Quote: @ArizonaViking said:
@ comet52 said:
@ StickyBun said:
Preach. I think most fans on this board know I'm not a purple glasses wearing pollyanna, but I can recognize when some of us are too close to the trees. I get it, its easy to do. Look around the league and you'll see the best teams in the NFL have letdowns and lose games.
I could preach...
Thursday night games on short rest are tough
An ex qb who knows your defense better than most is tough
A motivated team that got shutout at home last week is tough
Playing a weak team with a big away game next week on the schedule is often a mental roadblock/trap
And fans who hangout here and point out our numerous flaws then come here to complain that we didn't win 52-3 are tough. You know all the flaws but you keep expecting every game to be a blowout while fans party and do the wave all night long?
I take Mike Tice's prescription - relax and ENJOY THE SEASON!
I can only image how this board would have reacted if the Viking would of some how lost last night to the Redskins. Probably numerous suicide watches would be in effect...
I think that's the salient point for me. In the past the Vikings would have played poorly and lost. But they didn't. They played somewhat poorly and won. I'll take it.
Elf has issues, but two of those holding calls didn't look like holding.
Rhodes is starting to look like Josh Robinson. He is close on coverage but can't get his head around to see the ball. That pass interference call where he threw up his arm was terrible, but prevented a TD I guess.
The defensive line could help Rhodes out with a little more pressure. It doesn't seem to get a lot of mention but, there are long stretches with little or no pressure.
But the Vikings are 6-2. The remaining divisional games are at home. And Cousins and the offense seems to have worked out most of there previous problems.
It may not seem like it after last nights game, but the future looks bright.
I'm happy we won most of all but I am a little frustrated too. Mostly with our coach/offense not being aggressive once Haskins came into the game. I get the strategy but I think a couple of endzone shots or deeper passes would have probably worked quite well. They did in the first half!
"It was ugly, but a win's a win" is something you say after beating the Packers or the Bears. Not Washington.
But oh well, 10 days until we play KC. That will be a good test and I hope we're up to the challenge. Watching all the games this weekend will be more fun with a win already in the bag.
Quote: @minny65 said:
I agree with most others that this was an ugly win but a win.
Couple observations not discussed yet:
That 4th down call at our own 30ish was just plain stupid. Could not believe that Zimmer was willing to let the Redskins right back into the game. I think the score was 16-9 and we handed them the ball at our own 30??? Puzzling to say the least. Not that I would have run the play at all but then to have Cousins sneak it? It's not like he can move a pile. How do you not give that to Cook/Mattison or Ham?
How many OL holding calls did we get? Elf had 3 alone that killed a couple of long runs that would have put us close to 200 yards on the ground! I'll tell you want, I know Elf is overmatched and struggling but when they replayed 2 of the holding calls I didn't see a hold. I saw him twist the DL as he tried to cut a hole so maybe when the ref just sees a DL being twisted (like a wrestler move) then that is a hold? I don't know what holding is anymore and that is after watching 44 years of NFL football.
Other then all the holds our zone blocking scheme along with the screen game is looking really good.
Cousins had 3 incompletions - 2 throw aways and the drop by cook on a screen.
Mattison is a Closer and a beast - what a find.
Rhodes should be embarrassed. I was hoping he would play decent the last few weeks for trade-bait but I'm not sure we would get a 4th rounder for the former shut-down corner. Keenum was completely targeting Rhodes at will with a rookie WR schooling him play after play.
Barr and Kendricks are playing the best vs the passing game that I have ever seen them play. But we allowed Adrian to have his best game of the year with 5.4 YPC knowing that they were going to pound the rock. Our defense seems to play to the level of competition. We are going to have to pick up the Defensive play to really do some damage.
We have KC, Dallas and Seattle all coming up on the road = true test.
i dont know what. holding. is. anymore. either. i. constantley see. are def ends. being. grabed. by. there arms and shoulders. when they are well passed the oppsing olinemen. but. we rarley see. a. holding. flag
I understand having irregular periods is a sign of endometriosis.
To me, what I will take from the game is the last drive. The Vikings said we are going to run the ball and they imposed their will on the Redskins. 16 plays, 8 minutes and 10 seconds off the clock. Overcame 15 yards of penalties. All runs.
That is what a good team does to a bad team.
If they had stuck it in the end zone on that last drive, would we be having this discussion?
My concern is that Zimmer (or someone) felt overconfident that we could nurse a modest 7-point lead by stressing the run to a point of absolute predictability. In the second half I thought I was watching the 2012 Vikingsgoing run-run-run-run. They got away with it because it was the Redskins, but almost any other team would have found a way to score one more TD and put us in trouble. Even the lousy Redskins might have done so if Keenum had stayed in the game. Even with Haskins at QB, they could have done it if Anthony Harris had not caught a tipped pass.
I know a lot of people are expressing they don't mind we didn't get a blowout, but being conservative kept Washington hopeful and in the game. Cook and Mattison were great and good enough to carry us as it worked out, but our passing game players were effective too - Cousins was sharp, the Redskins couldn't stop Diggs, and Smith and Johnson were making plays well. Why not stay aggressive?
Maybe the coaches just knew Washington was so bad they could beat them without a full game plan - maybe they were actually trying to throw off their tough upcoming opponents (though looking beyond the current game is a recipe for getting upset.) But maybe Zimmer thinks the last 3 games were sufficient to molly the players and coaches who wanted more passing, and now he can shift back to his Bum Philipps impersonation.
We'll see. Good luck trying to beat the Chiefs (even with Matt Moore at QB) with 19 points.
Rhodes, remember, also had the disadvantages of a soft scheme and a QB who'd spent a lot of time practicing against him and learning. Rhodes is in-your-face bump corner. Playing soft works against what he can do physically. Keenum knew this, probably informed his coaching staff, so they schemed lots of cutback and curl routes. McLaurin is a fine receiver, but notice it was never about straight posts or slants vs him. Teams are scheming against that part of his game, betting that if he can't bump at the line he's gonna have to rely on acceleration. A curl or cut-back is gonna break that off.
Quote: @Jor-El said:
My concern is that Zimmer (or someone) felt overconfident that we could nurse a modest 7-point lead by stressing the run to a point of absolute predictability. In the second half I thought I was watching the 2012 Vikingsgoing run-run-run-run. They got away with it because it was the Redskins, but almost any other team would have found a way to score one more TD and put us in trouble. Even the lousy Redskins might have done so if Keenum had stayed in the game. Even with Haskins at QB, they could have done it if Anthony Harris had not caught a tipped pass.
I know a lot of people are expressing they don't mind we didn't get a blowout, but being conservative kept Washington hopeful and in the game. Cook and Mattison were great and good enough to carry us as it worked out, but our passing game players were effective too - Cousins was sharp, the Redskins couldn't stop Diggs, and Smith and Johnson were making plays well. Why not stay aggressive?
Maybe the coaches just knew Washington was so bad they could beat them without a full game plan - maybe they were actually trying to throw off their tough upcoming opponents (though looking beyond the current game is a recipe for getting upset.) But maybe Zimmer thinks the last 3 games were sufficient to molly the players and coaches who wanted more passing, and now he can shift back to his Bum Philipps impersonation.
We'll see. Good luck trying to beat the Chiefs (even with Matt Moore at QB) with 19 points.
So Zimmer is handling play calling on offense now too? Hmmm...
Quote: @Al (The Lochstar) Heurung said:
Rhodes, remember, also had the disadvantages of a soft scheme and a QB who'd spent a lot of time practicing against him and learning. Rhodes is in-your-face bump corner. Playing soft works against what he can do physically. Keenum knew this, probably informed his coaching staff, so they schemed lots of cutback and curl routes. McLaurin is a fine receiver, but notice it was never about straight posts or slants vs him. Teams are scheming against that part of his game, betting that if he can't bump at the line he's gonna have to rely on acceleration. A curl or cut-back is gonna break that off.
Very good points. Im also wondering if Zimmer is stressing NO PI PENALTIES and its especially messed up Rhodes style of play - meaning not playing as aggressive?? I don't know though, Just a thought.
Quote: @NorthernCalVike said:
@ Al (The Lochstar) Heurung said:
Rhodes, remember, also had the disadvantages of a soft scheme and a QB who'd spent a lot of time practicing against him and learning. Rhodes is in-your-face bump corner. Playing soft works against what he can do physically. Keenum knew this, probably informed his coaching staff, so they schemed lots of cutback and curl routes. McLaurin is a fine receiver, but notice it was never about straight posts or slants vs him. Teams are scheming against that part of his game, betting that if he can't bump at the line he's gonna have to rely on acceleration. A curl or cut-back is gonna break that off.
Very good points. Im also wondering if Zimmer is stressing NO PI PENALTIES and its especially messed up Rhodes style of play - meaning not playing as aggressive?? I don't know though, Just a thought.
LOL, hey NoCal, we didn't mean to pile on but you started a great thread!! :p
|
