Posts: 228
Threads: 224
Joined: May 2013
Reputation:
2
Arif spends ample time pointing out some O-Line failures
http://zonecoverage.com/2017/vikings/off...r-concern/
IMO Arif's article has a very negative edge after a pretty dominant performance. He highlights 10 plays by the O-line that were failures in his book, even though most turned out pretty well. Easton did seem to struggle quite a bit, but Elflein getting tripped twice hardly counts as a negative, especially when he has a "would have been" negative play if the defender hadn't got sandwiched and tripped.
Hard to get much of a read watching the gifs tho, so I can't from much more of an opinion.
Hmmm I don't really consider Arif to be a contrarian, and he does dedicate a lot of time to his craft. So while I'd say that it was a pretty dominant performance overall by the club, there definitely is room for improvement going forward. THis line is infantile at this point. They have a lot of room for growth for sure, so maybe keying on the things they need to improve on isn't necessarily a bad thing.
I understand he was looking at the failures, but 10 failures (real or perceived) for the whole game isn't really that many IMO.
This group will continue to grow and they have plenty of room for that growth. He mentions some of the good plays, but does not highlight any.
I do doubt that anything written on the interwebs will contribute to their improvement however. 
I think Arif is one of the most neutral and fact based writers out there.
What we all really want to know is "Is the OLine and Offense for real?" and "What will they look like when playing a "good" defense?"
I would have like to have seen a baseline and how they compared overall. The other thing I don't see really focused on is what happened on the "Good" or "Neutral" plays? It seems like last year our line was being pushed backwards collapsing the pocket, while this last game Bradford had a solid pocket to play from.
That reminds me of another thing that people were talking about this offseason. People were saying that Bradford wasn't any good at climbing the pocket (as if he had one last year) I think this last game showed that if he is given a pocket, he knows how to use it, and execute from it very well.
Quote: @Mike Olson said:
That reminds me of another thing that people were talking about this offseason. People were saying that Bradford wasn't any good at climbing the pocket (as if he had one last year) I think this last game showed that if he is given a pocket, he knows how to use it, and execute from it very well.
last year that was the last place he wanted to go. Climbing the pocket meant climbing over the bodies of our interior line.
As to Arif, I think he loves his numbers and in depth breakdowns. Just thought this was a bit harsh given the lack of pressure on Sam. 3 pressures all game and he finds the dark clouds amidst the blue sky.
I think Arif is no more than a fan with film: ignorant. He has an opinion like we all do. He doesn't know the line calls. He's wordy to the point of excess. More is often not better, especially in this context. Not sure if he's right or wrong, but he's certainly not insightful in any aspect. This is today's media. It doesn't take much. JMO
I think anybody wanting to breakdown and nit pick arguably the first positive performance from a Vikings OL in many years is really scratching for something.
What's the matter, Minnesota in danger of running out of negativity in sports reporting?
News flash to those that haven't played the game, or any game.... Perfection is unattainable. I am sure we can load up tape of any game from any great OL in the history of the game and find breakdowns and failures.
Quote: @StickyBun said:
I think Arif is no more than a fan with film: ignorant. He has an opinion like we all do. He doesn't know the line calls. He's wordy to the point of excess. More is often not better, especially in this context. Not sure if he's right or wrong, but he's certainly not insightful in any aspect. This is today's media. It doesn't take much. JMO
How would any person on the planet that is outside of the
specific teams we’re talking about be able to meet your expectations of knowing
line calls and what each players role in a scheme is? It sounds like you are waxing poetically
about the good ol’ days, but I don’t think there ever was a good ol’ days where
sports commentators knew the ins and outs of what the players were supposed to
be doing on an individual play.
More precisely, the reason Arif is able to make a living is
that the mainstream media is so incredibly bad, and provides so little value to
people that want more context on their favorite team.
Quote: @medaille said:
@ StickyBun said:
I think Arif is no more than a fan with film: ignorant. He has an opinion like we all do. He doesn't know the line calls. He's wordy to the point of excess. More is often not better, especially in this context. Not sure if he's right or wrong, but he's certainly not insightful in any aspect. This is today's media. It doesn't take much. JMO
How would any person on the planet that is outside of the
specific teams we’re talking about be able to meet your expectations of knowing
line calls and what each players role in a scheme is? It sounds like you are waxing poetically
about the good ol’ days, but I don’t think there ever was a good ol’ days where
sports commentators knew the ins and outs of what the players were supposed to
be doing on an individual play.
More precisely, the reason Arif is able to make a living is
that the mainstream media is so incredibly bad, and provides so little value to
people that want more context on their favorite team.
He's making a living because of the explosion of social media and that demographic. Its a niche: everyone has a podcast, everyone can 'break down film' (tons of paid services allow this), anyone can become an 'expert'. They are everywhere on the Internet. If you like that, that's cool. To me, its just a watered down, everyman opinion that holds no more impact than anything else on the Internet. Its personal choice.
|
