This is a very good sign. I think we all expect our defense, after all is said and done, to rank among the best, so if our offense can keep this up, very very good things are going to happen.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
This is a very good sign. I think we all expect our defense, after all is said and done, to rank among the best, so if our offense can keep this up, very very good things are going to happen.
i have been having similar thoughts... but 40 years of heart ache will not let me get drawn in just yet.
haha, true Jimmy. The force is strong in this one tho.
Quote: @Jor-El said:
@ BsuZagVike said:
@ Jor-El said:
@ purplefaithful said:
After ranking third in the NFL in total defense and sixth in scoring defense last season, the Vikings are 20th and 12th in those two categories through three games.
Not sure playing the Lions are going to help those stats...I just care about the W though.
I wonder if we will hear comments about the offense having to carry the defense - reversing the complaints of last year. Zimmer's defenses have never been stifling: Vikings in his tenure have only held an opponent under 10 points twice, both times in 2014 (St. Louis and Chicago). The only game you could call a "victory by the defense" was beating KC 16-10 in 2015.
Not saying our defense is a problem. It's good - just not great.
I would argue that it is great. Top 5 or 6 in scoring defense the last couple of years. They also usually have a couple of really bad games every year for some reason like last year when our DBs went rogue against GB and got shredded. That always bumps up our scoring average as well.
We all have a different definition of "great". To me, a great defense can win games for a team, even when their offense doesn't sparkle. Do you think we have the kind of defense that earns victories when we get into a low-scoring defensive struggle?
This offseason, people started publicizing Zimmer's record when the offense scored +20 points: 21-2 going into 2017 (now 23-2). Sure, that's great, but...teams generally do win when they score 21 points. Now, look at the flip side: when we score 20 or less, Zimmer's Vikings are 5-22 (including the playoff game and this season). In other words, unless our offense has a good showing, we're only 19% likely to win.
Consider the 2015 Broncos. Manning was on his last legs, he was out some games, they started Brock Osweiler for 7 games, and their offense ranked 19th. But they went 6-2 when they scored less than 21 points, including the AFC Championship game. THAT is an example of a defense that can put the team on its back- and, to me, is "great". They weren't rationalizing about being worn out because their offense didn't control the clock or how it's harder to play defense if they don't have a lead.
Most winning teams have a balance between a good offense and a good defense. Nothing wrong with that and I'm glad we might be getting to that point. But our defense is good, not "great" or "elite".
Fair enough, I guess we just have a different definition of "great". I think there are a handful of great defenses every year where the last one you think was great was from two years ago.
The Defense is evolving. If you think the team went 5-0 last year without a Great Defense you're high. Period.
Backup journeyman QB with a Walking Dead strength arm. Sam with no Offseason, Preseason and an OC that was literally the antithesis of what he was used to. One of the worst.O-Lines I've ever seen with personnel changing virtually every week.
There's only a few kinds of Defenses. Those that give up yards but not lots of points when it matters. Those that can go several series absolutely stoning an Offense and then get burned for chunks of yardage when their Pass Rush or blitzes don't get home. And those that don't give up squat.
Denver had one of those near perfect Defenses a few years ago. Amazing Pass Rush, shutdown Secondary, great against the run, could blitz effectively when they needed to.
But look at the money spent. And much of it on players they didn't draft, which equals a short shelf life.
Zimmer's Defense bends but doesn't break. Sure, they wore down last year. Injuries, too many 3 and outs on Offense. Teams scheming against the 2 Gap Blitz look, which was already seeing diminishing returns with Barr dinged up or ineffective.
Another factor is his reluctance to play rookie CBs. And when they are forced into action they are usually overly cautious, which leads to lots of completions and some PIs.
Waynes should have started long ago, even with Old Man River still playing at a high level. Have to get him the reps to see if he adjusts or not. Don't give me any horseshit about Mike's complex scheme. He mixes Man and Zone like every single other team in the League does.
His CBs are generally (but certainly not always) successful because he typically makes them wait a year or two (or three) before they start, preferring veterans instead.
You know who else does that? Nobody. Every team throws Rookie CBs out there, including New England. And they learn very quickly if they need to reload or not.
But aside from his arch-conservative approach to CBs, his Defenses historically rank in or near the Top 5 in Scoring. The only real metric that counts.
The Patriots have 5 rings under Belicheat. How many of those Defenses are ranked up there with the Broncos Unit from a few years ago or those amazing Baltimore years? And several of those SB wins were low scoring affairs.
The Defense is fine. Barr and OC's adjusting (but mostly Barr) have made Zimmer move away from the A Gap looks. His counter is less blitz looks, and remember that historically for all the exotic looks Mike doesn't blitz more than League Average.
And his Robinson the D-Line Rover is still a work in progress. There's also the factor of the new and absolutely pedestrian OLB Gedeon, the fact that Waynes and Sendejo are League Average Starters who will give up a lot of plays but also have an innate ballhawking skill that leads to turnovers and having an ancient 3T. When you look at all the factors I have to admit that this Defense has impressed me....so far.
Quote: @Jor-El said:
@purplefaithful said:
After ranking third in the NFL in total defense and sixth in scoring defense last season, the Vikings are 20th and 12th in those two categories through three games.
Not sure playing the Lions are going to help those stats...I just care about the W though.
I wonder if we will hear comments about the offense having to carry the defense - reversing the complaints of last year. Zimmer's defenses have never been stifling: Vikings in his tenure have only held an opponent under 10 points twice, both times in 2014 (St. Louis and Chicago). The only game you could call a "victory by the defense" was beating KC 16-10 in 2015.
Not saying our defense is a problem. It's good - just not great.
17-14 against Packers? 20-13 at Packers? they certainly should be on the list.
Quote: @matt4787 said:
@ Jor-El said:
@ purplefaithful said:
After ranking third in the NFL in total defense and sixth in scoring defense last season, the Vikings are 20th and 12th in those two categories through three games.
Not sure playing the Lions are going to help those stats...I just care about the W though.
I wonder if we will hear comments about the offense having to carry the defense - reversing the complaints of last year. Zimmer's defenses have never been stifling: Vikings in his tenure have only held an opponent under 10 points twice, both times in 2014 (St. Louis and Chicago). The only game you could call a "victory by the defense" was beating KC 16-10 in 2015.
Not saying our defense is a problem. It's good - just not great.
17-14 against Packers? 20-13 at Packers? they certainly should be on the list.
Those are significant, especially since it is a high-scoring offense. I'm probably specifying a higher standard: that an "elite" defense would have a couple victories where the opponent is stymied - 6 points, maybe even a shutout game. A lot of "very good" teams have ended up with "great" records, 13 or more wins, because they squeezed out at least 3 wins when their offense had a bad day but the defense pitched a gem and 10-6 or 15-9 was enough for a victory. Not us.
Quote: @Jor-El said:
@ matt4787 said:
@ Jor-El said:
@ purplefaithful said:
After ranking third in the NFL in total defense and sixth in scoring defense last season, the Vikings are 20th and 12th in those two categories through three games.
Not sure playing the Lions are going to help those stats...I just care about the W though.
I wonder if we will hear comments about the offense having to carry the defense - reversing the complaints of last year. Zimmer's defenses have never been stifling: Vikings in his tenure have only held an opponent under 10 points twice, both times in 2014 (St. Louis and Chicago). The only game you could call a "victory by the defense" was beating KC 16-10 in 2015.
Not saying our defense is a problem. It's good - just not great.
17-14 against Packers? 20-13 at Packers? they certainly should be on the list.
Those are significant, especially since it is a high-scoring offense. I'm probably specifying a higher standard: that an "elite" defense would have a couple victories where the opponent is stymied - 6 points, maybe even a shutout game.
not that it doesnt happen anymore, but in todays NFL that is heavily favoring the O, and especially the passing O you really rarely see single digit games anymore. couple that with the teams starting at the 25 and kickers getting more accurate from 40 and out, I think its maybe not as much the lack of "dominant" defensive performances as much as it is a changing of the rules and such.
Quote: @FSUVike said:
The Defense is evolving. If you think the team went 5-0 last year without a Great Defense you're high. Period.
Backup journeyman QB with a Walking Dead strength arm. Sam with no Offseason, Preseason and an OC that was literally the antithesis of what he was used to. One of the worst.O-Lines I've ever seen with personnel changing virtually every week.
There's only a few kinds of Defenses. Those that give up yards but not lots of points when it matters. Those that can go several series absolutely stoning an Offense and then get burned for chunks of yardage when their Pass Rush or blitzes don't get home. And those that don't give up squat.
Denver had one of those near perfect Defenses a few years ago. Amazing Pass Rush, shutdown Secondary, great against the run, could blitz effectively when they needed to.
But look at the money spent. And much of it on players they didn't draft, which equals a short shelf life.
Zimmer's Defense bends but doesn't break. Sure, they wore down last year. Injuries, too many 3 and outs on Offense. Teams scheming against the 2 Gap Blitz look, which was already seeing diminishing returns with Barr dinged up or ineffective.
Another factor is his reluctance to play rookie CBs. And when they are forced into action they are usually overly cautious, which leads to lots of completions and some PIs.
Waynes should have started long ago, even with Old Man River still playing at a high level. Have to get him the reps to see if he adjusts or not. Don't give me any horseshit about Mike's complex scheme. He mixes Man and Zone like every single other team in the League does.
His CBs are generally (but certainly not always) successful because he typically makes them wait a year or two (or three) before they start, preferring veterans instead.
You know who else does that? Nobody. Every team throws Rookie CBs out there, including New England. And they learn very quickly if they need to reload or not.
But aside from his arch-conservative approach to CBs, his Defenses historically rank in or near the Top 5 in Scoring. The only real metric that counts.
The Patriots have 5 rings under Belicheat. How many of those Defenses are ranked up there with the Broncos Unit from a few years ago or those amazing Baltimore years? And several of those SB wins were low scoring affairs.
The Defense is fine. Barr and OC's adjusting (but mostly Barr) have made Zimmer move away from the A Gap looks. His counter is less blitz looks, and remember that historically for all the exotic looks Mike doesn't blitz more than League Average.
And his Robinson the D-Line Rover is still a work in progress. There's also the factor of the new and absolutely pedestrian OLB Gedeon, the fact that Waynes and Sendejo are League Average Starters who will give up a lot of plays but also have an innate ballhawking skill that leads to turnovers and having an ancient 3T. When you look at all the factors I have to admit that this Defense has impressed me....so far.
Gee, after your first paragraph, I'm not sure you're disagreeing with me. Gedeon, Waynes, Sendejo, Tom Johnson, Barr, unwillingness to play young CBs - all sound like a lot of reasons why this defense is not great. It's "fine", as you said, very good even. It could get better. As Vikings fans, we're happy because it is FAR better than anything we have enjoyed in a long time.
But it is not good enough to carry the team. That's what the real meaning of "21-2 when we score 21 points" is: an admission that Zimmer has crafted a very good defense, but we have to put an offense with it or we will be losers. Fair enough: as you say (and I said earlier), most championship teams win with a balance between units.
I'm splitting hairs, I know...and I'm poking holes in the idea some hold that Zimmer is a defensive guru on the level of Buddy Ryan, Chuck Knoll or even the hated Belichick. He isn't; we are not going to win like the '85 Bears or '15 Broncos or '16 Pats. FSU, you are wrong when you say that "his Defenses historically rank in or near the Top 5 in Scoring". In 17 years Zimmer has only fielded 3 units in the top 5 (6 for Belichick in the same period btw). He had 7 in the top 10 - but 10 other seasons they were no better than middling, including 3 years ranked in the bottom 10 (as recently as 2010).
Again, our defense is certainly good enough. I'm a happy Vikings fan this year. But no one should be shocked that the defense is only ranked 12th in scoring. If I have any gripe, it is that we have heard for 3+ years that the offense (especially OL) was being under-drafted, and we shouldn't trade any defensive talent to balance the team, because we were building a top-tier defense. But we aren't. Extremely few teams can, I get that; but why didn't Zimmer and Spielman realize sooner that the team needed balance?
|
