Quote: @MaroonBells said:
From an article: "The Vikings have trailed with less than 5 minutes remaining in three straight games and won each time."
Like everyone else I suspect, I want a blow out. But the Vikings are learning how to win close games, something they had so much trouble with last year.
And these experiences will serve them well later in the season.
Quote: @bigbone62 said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Wetlander said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Wetlander said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
And then the O got zimmerish and things went to shit.
Huh? The offense was on fire to start... but did you think we were gonna score a TD every drive? The overall numbers were great... 12/15 on 3rd downs... Had 29 1st downs to the Bears 14 on offense. We ran 79 offensive plays to their 47 and outgained them 429 to 271. We dominated the time of possession. We missed two long FGs that really could have been difference makers in the final score and tone of the game, but the offense was moving the ball all day. We didn't have a single 3 and out all game.
The Vikings missed a long FG before half time, then had a drive stall out and we missed another long FG in the 3rd quarter, and Cousins threw a pick on the next series. Despite some mid game adversity they found a way to not only score to take the lead... They did it with a 17 play 75 yard drive that took a ton of time off the clock and scored a TD and 2 pt conversion to put them back up by a score with less than 2 minutes remaining. The offense isn't Bills dominant, but they are really good. We've scored 28, 28, and 29 points since the Eagles game. If we keep doing that, we're gonna win a lot more games.
they got the lead, and then went a lot more conservative on the play calling until they had lost the lead and then they dialed it back up again. thats what happened under Zimmer as well, he would get a 2 score lead and then would change the offensive script that would slow down the O. We have seen the same thing with KOC this season, we start trying to run more and get away from what was working and as such become more predictable (not nearly as bad as Zimmer, but I see the same tendency to take the foot off the gas)
Did we go more conservative or did we just not have the same results as the opening three drives? I felt like the Vikings stayed aggressive all game, we just didn't capitalize on two drives that ended in FG tries, had an interception on another, and punted one time all game (was a bad punt, his first bad one all year).
I feel like we're projecting here... the offense is a lot different than what we ran under Zimmer.
they go into a more run first mode when they get that early lead, I understand wanting to run the clock, but I think its more important to keep the ball than it is to chew clock. Cook wasnt overly successful mid game and thats when things stalled out and forced the longer FG attempts. Its just a tendency that I seem to think is a bit of a pattern.
This is not an accurate take for this game. Games past perhaps. First two possessions they ran 4 times and passes 7.
2nd half drives
Drive One: 3 runs/3passes (Score at the start of the drive 21-16)
Drive Two: 1 run/4 passes (Score at the start of the drive 21-19)
Drive Three: 9 runs one of which was a KC scramble and the other a QB sneak/8 passes.(Score at the start of the drive 21-22)
I am maybe thinking more about the runs success and what the D was showing, more than once yesterday they had stacked the box, and KC checked into a terrible run... I was a happy to see the results early on, but it just seemed that the runs were ill timed and the results often showed. It just seemed that they were trying to force the run when a PA pass would have been more successful based on what the D was doing on some of them.
Quote: @Wetlander said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Wetlander said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
And then the O got zimmerish and things went to shit.
Huh? The offense was on fire to start... but did you think we were gonna score a TD every drive? The overall numbers were great... 12/15 on 3rd downs... Had 29 1st downs to the Bears 14 on offense. We ran 79 offensive plays to their 47 and outgained them 429 to 271. We dominated the time of possession. We missed two long FGs that really could have been difference makers in the final score and tone of the game, but the offense was moving the ball all day. We didn't have a single 3 and out all game.
The Vikings missed a long FG before half time, then had a drive stall out and we missed another long FG in the 3rd quarter, and Cousins threw a pick on the next series. Despite some mid game adversity they found a way to not only score to take the lead... They did it with a 17 play 75 yard drive that took a ton of time off the clock and scored a TD and 2 pt conversion to put them back up by a score with less than 2 minutes remaining. The offense isn't Bills dominant, but they are really good. We've scored 28, 28, and 29 points since the Eagles game. If we keep doing that, we're gonna win a lot more games.
they got the lead, and then went a lot more conservative on the play calling until they had lost the lead and then they dialed it back up again. thats what happened under Zimmer as well, he would get a 2 score lead and then would change the offensive script that would slow down the O. We have seen the same thing with KOC this season, we start trying to run more and get away from what was working and as such become more predictable (not nearly as bad as Zimmer, but I see the same tendency to take the foot off the gas)
Did we go more conservative or did we just not have the same results as the opening three drives? I felt like the Vikings stayed aggressive all game, we just didn't capitalize on two drives that ended in FG tries, had an interception on another, and punted one time all game (was a bad punt, his first bad one all year).
I feel like we're projecting here... the offense is a lot different than what we ran under Zimmer.
KOC hinted he went conservative at several points in the 2nd half and would change that.
|
