Quote: @Jor-El said:
@ FSUVike said:
@ Canthony said:
@ suncoastvike said:
Turnovers will put the ball in the offenses hands too quickly.
Maybe that's what Zim doesn't like.
LOL!
I think if we can get pressure up the middle with a 3 tech that will change a lot of things with the secondary.
Not enough. No team, even San Francisco with what, six 1st Round Picks on their D-Line, gets pressure on every single passing down. As Zimmer's Defense gets more and more 'Bend and Hope It Doesn't Break' it will need to rely more and more on forcing TOs to offset how much TOP it gives up. Losing Harris will only hurt that.
Did Zimmer play more zone last year because he was really into it, or was he grinding his teeth and secretly vowing, "So help me god I'll never be stuck with this personnel limitation again"?? Because he has run man-coverage CB-centric defenses for 30 years and I don't buy that he's changed his spots.
And where is the past evidence to suggest Zimmer might be doing a "smokescreen" in his comments about Harris? He said he loved Barr and they kept Barr. He told everyone he didn't trust Keenum and they dumped Keenum. This is not a coach full of nuances.
My translation of his comments about Harris: "Some other team can overpay for his interceptions. Every INT was a gamble and a bunch of other times he tried for a pick and missed his coverage." Zimmer lets Smith - and only Smith - freelance a bit. His defenses have always been relatively low in turnovers because Zimmer wants his players disciplined and working to stifle the opposing team, not gambling for INTs.
I think they let Harris walk, pay to keep Alexander and/or Waynes, pick a CB in the top 2 rounds (no 7-11 CBs for Zimmer), and Rhodes will still be a Viking. Maybe Zimmer will find a new role for Rhodes - even if he's lost a couple steps he's probably faster than Kearse so use him at Big Nickel or something.
Rhodes body wont hold up in a more physical role. we know that he isnt afraid of sticking his nose in on a tackle, but he is more an more frequently dinged in just the limited hits he makes, you try and put him in a safety role where he becomes more of a tackling presence IMO he will be on IR in a hurry. I would rather they walk away from X than to see him put in a position to fail.
Quote: @Jor-El said:
Did Zimmer play more zone last year because he was really into it, or was he grinding his teeth and secretly vowing, "So help me god I'll never be stuck with this personnel limitation again"?? Because he has run man-coverage CB-centric defenses for 30 years and I don't buy that he's changed his spots.
And where is the past evidence to suggest Zimmer might be doing a "smokescreen" in his comments about Harris? He said he loved Barr and they kept Barr. He told everyone he didn't trust Keenum and they dumped Keenum. This is not a coach full of nuances.
My translation of his comments about Harris: "Some other team can overpay for his interceptions. Every INT was a gamble and a bunch of other times he tried for a pick and missed his coverage." Zimmer lets Smith - and only Smith - freelance a bit. His defenses have always been relatively low in turnovers because Zimmer wants his players disciplined and working to stifle the opposing team, not gambling for INTs.
I think they let Harris walk, pay to keep Alexander and/or Waynes, pick a CB in the top 2 rounds (no 7-11 CBs for Zimmer), and Rhodes will still be a Viking. Maybe Zimmer will find a new role for Rhodes - even if he's lost a couple steps he's probably faster than Kearse so use him at Big Nickel or something.
The bolded couldn't be further from the truth... a number of his interceptions where playing centerfield (intercepting a deep pass) or being in good position to corral a tipped ball. He is not a gambler and has worked his way up from an UDFA, to core special teams player, to a starting caliber safety. We have a lot more freedom to move Harrison Smith around the defense with Harris playing deep in coverage. We'll lose that if we go back to Sendejo or a lesser safety.
Quote: @Wetlander said:
@ Jor-El said:
Did Zimmer play more zone last year because he was really into it, or was he grinding his teeth and secretly vowing, "So help me god I'll never be stuck with this personnel limitation again"?? Because he has run man-coverage CB-centric defenses for 30 years and I don't buy that he's changed his spots.
And where is the past evidence to suggest Zimmer might be doing a "smokescreen" in his comments about Harris? He said he loved Barr and they kept Barr. He told everyone he didn't trust Keenum and they dumped Keenum. This is not a coach full of nuances.
My translation of his comments about Harris: "Some other team can overpay for his interceptions. Every INT was a gamble and a bunch of other times he tried for a pick and missed his coverage." Zimmer lets Smith - and only Smith - freelance a bit. His defenses have always been relatively low in turnovers because Zimmer wants his players disciplined and working to stifle the opposing team, not gambling for INTs.
I think they let Harris walk, pay to keep Alexander and/or Waynes, pick a CB in the top 2 rounds (no 7-11 CBs for Zimmer), and Rhodes will still be a Viking. Maybe Zimmer will find a new role for Rhodes - even if he's lost a couple steps he's probably faster than Kearse so use him at Big Nickel or something.
The bolded couldn't be further from the truth... a number of his interceptions where playing centerfield (intercepting a deep pass) or being in good position to corral a tipped ball. He is not a gambler and has worked his way up from an UDFA, to core special teams player, to a starting caliber safety. We have a lot more freedom to move Harrison Smith around the defense with Harris playing deep in coverage. We'll lose that if we go back to Sendejo or a lesser safety.
Thank you. Zimmer finally had a true Centerfielder and he hated it? That's reaching.
Jor El, Offenses starting using a lot more misdirection and bunched looks with pick plays and the League responded by using more Zone for obvious reasons. Zimmer also was tinkering with it as far back as after losing the shootout at the Rams.
Your basic assumption here is that Mike can't change unless he's forced to and I don't buy that for a single second. We've seen him mix things up numerous times. Granted, he's probably not happy with the amount of Zone he had to play but even if Rhodes was playing at his 2016-2017 level the team would still be using it became it worked.
Offenses were destroying Defenses the first half of the 2018 season. Half the posters on here were predicting the NFL would turn into the Arena League. And then teams started playing Zone and the offensive fireworks died down the 2nd half of the season leading to a very low scoring Superbowl.
Several All Time Elite Defenses have been primarily Cover 3 based. Including that Ravens Defense he got to see in his own division. Sure, that's a Man/Zone hybrid and Zimmer had to play more quarters coverage since he didn't have a single CB he could trust in Man other than Mac in the Slot. But he also ran other Zone looks last year along with straight Man coverage. He mixes it up. Hell, even Pete Carroll doesn't just sit in Cover 3 the whole game.
Regardless of how much Zone he was forced to be in, it was always going to be at least part of the plan last season. And it will again this season. Good Safety play is just as important in Zone as Man. And Mike knows it.
As for smoke, Mike talks a lot. Half of it amounts to nada. It may not be intentionally misleading in this or any other case but I learned a long time ago that taking everything he says at face value is pointless. He's just as likely to contradict himself the next time he speaks about Harris as he is to reinforce his opinion. And he's not the one calling the shots, Rick is.
Who here doesn't think they tag Ant Harris if they can't reach a deal???
Quote: @purplefaithful said:
Who here doesn't think they tag Ant Harris if they can't reach a deal???
I dont know about "here" but there was an espn report a little while ago that says the Vikings are not expecting him back.... so yeah, he'll be back since it was espn.
Quote: @purplefaithful said:
Who here doesn't think they tag Ant Harris if they can't reach a deal???
They can't afford to pay him $16M on the tag. In a vacuum its feasible but the timing of the tag deadline in relation to free agency makes it incredibly challenging.
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ purplefaithful said:
Who here doesn't think they tag Ant Harris if they can't reach a deal???
They can't afford to pay him $16M on the tag. In a vacuum its feasible but the timing of the tag deadline in relation to free agency makes it incredibly challenging.
That's big, big $$$...
I thought maybe $10-$12.
|
