Quote: @njvike said:
The Vikings OL has been a joke for a while. Peterson's greatness covered up a LOT of the issues with that unit for years, but its painfully obvious the last few seasons.
This.
Quote: @holmanjp said:
2 fumble recovery TD's
2 pick 6's
2 TD's scored with 1 play each after a turn over
42 points scored because of 2 Offensive plays
I would not say the d's gave up 50 plus points
More like the D's scored 42 points
It's not just a preference for defense or offense: as the above shows, the exciting, dominating teams are playing ATTACKING defense. Go for INTs, try to strip the ball. But Vikings' defense is about SLOWING an offense, not taking control away. I posted annual stats on another thread last week, and our defenses under Zimmer are average, at best, in turnovers: 13th-19th in INTs, 23rd-29th in Forced Fumbles - middle of the pack. That's not just luck, that's coached style. I think Zimmer fears that trying for INTs allows long pass completions, and trying to strip the ball allows some missed tackles. But turnovers make opponents fear a defensive unit.
Quote: @njvike said:
We know, Mikey.
You're more of a 38-7 kinda guy!
Hilarious. This from a guy who has posted 30 times since the season started... and only twice during the week after a win (and both times it was to disparage the Vikings: mocking them for not having a better record vs. Detroit... and once for criticizing Viking fans for being "arrogant" about our team / players).
The other 28 times all came after losses. Strangely, while the team was winning 3 weeks in a row... you didn't post a single word.
What kind of "guy" are you?
Quote: @Jor-El said:
@ holmanjp said:
2 fumble recovery TD's
2 pick 6's
2 TD's scored with 1 play each after a turn over
42 points scored because of 2 Offensive plays
I would not say the d's gave up 50 plus points
More like the D's scored 42 points
It's not just a preference for defense or offense: as the above shows, the exciting, dominating teams are playing ATTACKING defense. Go for INTs, try to strip the ball. But Vikings' defense is about SLOWING an offense, not taking control away. I posted annual stats on another thread last week, and our defenses under Zimmer are average, at best, in turnovers: 13th-19th in INTs, 23rd-29th in Forced Fumbles - middle of the pack. That's not just luck, that's coached style. I think Zimmer fears that trying for INTs allows long pass completions, and trying to strip the ball allows some missed tackles. But turnovers make opponents fear a defensive unit.
I think you will see a League-Wide shift towards attacking style Defenses that use multiple looks. The next adjustment DCs will make is to stop being afraid to get caught gambling with certain formations and give up a chunk play or TD.
The days of forcing the Offense to go 80 yards one first down at a time may be numbered for now. Too many Offenses are taking advantage of all the pick plays that shouldn't be legal. Too many teams are putting their best WR in the slot. As well as TEs and slick route running RBs. Too many teams are using misdirection to pop guys wide open against man coverage.
Fangio and the Bears are already using a lot of different formations and schemes on D. More Zone looks is a big part of combating bunches and misdirection.
You'll need versatile DBs and LBs to switch schemes or use different Defensive plays out of the same looks. And pass rushing will continue to be the most important commodity you can have.
I expect this will start to get reflected in this year's Draft. Some very polished, plug 'n play kids with lower ceilings will slowly start getting picked after rawer kids with more explosive athleticism with much higher bust potential. Run stuffing LBs that can't cover, NTs that can't rush the QB,.Safeties that can't cover WRs and TEs are all in danger of becoming extinct. Or at the very least becoming greatly devalued in the Draft.
Be an interesting Draft for many reasons.
Quote: @FSUVike said:
@ Jor-El said:
@ holmanjp said:
2 fumble recovery TD's
2 pick 6's
2 TD's scored with 1 play each after a turn over
42 points scored because of 2 Offensive plays
I would not say the d's gave up 50 plus points
More like the D's scored 42 points
It's not just a preference for defense or offense: as the above shows, the exciting, dominating teams are playing ATTACKING defense. Go for INTs, try to strip the ball. But Vikings' defense is about SLOWING an offense, not taking control away. I posted annual stats on another thread last week, and our defenses under Zimmer are average, at best, in turnovers: 13th-19th in INTs, 23rd-29th in Forced Fumbles - middle of the pack. That's not just luck, that's coached style. I think Zimmer fears that trying for INTs allows long pass completions, and trying to strip the ball allows some missed tackles. But turnovers make opponents fear a defensive unit.
I think you will see a League-Wide shift towards attacking style Defenses that use multiple looks. The next adjustment DCs will make is to stop being afraid to get caught gambling with certain formations and give up a chunk play or TD.
The days of forcing the Offense to go 80 yards one first down at a time may be numbered for now. Too many Offenses are taking advantage of all the pick plays that shouldn't be legal. Too many teams are putting their best WR in the slot. As well as TEs and slick route running RBs. Too many teams are using misdirection to pop guys wide open against man coverage.
Fangio and the Bears are already using a lot of different formations and schemes on D. More Zone looks is a big part of combating bunches and misdirection.
You'll need versatile DBs and LBs to switch schemes or use different Defensive plays out of the same looks. And pass rushing will continue to be the most important commodity you can have.
I expect this will start to get reflected in this year's Draft. Some very polished, plug 'n play kids with lower ceilings will slowly start getting picked after rawer kids with more explosive athleticism with much higher bust potential. Run stuffing LBs that can't cover, NTs that can't rush the QB,.Safeties that can't cover WRs and TEs are all in danger of becoming extinct. Or at the very least becoming greatly devalued in the Draft.
Be an interesting Draft for many reasons. And back to your earlier point that 2/3 of next year's first rounders may be defenders: that doesn't necessarily mean that the offensive explosion will be stemmed. It could just mean 2/3 of the league are panicking and trying to resist the trend, but that could be the bottom 2/3.
Quote: @Jor-El said:
@ FSUVike said:
@ Jor-El said:
@ holmanjp said:
2 fumble recovery TD's
2 pick 6's
2 TD's scored with 1 play each after a turn over
42 points scored because of 2 Offensive plays
I would not say the d's gave up 50 plus points
More like the D's scored 42 points
It's not just a preference for defense or offense: as the above shows, the exciting, dominating teams are playing ATTACKING defense. Go for INTs, try to strip the ball. But Vikings' defense is about SLOWING an offense, not taking control away. I posted annual stats on another thread last week, and our defenses under Zimmer are average, at best, in turnovers: 13th-19th in INTs, 23rd-29th in Forced Fumbles - middle of the pack. That's not just luck, that's coached style. I think Zimmer fears that trying for INTs allows long pass completions, and trying to strip the ball allows some missed tackles. But turnovers make opponents fear a defensive unit.
I think you will see a League-Wide shift towards attacking style Defenses that use multiple looks. The next adjustment DCs will make is to stop being afraid to get caught gambling with certain formations and give up a chunk play or TD.
The days of forcing the Offense to go 80 yards one first down at a time may be numbered for now. Too many Offenses are taking advantage of all the pick plays that shouldn't be legal. Too many teams are putting their best WR in the slot. As well as TEs and slick route running RBs. Too many teams are using misdirection to pop guys wide open against man coverage.
Fangio and the Bears are already using a lot of different formations and schemes on D. More Zone looks is a big part of combating bunches and misdirection.
You'll need versatile DBs and LBs to switch schemes or use different Defensive plays out of the same looks. And pass rushing will continue to be the most important commodity you can have.
I expect this will start to get reflected in this year's Draft. Some very polished, plug 'n play kids with lower ceilings will slowly start getting picked after rawer kids with more explosive athleticism with much higher bust potential. Run stuffing LBs that can't cover, NTs that can't rush the QB,.Safeties that can't cover WRs and TEs are all in danger of becoming extinct. Or at the very least becoming greatly devalued in the Draft.
Be an interesting Draft for many reasons. And back to your earlier point that 2/3 of next year's first rounders may be defenders: that doesn't necessarily mean that the offensive explosion will be stemmed. It could just mean 2/3 of the league are panicking and trying to resist the trend, but that could be the bottom 2/3.
From everything I've read and seen there's just a lot of quality D-Linemen available that will be hard to pass on. Two nice looking CBs out of the SEC in Greedy Williams and the Baker kid from Georgia. LSU and Michigan both have good MLBs.
But there's at least 2 QBs going early. And several Tackles, though many of them project more as Guards. A few WRs. No RBs getting any love in mocks. Fant is about the only TE so far.
Will teams start picking explosive but raw Offensive Players earlier or will the emphasis be steady, proven Defenders or will it see an uptick in riskier picks on freaks like Hunter? Will we see some of all of the above in the first Round? Be fun to watch.
Quote: @pumpf said:
@ njvike said:
We know, Mikey.
You're more of a 38-7 kinda guy!
Hilarious. This from a guy who has posted 30 times since the season started... and only twice during the week after a win (and both times it was to disparage the Vikings: mocking them for not having a better record vs. Detroit... and once for criticizing Viking fans for being "arrogant" about our team / players).
The other 28 times all came after losses. Strangely, while the team was winning 3 weeks in a row... you didn't post a single word.
What kind of "guy" are you?
Um, I'm the kinda guy that doesn't keep track of a random dude's post count on a fan site. Just posting FACTS and giving my opinions on Vikings coaches, executives and players. Not policing other fans and what their opinions or number of post counts.
Since YOU obviously DO keep track of posters' history, I'd say you are one CREEPY motherfucker. Get a life, man/boy.
I'm also posting NOW, after a Vikings WIN, so you can lick my ASS (and apparently, with your bizarre obsession with when/how I post here, that seems to be your desire).
Surprising how you don't comment on, or dispute the actual content of my posts. Actually, it's NOT so surprising, when I think of it. Even weenies like you understand you can't dispute FACTS, so you resort to personal attacks on the messenger. Typical.
Good home win tonite against a depleted opponent. Let's see them win on the road the next 2 weeks. They DO have the best roster in the NFL afterall, correct? I'll expect nothing less than WINS from here on out until February.
G'nite!
Geezuz njvike you are exhausting. I guess it serves a purpose to have a gadfly in the house but damn man you are sort of like a message board punching bag.
I agree with a lot of your takes but the method of insulting (yes I know people insult you too) is just so tiring. In one thread you disparage people that you claim are trying to tell people how to be fans but then you sit and rip people for supporting the team, the front office, and the coaches. And that isn't me taking notes that's just observing your posting behavior. Why are you soooo edgy?
Quote: @Ralphie said:
@ purplefaithful said:r
It's not my cup of tea either...
I don't know if NFL rules will evolve to getting the defense a more level playing field or not? I hope so
Adapt? It's not adapting when the very organization that runs the league tilts the field in favor of the offense. Zim learned the game when it was a true battle of defense v. offense.
To say he hasn't grown with the game is disingenuous. To recapture it's lost fans (i.e. money) the NFL has constructed this charade that was on full display Monday night. It may work for the NBA but we'll see how many teams follow suit. But any defensive coordinator whose squad gives up 6 TD passes would not be employed by me.
Interesting that the author would use that comment about "time to adapt". I would look at Zimmer and say he is one of the best at adapting. Each year he adapts his D and even in the pinball scoring year, our D has played pretty damn good. Brees was held to 200 yards? Rodgers 225? Since getting owned in the Rams game, our D has really been pretty stellar. We have limited some pretty good offenses and have done so when the league has changed rules to favor the offense.
I would say Zimmer is a master at adapting.
Quote: @njvike said:
@ pumpf said:
@ njvike said:
We know, Mikey.
You're more of a 38-7 kinda guy!
Hilarious. This from a guy who has posted 30 times since the season started... and only twice during the week after a win (and both times it was to disparage the Vikings: mocking them for not having a better record vs. Detroit... and once for criticizing Viking fans for being "arrogant" about our team / players).
The other 28 times all came after losses. Strangely, while the team was winning 3 weeks in a row... you didn't post a single word.
What kind of "guy" are you?
Um, I'm the kinda guy that doesn't keep track of a random dude's post count on a fan site. Just posting FACTS and giving my opinions on Vikings coaches, executives and players. Not policing other fans and what their opinions or number of post counts.
Since YOU obviously DO keep track of posters' history, I'd say you are one CREEPY motherfucker. Get a life, man/boy.
I'm also posting NOW, after a Vikings WIN, so you can lick my ASS (and apparently, with your bizarre obsession with when/how I post here, that seems to be your desire).
Surprising how you don't comment on, or dispute the actual content of my posts. Actually, it's NOT so surprising, when I think of it. Even weenies like you understand you can't dispute FACTS, so you resort to personal attacks on the messenger. Typical.
Good home win tonite against a depleted opponent. Let's see them win on the road the next 2 weeks. They DO have the best roster in the NFL afterall, correct? I'll expect nothing less than WINS from here on out until February.
G'nite!
I don't have to "keep track" of them; everyone knows your schtick. Previously I had the opinion that you only post after the Vikings lose, because you're not really a fan- just a bitter person who is looking for something to bitch about. Then... I did something that you don't usually (ever?) do: I backed up that opinion with FACTS. After all, you love posting FACTS. And all I had to do was click on your "name". It showed the dates when you've posted comments. It took me less than 2 minutes to accumulate all that information. It would've taken alot longer... if you ever posted after the Vikings won a game. But since you only show up after we lose... it was really easy.
And, yes: you DID post after a Viking win. But- like the other 2 times- it wasn't to say anything good about the team (except in your typical back-handed way).
And, no: I don't comment on the posts you make after a Viking loss (anymore) because it's not worth my time. You're not open to reason; nor are you interested in a conversation. You want everyone to know how right you are... that you would actually root for the team to lose, just so you can look smart. Also: you don't post "FACTS"; you post your opinion and then cite statistics that you *think* prove you're correct. For example: "If Rick was a good GM, we'd have won a Super Bowl by now. Since we haven't won one yet (yep, that IS a fact), that proves that Rick is a bad GM."
As for bizarre obsessions... let's see... You ONLY come to this website after the Vikings lose (28 of your posts have been after a loss- and in the other 2 you still managed to criticize the team)... and I like to point that fact out to you. Hmmmm... I wonder which one is more bizarre? I suppose both; but- as bizarre as we both may be- at least I'm still cheering for the team to win. Maybe I am bizarre... and petty (probably, but poking this bear amuses me). But at least I'm an actual fan of the team. Which- by the way- is the only real "attack" that I've lobbed at you (that I recall): I've implied that you're not a real fan. Ouch! But if you take that as a real traumatizing attack... well, I'm not sure what can be done about that. I suppose you could try cheering for the team?
Lastly... you whine about "attacking the messenger". Well, not that I'm saying 2 wrongs make a right... but you have attacked my team and my coach. And it's not because you want to win more than anyone else. It's about trying to show everyone how smart you think you are. That- to me- makes you no better than a Packer fan (although you're probably much skinnier and have most/all of your teeth). What do you expect to happen when Packer fans show up to gloat after the Vikings lose?
|
