot more -- especially in the second half.  It just seemed to me that when the defense made a countermove, we didn't have a counter-counter move.

Sometimes getting pounded is about being outplayed.  Their energy surpassed ours.  We got beat.  That said, I think we did adjust.  in the 3rd Q I think we started to slow them down.  But IIRC (and I mean I have forgotten most of that game already uninspired as it was) we stopped them on a drive or two but our offense turned the ball over or went 3 and out.  I just remember thinking, finally we got a stop.  Then the offense shit the bed.
On offense, I agree, I think Stef had trouble adjusting when the run wasn't working.  The one thing that I read tho, SF got gashed a few weeks before by the Rams with the boots and basically what we do well.  Kudos to their coaches, they used that bye week wisely and adjusted and were ready for us. 

To me, that game was lost by losing @GB and to GB at home and to Seattle/KC.  We didn't win the division and get a home game.  We didn't get a bye, so we traveled 2 weeks in a row and on a short rest.  SF took it to us and we didn't respond well enough.
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
3 Guest(s)

Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 Melroy van den Berg.