Quote: @AGRforever said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ StickyBun said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ StickyBun said:
Well, lets get real about the 2nd half: it wasn't great, but also the Vikings had a TD taken off the board, shut down their offense on a drive that was kept going because of a bullshit penalty, etc. Missed FG. Dumb penalties. Minnesota could have easily scored more points. KOC also went conservative. It wasn't like the Saints figured something out.
I guess we saw it differently, I saw Dobbs do whatever he wanted in the first half and struggle more in the 2nd half, I think the aints made some adjustments that we didn't counter very well. Sometimes penalties come from not having a good blocking scheme called or other things the D is doing that you didn't expect. Missed FG... it was about 55 IIRC, hardly an indication of a successful drive. Either way, the tide shifted and it wasnt the same result.
I didn't say Dobbs wasn't less effective in the 2nd half. What I'm saying is the team left at least 10 points on the table after halftime. It should have been a more comfortable win. There's no perfect game. Cincy gave up 14 points in a minute yesterday. Look around the league, its very normal. I just don't get the fans going this morning, 'yeah, but the 2nd half.....'. Its a total eye roll for me. Its the same stuff I see unrealistic fans get on Kirk Cousins about.
Dobbs has still been a Viking less than 2 weeks, lol. Just something to consider.
I want putting the 2nd half struggles in him alone, I said play calling needs to adjust, he just runs the plays he's given. The saints adjusted their blitz to help contain him as well, he didn't have the escape lanes in the 2nd he had in the first half.
I'm not dogging Dobbs, just pointing out adjustments were made and it was effective imo.
Could have been the eye test, but to me it looked like the aints blitzed Dobbs a ton more and I said the same thing. Whomever the Vikings play going forward, they’ll look to the 2nd half on how to play it.
Where I hold out hope, TJH was sitting a ton more in the 2nd half and he was the offense in the first half. Jefferson is going to be back soon. Imagine our best player having fun with this new offense.
Actually, in the next week or two the Vikings will have several players back from IR. Mainly, JJ and Davenport.
Quote: @mblack said:
KOC in the second half was more a mathematician. In his presser he mentioned the following - He owned up to the poor second half
- said they analysed the number of times each team will have the ball and where pretty good with slowing the game down
- he felt if they had one more score they would put the gane beyond reach (again without us turning the ball over) so that was what they were playing for
- they wanted to protect the ball and steal a possession to make it even harder (and slow the game)
- So with that in mind, l running the ball made sense
- Well then Jamies happened which changed the dynamics and our offense could not get back in groove.
- Interestingly, the game would have been easier if we converted two more first downs.
i think KOC is not going to go deep in his play book / game plan if he does not have to. The less he reveals the more he has to work with down the stretch. I dont think us being in these close one score games is all due to tough opponents. i think it has to do more with them counting possessions which sometimes bites them in the butt with turnovers and poor execution.
He is still growing in his role.
this sounds like something Zimmer would have said.... I have never understood the notion that momentum is like a throttle, IMO you can dial back the risk, without going into a shell. its damn tough to get a key turnover or big play that will swing momentum back your way once you lose it, so why give it up willingly? as far as saving plays.... a team can only practice against so many things in a given week, sure you dont want to loose your "special" plays that you may need for a key 2 point conversion or late game situation, but again, you dont have to go into a shell when what you are doing is getting sniffed out. IMO the best way to eat the clock and keep the other team from coming back, first downs, keep those chains moving and the rest will take care of itself.
Quote: @mblack said:
KOC in the second half was more a mathematician. In his presser he mentioned the following - He owned up to the poor second half
- said they analysed the number of times each team will have the ball and where pretty good with slowing the game down
- he felt if they had one more score they would put the gane beyond reach (again without us turning the ball over) so that was what they were playing for
- they wanted to protect the ball and steal a possession to make it even harder (and slow the game)
- So with that in mind, l running the ball made sense
- Well then Jamies happened which changed the dynamics and our offense could not get back in groove.
- Interestingly, the game would have been easier if we converted two more first downs.
i think KOC is not going to go deep in his play book / game plan if he does not have to. The less he reveals the more he has to work with down the stretch. I dont think us being in these close one score games is all due to tough opponents. i think it has to do more with them counting possessions which sometimes bites them in the butt with turnovers and poor execution.
He is still growing in his role.
I actually think this is a pretty good explanation on KOC's part. It makes sense. The only thing I hate seeing is when he only rushes 3 linemen. It never works. A NFL QB will find a guy if given enough time to throw, even dropping 8 in coverage.
Jameis pulled a rabbit out of his ass on a few throws but then threw 2 horrible INTs. Fine with me.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ mblack said:
KOC in the second half was more a mathematician. In his presser he mentioned the following - He owned up to the poor second half
- said they analysed the number of times each team will have the ball and where pretty good with slowing the game down
- he felt if they had one more score they would put the gane beyond reach (again without us turning the ball over) so that was what they were playing for
- they wanted to protect the ball and steal a possession to make it even harder (and slow the game)
- So with that in mind, l running the ball made sense
- Well then Jamies happened which changed the dynamics and our offense could not get back in groove.
- Interestingly, the game would have been easier if we converted two more first downs.
i think KOC is not going to go deep in his play book / game plan if he does not have to. The less he reveals the more he has to work with down the stretch. I dont think us being in these close one score games is all due to tough opponents. i think it has to do more with them counting possessions which sometimes bites them in the butt with turnovers and poor execution.
He is still growing in his role.
this sounds like something Zimmer would have said.... I have never understood the notion that momentum is like a throttle, IMO you can dial back the risk, without going into a shell. its damn tough to get a key turnover or big play that will swing momentum back your way once you lose it, so why give it up willingly? as far as saving plays.... a team can only practice against so many things in a given week, sure you dont want to loose your "special" plays that you may need for a key 2 point conversion or late game situation, but again, you dont have to go into a shell when what you are doing is getting sniffed out. IMO the best way to eat the clock and keep the other team from coming back, first downs, keep those chains moving and the rest will take care of itself. At the bold...
You have to bring that name up again :angry: . That was exactly what I thought when he said it.
The difference is KOC actually explained his thought process. It actually was refreshing to hear it was not chance but they thought it through. I am OK with that. I also like the fact that he owned up to it.
However, I think Jamies happened and they could not recover. I do hope that is a lesson.
Quote: @mblack said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ mblack said:
KOC in the second half was more a mathematician. In his presser he mentioned the following - He owned up to the poor second half
- said they analysed the number of times each team will have the ball and where pretty good with slowing the game down
- he felt if they had one more score they would put the gane beyond reach (again without us turning the ball over) so that was what they were playing for
- they wanted to protect the ball and steal a possession to make it even harder (and slow the game)
- So with that in mind, l running the ball made sense
- Well then Jamies happened which changed the dynamics and our offense could not get back in groove.
- Interestingly, the game would have been easier if we converted two more first downs.
i think KOC is not going to go deep in his play book / game plan if he does not have to. The less he reveals the more he has to work with down the stretch. I dont think us being in these close one score games is all due to tough opponents. i think it has to do more with them counting possessions which sometimes bites them in the butt with turnovers and poor execution.
He is still growing in his role.
this sounds like something Zimmer would have said.... I have never understood the notion that momentum is like a throttle, IMO you can dial back the risk, without going into a shell. its damn tough to get a key turnover or big play that will swing momentum back your way once you lose it, so why give it up willingly? as far as saving plays.... a team can only practice against so many things in a given week, sure you dont want to loose your "special" plays that you may need for a key 2 point conversion or late game situation, but again, you dont have to go into a shell when what you are doing is getting sniffed out. IMO the best way to eat the clock and keep the other team from coming back, first downs, keep those chains moving and the rest will take care of itself. At the bold...
You have to bring that name up again :angry: . That was exactly what I thought when he said it.
The difference is KOC actually explained his thought process. It actually was refreshing to hear it was not chance but they thought it through. I am OK with that. I also like the fact that he owned up to it.
However, I think Jamies happened and they could not recover. I do hope that is a lesson.
sorry brother, I know how certain names can trigger our fan derangement syndrome, I will try and be more considerate in the future. =)
Quote: @mblack said:
KOC in the second half was more a mathematician. In his presser he mentioned the following - He owned up to the poor second half
- said they analysed the number of times each team will have the ball and where pretty good with slowing the game down
- he felt if they had one more score they would put the gane beyond reach (again without us turning the ball over) so that was what they were playing for
- they wanted to protect the ball and steal a possession to make it even harder (and slow the game)
- So with that in mind, l running the ball made sense
- Well then Jamies happened which changed the dynamics and our offense could not get back in groove.
- Interestingly, the game would have been easier if we converted two more first downs.
i think KOC is not going to go deep in his play book / game plan if he does not have to. The less he reveals the more he has to work with down the stretch. I dont think us being in these close one score games is all due to tough opponents. i think it has to do more with them counting possessions which sometimes bites them in the butt with turnovers and poor execution.
He is still growing in his role.
This, & the unmentionable Mannion being the next man up, gulp…! 
Quote: @mblack said:
KOC in the second half was more a mathematician. In his presser he mentioned the following - He owned up to the poor second half
- said they analysed the number of times each team will have the ball and where pretty good with slowing the game down
- he felt if they had one more score they would put the gane beyond reach (again without us turning the ball over) so that was what they were playing for
- they wanted to protect the ball and steal a possession to make it even harder (and slow the game)
- So with that in mind, l running the ball made sense
- Well then Jamies happened which changed the dynamics and our offense could not get back in groove.
- Interestingly, the game would have been easier if we converted two more first downs.
i think KOC is not going to go deep in his play book / game plan if he does not have to. The less he reveals the more he has to work with down the stretch. I dont think us being in these close one score games is all due to tough opponents. i think it has to do more with them counting possessions which sometimes bites them in the butt with turnovers and poor execution.
He is still growing in his role.
I get the idea of wanting to slow down the game and protect the lead, but they are not capable of closing out games on the ground right now. There was one sequence with around 4-minutes left where they handed the ball off three times in a row. It did get New Orleans to burn 2 time outs, but the running game was going nowhere and it lead to a 3-and-out. I get that can't give up on the run entirely in those situations, but I wish they would at least mix in some high percentages passes to give them a chance of picking up 1st down. Before Akers got hurt, they had a good screen going for the first time in ages, but that's disappeared. Upgrading running back needs to be high on their list for the offseason, since the current group has been underwhelming. It would be great if Chandler or Nwangu could break out, but I'm not counting on it either.
Quote: @Tyr said:
@ mblack said:
KOC in the second half was more a mathematician. In his presser he mentioned the following - He owned up to the poor second half
- said they analysed the number of times each team will have the ball and where pretty good with slowing the game down
- he felt if they had one more score they would put the gane beyond reach (again without us turning the ball over) so that was what they were playing for
- they wanted to protect the ball and steal a possession to make it even harder (and slow the game)
- So with that in mind, l running the ball made sense
- Well then Jamies happened which changed the dynamics and our offense could not get back in groove.
- Interestingly, the game would have been easier if we converted two more first downs.
i think KOC is not going to go deep in his play book / game plan if he does not have to. The less he reveals the more he has to work with down the stretch. I dont think us being in these close one score games is all due to tough opponents. i think it has to do more with them counting possessions which sometimes bites them in the butt with turnovers and poor execution.
He is still growing in his role.
I get the idea of wanting to slow down the game and protect the lead, but they are not capable of closing out games on the ground right now. There was one sequence with around 4-minutes left where they handed the ball off three times in a row. It did get New Orleans to burn 2 time outs, but the running game was going nowhere and it lead to a 3-and-out. I get that can't give up on the run entirely in those situations, but I wish they would at least mix in some high percentages passes to give them a chance of picking up 1st down. Before Akers got hurt, they had a good screen going for the first time in ages, but that's disappeared. Upgrading running back needs to be high on their list for the offseason, since the current group has been underwhelming. It would be great if Chandler or Nwangu could break out, but I'm not counting on it either.
Drafting is always going to be the best combo of fresh legs/cheap contract but I don’t think we have enough picks to justify drafting RB this season. So it’ll probably be a free agent.
He’s getting older and his YPC this year is bad, but Austin Ekeler is a FA next offseason. A guy who can catch like that would be a lot of fun to bring in. To me he still looks explosive.
D’Andre Swift might be too similar to Chandler but he could be interesting. Zack Moss on first and second and Chandler/Kene on third could be effective and affordable.
Quote: @Tyr said:
@ mblack said:
KOC in the second half was more a mathematician. In his presser he mentioned the following - He owned up to the poor second half
- said they analysed the number of times each team will have the ball and where pretty good with slowing the game down
- he felt if they had one more score they would put the gane beyond reach (again without us turning the ball over) so that was what they were playing for
- they wanted to protect the ball and steal a possession to make it even harder (and slow the game)
- So with that in mind, l running the ball made sense
- Well then Jamies happened which changed the dynamics and our offense could not get back in groove.
- Interestingly, the game would have been easier if we converted two more first downs.
i think KOC is not going to go deep in his play book / game plan if he does not have to. The less he reveals the more he has to work with down the stretch. I dont think us being in these close one score games is all due to tough opponents. i think it has to do more with them counting possessions which sometimes bites them in the butt with turnovers and poor execution.
He is still growing in his role.
I get the idea of wanting to slow down the game and protect the lead, but they are not capable of closing out games on the ground right now. There was one sequence with around 4-minutes left where they handed the ball off three times in a row. It did get New Orleans to burn 2 time outs, but the running game was going nowhere and it lead to a 3-and-out. I get that can't give up on the run entirely in those situations, but I wish they would at least mix in some high percentages passes to give them a chance of picking up 1st down. Before Akers got hurt, they had a good screen going for the first time in ages, but that's disappeared. Upgrading running back needs to be high on their list for the offseason, since the current group has been underwhelming. It would be great if Chandler or Nwangu could break out, but I'm not counting on it either.
I don’t think it was an inappropriate decision. The amount of things in a row that they had
to accomplish was very improbable and our defense was performing well. Like they needed 3x TD’s, 3x 2 point
conversions, keep us from scoring any points and that just gets them to
overtime. I think we could have been
more aggressive, but our receiving corp at this point is Hockenson, Addison,
and Powell. Ideally you’re avoiding
Hockenson taking a bunch of meaningless hits in garbage time. The biggest risk to losing the game is
probably throwing a pick or Dobbs fumbling because they covered the 2 receivers
he’s comfortable with. Would he do
things differently if we had JJ and KJO also out there and it was his 4th
week in the system? Probably. I do agree that figuring out what’s wrong
with our running game has to be high on the list of priorities.
|
