Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
i would like to see how these defenses stack up with some sort of scale for opponents W/L records or some other way of quantifying their success over time.
I agree. I would like to know their strength of schedule to see just how dominating they were.
Quote: @Canthony said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
i would like to see how these defenses stack up with some sort of scale for opponents W/L records or some other way of quantifying their success over time.
I agree. I would like to know their strength of schedule to see just how dominating they were.
its like when my boss fawns over the patriots record every year I remind him that in the division they are basically spotted 4-6 wins every year. they are a good team, but playing the bills jets and phins twice a year has been a bit of a gift the last 15 years, sure they have their moments in the sun, but typically they are all towards the tops of the draft.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ Canthony said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
i would like to see how these defenses stack up with some sort of scale for opponents W/L records or some other way of quantifying their success over time.
I agree. I would like to know their strength of schedule to see just how dominating they were.
its like when my boss fawns over the patriots record every year I remind him that in the division they are basically spotted 4-6 wins every year. they are a good team, but playing the bills jets and phins twice a year has been a bit of a gift the last 15 years, sure they have their moments in the sun, but typically they are all towards the tops of the draft.
I agree. It would be nice to see just how tough teams roads really were.
It is interesting seeing how few turnovers the defense has forced. In general, Zimmer seems to favor having his players maintain position rather than gamble to make big plays. They have been getting more picks over the past few games and I'd expect 1 or 2 against Chicago, but they haven't forced a lot of fumbles this year. Not sure if that is a consequence of playing against a lot of mobile and quick release QBs, making it difficult to get strip sacks, or what is causing that decrease. They do seem to be trying to strip the ball, so maybe it is random variance. It also feels like the pass rush started off strong in terms of sacks, but they have been harder to come by as the season went on, but that feels like matchups. For instance, GB is a game they should have been able to put up 5 or 6 sacks, but their QB was mobile enough to turn those into throw aways. That being said despite not having huge turnover numbers and the sacks drying up, the defense has been dominant and has been shutting teams down on 3rd downs. It would be nice to have the splash plays, but the results are still there in the end. Just a very well-coached and disciplined defense.
Quote: @Tyr said:
It is interesting seeing how few turnovers the defense has forced. In general, Zimmer seems to favor having his players maintain position rather than gamble to make big plays. They have been getting more picks over the past few games and I'd expect 1 or 2 against Chicago, but they haven't forced a lot of fumbles this year. Not sure if that is a consequence of playing against a lot of mobile and quick release QBs, making it difficult to get strip sacks, or what is causing that decrease. They do seem to be trying to strip the ball, so maybe it is random variance. It also feels like the pass rush started off strong in terms of sacks, but they have been harder to come by as the season went on, but that feels like matchups. For instance, GB is a game they should have been able to put up 5 or 6 sacks, but their QB was mobile enough to turn those into throw aways. That being said despite not having huge turnover numbers and the sacks drying up, the defense has been dominant and has been shutting teams down on 3rd downs. It would be nice to have the splash plays, but the results are still there in the end. Just a very well-coached and disciplined defense.
A couple of thoughts on the low number of turnovers. When a defense forces so many 3 and outs, the opposing offenses don't have the ball as long, with fewer chances to turn it over. The 3rd down success is basically a turnover in many cases.
Also, as to sacks and turnovers, the offenses change their game plan to avoid risking these plays. Short drops, quick safe passes, not taking shots down the field. We have seen NO, Atlanta, Detroit, Rams... all shorten their offense when facing us. Sacks are fun, but if the defense brings such fear that an offense goes away from its identity to avoid them, well that is a bigger win. In GB, the field was trash, so our D-line chose to bull rush and not make a mistake which could lead to a big play.
Splash plays are exciting but often involve risk. Doing your job, stopping the offense and getting off the field isn't as splashy, but man we are good at it.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ Tyr said:
It is interesting seeing how few turnovers the defense has forced. In general, Zimmer seems to favor having his players maintain position rather than gamble to make big plays. They have been getting more picks over the past few games and I'd expect 1 or 2 against Chicago, but they haven't forced a lot of fumbles this year. Not sure if that is a consequence of playing against a lot of mobile and quick release QBs, making it difficult to get strip sacks, or what is causing that decrease. They do seem to be trying to strip the ball, so maybe it is random variance. It also feels like the pass rush started off strong in terms of sacks, but they have been harder to come by as the season went on, but that feels like matchups. For instance, GB is a game they should have been able to put up 5 or 6 sacks, but their QB was mobile enough to turn those into throw aways. That being said despite not having huge turnover numbers and the sacks drying up, the defense has been dominant and has been shutting teams down on 3rd downs. It would be nice to have the splash plays, but the results are still there in the end. Just a very well-coached and disciplined defense.
A couple of thoughts on the low number of turnovers. When a defense forces so many 3 and outs, the opposing offenses don't have the ball as long, with fewer chances to turn it over. The 3rd down success is basically a turnover in many cases.
Also, as to sacks and turnovers, the offenses change their game plan to avoid risking these plays. Short drops, quick safe passes, not taking shots down the field. We have seen NO, Atlanta, Detroit, Rams... all shorten their offense when facing us. Sacks are fun, but if the defense brings such fear that an offense goes away from its identity to avoid them, well that is a bigger win. In GB, the field was trash, so our D-line chose to bull rush and not make a mistake which could lead to a big play.
Splash plays are exciting but often involve risk. Doing your job, stopping the offense and getting off the field isn't as splashy, but man we are good at it.
I agree with that. It's great to get the splash plays, but we're seeing a different type of dominance where the combination of coverage AND a pass rush forces teams to change their game plans and largely give up on big plays. There are also trends in modern offenses for quick, high percentage throws, but we see those even more because that is all the defense allows. I'll definitely take an elite 3rd down defense over a ton of splash plays and I'm sure all Zimmer cares about is getting the job done and not giving teams a chance for big plays.
Had to find this post after the win today. Given this is a passing league, outside of turnovers (attributed mostly due to our 3rd % stat), I'd say we are totally on par with the others in this list.
Perhaps I'm drinking the too much of the koolaid, but haven't most of our turnovers come on drives where our defense was on the field much longer than normal?? hmm
Either way...love our D! love our Coach! SKOL Vikes!
Just solid, fundamentally sound D....Watching the DB's yesterday is how you need to play D in this new era NFL.
Fundamentally sound + scheme + great athletes = playoff nightmare.
That goal line stand was amazing
After Hunter jumped and it was first and goal on the nothing line, the team could have easily let up during this meaningless contest.
Instead we saw Pride
There was a game earlier in the year, or maybe last season where the opposig coach said something like “they (the Vikings’ D) really excel when you hold onto the ball for more than 2.8 seconds, so we won’t do that”. And they didn’t... their whole gameplan was to throw the ball immediately on nealy every play and the Vikings throttled them.
Put simply, this is a defense people fear. Look at all the drops by receivers playing against the Vikings that are usually sure-handed. Fear. Look at Mr. Biscuit throwing the ball backwards while taking a sack. Fear.
|
