Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Case of the missing horseshoe
#1
Case of the Missing Horseshoe
Another post NFCCG loss wrapu-p, what went wrong.

And before you jump all over me for writing an obviously anti-Case case, please understand that I have no control over my headlines.  That is up to my editor.  Who in this case is my overactive mind following another heartbreaking loss.  It just popped into my head and so I was forced to write and article to fill the rest of the white space.

And it isn't anti-Case, it is just a clever ploy to get you to read this.   I could torture the analogy by making it a who-done-it mystery, but that seems like to much work.  So here is my breakdown on what the #%$^& went wrong.  Again!

The missing horseshoe has much to do with the results I am afraid.  But it wasn't so much missing, but did what horseshoes are known to do, it changed possessions, took the luck and went east, found a new poor bastard to torture.  Did anyone else get the feeling that Foles found Case's horseshoe?  The plays that we were accustomed to seeing, the bounces that went our way this season suddenly didn't.  The "how did he escape that" was now against us.  Foles turned the proverbial dung into miraculous. 

Lets take for instance a couple of plays that illustrate this fraction of a second, an inch the other way and the outcome is much different.  The INTs by Case and the TDs by Foles.  A defender brushes by Case as he throws, contacting his chest and arm enough to take something off the throw and it floats into the hands of the defender who runs back for a TD and changes the whole game.  We were in control.  We had driven methodically down and score.  Then we forced a punt on defense and were back on offense for more.  The crowd was quiet, the dog masks were looking kinda silly, and Shurmur was planning on being in Minnesota for a few more weeks.  All except for that little hand to the chest of the QB. 

Compare that to Foles, who in one instance somehow moved the ball enough to unknowingly avoid Hunter's hand that was swiping at the ball as he was pushed past.  Or the should be sack by Griffen and yet somehow Foles steps to the side and avoids both Griffen and another defender to loft the ball to Jefferys for a TD.  That was supposed to be Case somehow sliding in the pocket and hitting the big throw.  Except for that cursed horseshoe.  Or consider the second INT (ignoring the fact that the game was already over), as a forced pass is intercepted and Adam Thielen makes an incredible play to rip the ball out of the defenders hands.  But the horseshoe bounced right into the hands of another defender for an INT.

I can't know for certain, but I think Case felt the horseshoe leaving on that first interception.  He didn't seem the same after that.  His moxie was gone, confidence faded into desperation and Shurmur was seen with his NY or Bust sticker on his playcalling sheet.  Certainly there are other things that can explain this in rational terms.  Thielen, our #1 WR was hurting.  And a low back injury is tough to gut out for a guy that depends on making precise cuts.  He played, but was largely missing from the offense.  A case could be made that our offensive line didn't protect Keenum well enough, but that doesn't seem to fit the facts early on when the game was still in doubt.  Maybe Keenum doesn't like the cold, and that has some merit, but then there is that opening drive.  All in all, our offense seemed to suffer from the Case of the Missing Horseshoe.

But then there is the other side of the ball, the defense trying to defend the horseshoe.  Anyone that tries to say this loss was all on the offense either has an agenda or was self medicating a bit early.  What happened to the vaunted defense?  The #1 defense in the league in multiple categories?

In my opinion, and it is hard to admit, but I think we got outcoached.  Or at least out schemed.  And it isn't entirely out of the question.  What do good teams do?  They study film, the look for tendencies, they find weaknesses and exploit them.  Foles was still an unknown.  Having played only a few games, the book wasn't written on him yet.  And he was still growing in confidence in Pedersen's offense.  The focus was on the RPO, the quick passes that they ran.  Foles didn't throw deep, they kept it short and manageable. 

So, if you are a coach facing a very tough defense, you can either hunker down and try to survive.  Or you can go out in a blaze of glory.  The Eagles chose the latter.  Foles had gained some confidence and it was time to be unpredictable and go for the big plays.  The defense shut them down for the first drive, but then came the double moves.  Watching veterans like Smith, Newman and Rhodes bite hard, one has to say they didn't see it coming.  None of them expected the deep passes from that offense.  And once the horseshoe had made its switch, there was little they could do to stop it.  Even when they played it well, somehow they missed a tackle, or let Foles escape.  The pick 6 had energized the crowd and the Eagles and they became the team of destiny.  At least until they get destroyed on the 1st Sunday in February. 

That is the only reason I can think that our defense was exposed so bad.  They didn't suddenly forget how to play football, they didn't become lazy and undisciplined.  They got outschemed.  They had worked on a way to stop the Eagles offense and it was a good plan.  Except Pedersen had a better plan.  And a QB with a horseshoe stuck up his posterior. 
Reply

#2
I agree with most of your thoughts, but to me the D looked gassed.  Too many nagging injuries to Rhodes, Sendejo, Griffen, et al finally took it's toll.  Same with the O line.  If they could have been mid-season healthy, I would expect a different outcome.
But like my dad used to say, "...and if the dog didn't stop to take a s***, he'd of caught the rabbit!"  Wink
Reply

#3
That game was all about gameplan, IMO....and matchups. And Minnesota was both out-coached and out-played. Over matched in almost every way. Plenty of blame to go around. The defense looked like a high school team. I mean, this was just a HORRIBLE matchup for Minnesota. It happens. We could play them next Sunday and they'd still slap us around....the key will be how will the team do against them next year. Offense looked pop-gun. 

IMO, I think Minnesota is thinking long and hard about moving forward with Bradford. He's the alpha talent of the group. They've seen what the offense can look like with him slinging it. Minnesota will be second-guessed in whatever decision they make, guaranteed. 




Reply

#4
Quote: @StickyBun said:
That game was all about gameplan, IMO....and matchups. And Minnesota was both out-coached and out-played. Over matched in almost every way. Plenty of blame to go around. The defense looked like a high school team. I mean, this was just a HORRIBLE matchup for Minnesota. It happens. We could play them next Sunday and they'd still slap us around....the key will be how will the team do against them next year. Offense looked pop-gun. 

IMO, I think Minnesota is thinking long and hard about moving forward with Bradford. He's the alpha talent of the group. They've seen what the offense can look like with him slinging it. Minnesota will be second-guessed in whatever decision they make, guaranteed. 

Not sure you can trust that knee and it could give you issues at any moment. I think you have to move on from the Bradford idea if I were the Vikes.
Reply

#5
Quote: @Canthony said:
@StickyBun said:
That game was all about gameplan, IMO....and matchups. And Minnesota was both out-coached and out-played. Over matched in almost every way. Plenty of blame to go around. The defense looked like a high school team. I mean, this was just a HORRIBLE matchup for Minnesota. It happens. We could play them next Sunday and they'd still slap us around....the key will be how will the team do against them next year. Offense looked pop-gun. 

IMO, I think Minnesota is thinking long and hard about moving forward with Bradford. He's the alpha talent of the group. They've seen what the offense can look like with him slinging it. Minnesota will be second-guessed in whatever decision they make, guaranteed. 

Not sure you can trust that knee and it could give you issues at any moment. I think you have to move on from the Bradford idea if I were the Vikes.
everybody has question marks,  it really comes down to what was wrong this year,  was it corrected,  and what are the chances of it happening again.   same with Teddy, who I am convinced we dont have the whole story on,  perfectly healthy knees dont just fly apart for no reason.  I hope it was a previously undiagnosed injury as that would at least make sense as opposed to the unknown.
Reply

#6
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@Canthony said:
@StickyBun said:
That game was all about gameplan, IMO....and matchups. And Minnesota was both out-coached and out-played. Over matched in almost every way. Plenty of blame to go around. The defense looked like a high school team. I mean, this was just a HORRIBLE matchup for Minnesota. It happens. We could play them next Sunday and they'd still slap us around....the key will be how will the team do against them next year. Offense looked pop-gun. 

IMO, I think Minnesota is thinking long and hard about moving forward with Bradford. He's the alpha talent of the group. They've seen what the offense can look like with him slinging it. Minnesota will be second-guessed in whatever decision they make, guaranteed. 

Not sure you can trust that knee and it could give you issues at any moment. I think you have to move on from the Bradford idea if I were the Vikes.
everybody has question marks,  it really comes down to what was wrong this year,  was it corrected,  and what are the chances of it happening again.   same with Teddy, who I am convinced we dont have the whole story on,  perfectly healthy knees dont just fly apart for no reason.  I hope it was a previously undiagnosed injury as that would at least make sense as opposed to the unknown.

All fair points. I would assume we just grab an Alex Smith and move on altogether. I wish we could see what Teddy has with an offseason though. I think he could still be the QB for a franchise.
Reply

#7
Quote: @Canthony said:
@StickyBun said:
That game was all about gameplan, IMO....and matchups. And Minnesota was both out-coached and out-played. Over matched in almost every way. Plenty of blame to go around. The defense looked like a high school team. I mean, this was just a HORRIBLE matchup for Minnesota. It happens. We could play them next Sunday and they'd still slap us around....the key will be how will the team do against them next year. Offense looked pop-gun. 

IMO, I think Minnesota is thinking long and hard about moving forward with Bradford. He's the alpha talent of the group. They've seen what the offense can look like with him slinging it. Minnesota will be second-guessed in whatever decision they make, guaranteed. 

Not sure you can trust that knee and it could give you issues at any moment. I think you have to move on from the Bradford idea if I were the Vikes.
But that arm talent... 

I don't disagree with you. But that arm talent... 
Reply

#8
Quote: @StickyBun said:
That game was all about gameplan, IMO....and matchups. And Minnesota was both out-coached and out-played. Over matched in almost every way. Plenty of blame to go around. The defense looked like a high school team. I mean, this was just a HORRIBLE matchup for Minnesota. It happens. We could play them next Sunday and they'd still slap us around....the key will be how will the team do against them next year. Offense looked pop-gun. 

IMO, I think Minnesota is thinking long and hard about moving forward with Bradford. He's the alpha talent of the group. They've seen what the offense can look like with him slinging it. Minnesota will be second-guessed in whatever decision they make, guaranteed. 
As much as I love Teddy, and hoped he could take the steps. It does begin to make sense to commit to a bradford or Cousins,  a truly elite downfield talent that can pressure every level of a defense.  Thing is, you need a very stout Oline to protect him, or your downfield schemes fall apart. 

With Cook returning and Murray hopefully restructuring, We should be able to draft Oline and Dline with our 2 early picks.  If Treadwells light comes on or we obtain a high end #1 receiver, our O could become elite quickly
Reply

#9
Quote: @StickyBun said:
That game was all about gameplan, IMO....and matchups. And Minnesota was both out-coached and out-played. Over matched in almost every way. Plenty of blame to go around. The defense looked like a high school team. I mean, this was just a HORRIBLE matchup for Minnesota. It happens. We could play them next Sunday and they'd still slap us around....the key will be how will the team do against them next year. Offense looked pop-gun. 

IMO, I think Minnesota is thinking long and hard about moving forward with Bradford. He's the alpha talent of the group. They've seen what the offense can look like with him slinging it. Minnesota will be second-guessed in whatever decision they make, guaranteed. 
I disagree heartily.

I think @Ralphie brings a good point, nagging injuries hampered our defense.  Rhodes was out for the one TD.  Griffen didn't have the same effect he had earlier.

But IMO, we built our defensive game plan to take away the short quick throws, but Philly had a counter that hadn't been used yet with Foles and that was to go deep. We were in a dogfight and we were sold out on stopping the offense by taking away the short stuff. 

The offense wasn't popgun when they marched down the field to score first.  The defense wasn't highschool when they forced the first punt.  But that INT rocked the offense.  I will go back to my thoughts in the Redskins game, after the bad INT there, I thought the coaches didn't trust Case.  But maybe, it was more Case not having the confidence he normally did.  Perhaps this was the same here, Case didn't have the confidence to make the throws he normally did and started seeing ghosts.

That is just my opinion, but to paint with the broad brush that we were an awful team and had no chance just doesn't fit reality.  We beat good teams on the road this year. 
Reply

#10
I was chips all in - again. 13/3 was great, winning a playoff Divisional game amazing. As fun to be at this one as Favre vs Cowboys, maybe even better cause I hate The Saints so much. 

But losing the way they did in the NFCCG? Embarrassing for the owners, employees of the entire franchise. Out-coached or out-schemed? Thats a question for Zimmer to wrestle with. For the fans? Doesn't matter at this point.

Player resiliency? File a missing resiliency report. A loss of immense proportions - historically epic in ineptitude & comparable to 41/donut. Infamy describes both of these games. 

And do yourself a favor, don't peek at the statistics of teams that lost to this degree in a CG, and what  % of the time they made the playoffs the next season. 

I hope they can buck that trend. 

Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
3 Guest(s)

Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2025 Melroy van den Berg.