Let's hope not

Now we just need the plate to hit Cousins in the head so we have to start Jake Browning :p

Kinda agree with Zimmer on this one. 

Like this guy is a bad option?

I can see us passing more this year, especially on 1st down, but with Dalvin Cook and a very good run blocking line and system, this will remain a run-first team. 

@"MaroonBells" said: I can see us passing more this year, especially on 1st down, but with Dalvin Cook and a very good run blocking line and system, this will remain a run-first team. 

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I can see us passing more this year, especially on 1st down, but with Dalvin Cook and a very good run blocking line and system, this will remain a run-first team. 

It needs to be a do whatever the defense is showing a weakness for.  To many times we got predictable and couldn't move the ball,  that happens to great OL,  when the stack the box throw them out of it.

Regardless of overall balance (or not) Cook had 312 carries in 2020. IMO this is too many. 

Only Henry had more with a 1970's Steelers like 378. 

Next tier of runners (after Cook and Henry) were in the 200's in carries. 

https://www.nfl.com/stats/player-stats/category/rushing/2020/REG/all/rushingattempts/DESC

I love Dalvin but they have to watch the wear and tear. They also need to make the offense less predictable. You gotta adjust to opponents too. Once again the OL is key. 

I'm hoping that the young Kubiak can stand up to Z, and unleash more of the offense.  We have the tools to prey on any defense's weaknesses, if we'll just show the will/flexibility.

Even Z must know that we can't default to run/grind all the time without being painfully predictable...and that he has a host of proven weapons in his passing offense to go with his beloved running game.

And can we stop the revolving door of Offensive Coordinators too? Seriously? That is absolutely ridiculous.

@"Vikergirl" said: And can we stop the revolving door of Offensive Coordinators too? Seriously? That is absolutely ridiculous.

Kubiak's REALLY young though. 34. Maybe too young for an HC position. Ya gotta at least pay a LITTLE bit of dues, right? The top 4 offenses last year were....

1. KC--Bienemy doesn't get a shot because most people realize it's Andy Reid's offense. 
2. Titans--OC was hired away. Arthur Smith is now the HC in Atlanta.
3. Bills--Daboll was the favorite for the Chargers HC job. But they decided they wanted to go with a defensive HC. Daboll still in Buffalo. If the Bills repeat what they did last year, Daboll would probably be the top candidate, despite the fact that Josh Allen and Stefon Diggs are why the offense goes, not Daboll.
4. Vikings--Kubiak retired. But a 34-year old version of a very successful, Super Bowl winning coach will be very tempting for teams, especially if the Vikings finish near the top again. 

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I can see us passing more this year, especially on 1st down, but with Dalvin Cook and a very good run blocking line and system, this will remain a run-first team. 

It needs to be a do whatever the defense is showing a weakness for.  To many times we got predictable and couldn't move the ball,  that happens to great OL,  when the stack the box throw them out of it.

Yes, but for too many, "predictable" simply means running the ball. If it goes for 1, it's predictable. If Dalvin busts it for 60, nobody talks about how predictable it was. Thing is, even those 1 yard gains are useful. 

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I can see us passing more this year, especially on 1st down, but with Dalvin Cook and a very good run blocking line and system, this will remain a run-first team. 

It needs to be a do whatever the defense is showing a weakness for.  To many times we got predictable and couldn't move the ball,  that happens to great OL,  when the stack the box throw them out of it.

Yes, but for too many, "predictable" simply means running the ball. If it goes for 1, it's predictable. If Dalvin busts it for 60, nobody talks about how predictable it was. Thing is, even those 1 yard gains are useful. 

1 yard gains have their place,  but when we are simply trying to "impose our willingness to run on a stacked defense and end up not at least flipping field position,  then those one yard gains are futile.  It seems to often under Zimmer that our game plan is to simply run the clock on a narrow lead and they end up going 3 and out at inopportune times.

@"Zanary" said: I'm hoping that the young Kubiak can stand up to Z, and unleash more of the offense.  We have the tools to prey on any defense's weaknesses, if we'll just show the will/flexibility.

Even Z must know that we can't default to run/grind all the time without being painfully predictable...and that he has a host of proven weapons in his passing offense to go with his beloved running game.

Vikings are not a grind it out team. They passed more than they ran last year. 55% to 45%. Who ran more? Titans, Patriots, Ravens, Browns, Saints--except the Pats, all playoff teams. 

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I can see us passing more this year, especially on 1st down, but with Dalvin Cook and a very good run blocking line and system, this will remain a run-first team. 

It needs to be a do whatever the defense is showing a weakness for.  To many times we got predictable and couldn't move the ball,  that happens to great OL,  when the stack the box throw them out of it.

Yes, but for too many, "predictable" simply means running the ball. If it goes for 1, it's predictable. If Dalvin busts it for 60, nobody talks about how predictable it was. Thing is, even those 1 yard gains are useful. 

1 yard gains have their place,  but when we are simply trying to "impose our willingness to run on a stacked defense and end up not at least flipping field position,  then those one yard gains are futile.  It seems to often under Zimmer that our game plan is to simply run the clock on a narrow lead and they end up going 3 and out at inopportune times.

I remember a tight game last year--Titans, Cowboys, can't remember who--where all we had to do was get a first down, run off about 90 seconds and the game was ours. We went three and out and took about 20 seconds off the clock because we passed on all three of the downs. We lost. 

Why did they do this? I suspect because the defense expected them to run and stacked the box. For the most part, offenses will take what the defense gives them, but sometimes it's best to ignore that and just do what you do well, especially if the situation calls for it. 

@"greediron" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I can see us passing more this year, especially on 1st down, but with Dalvin Cook and a very good run blocking line and system, this will remain a run-first team. 

It needs to be a do whatever the defense is showing a weakness for.  To many times we got predictable and couldn't move the ball,  that happens to great OL,  when the stack the box throw them out of it.

Yes, but for too many, "predictable" simply means running the ball. If it goes for 1, it's predictable. If Dalvin busts it for 60, nobody talks about how predictable it was. Thing is, even those 1 yard gains are useful. 

1 yard gains have their place,  but when we are simply trying to "impose our willingness to run on a stacked defense and end up not at least flipping field position,  then those one yard gains are futile.  It seems to often under Zimmer that our game plan is to simply run the clock on a narrow lead and they end up going 3 and out at inopportune times.

I remember a tight game last year--Titans, Cowboys, can't remember who--where all we had to do was get a first down, run off about 90 seconds and the game was ours. We went three and out and took about 20 seconds off the clock because we passed on all three of the downs. We lost. 

Why did they do this? I suspect because the defense expected them to run and stacked the box. For the most part, offenses will take what the defense gives them, but sometimes it's best to ignore that and just do what you do well, especially if the situation calls for it. 

Pretty easy to throw out a general criticism about Zimmer being to conservative.  It is just a fan thing, fans want excitement and if we lose 1 game in a boring way, the confirmation bias sets in.  All those other losses that don't confirm the bias are just losses.

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"greediron" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I can see us passing more this year, especially on 1st down, but with Dalvin Cook and a very good run blocking line and system, this will remain a run-first team. 

It needs to be a do whatever the defense is showing a weakness for.  To many times we got predictable and couldn't move the ball,  that happens to great OL,  when the stack the box throw them out of it.

Yes, but for too many, "predictable" simply means running the ball. If it goes for 1, it's predictable. If Dalvin busts it for 60, nobody talks about how predictable it was. Thing is, even those 1 yard gains are useful. 

1 yard gains have their place,  but when we are simply trying to "impose our willingness to run on a stacked defense and end up not at least flipping field position,  then those one yard gains are futile.  It seems to often under Zimmer that our game plan is to simply run the clock on a narrow lead and they end up going 3 and out at inopportune times.

I remember a tight game last year--Titans, Cowboys, can't remember who--where all we had to do was get a first down, run off about 90 seconds and the game was ours. We went three and out and took about 20 seconds off the clock because we passed on all three of the downs. We lost. 

Why did they do this? I suspect because the defense expected them to run and stacked the box. For the most part, offenses will take what the defense gives them, but sometimes it's best to ignore that and just do what you do well, especially if the situation calls for it. 

Pretty easy to throw out a general criticism about Zimmer being to conservative.  It is just a fan thing, fans want excitement and if we lose 1 game in a boring way, the confirmation bias sets in.  All those other losses that don't confirm the bias are just losses.

Fans want wins,  I dont give a shit how they do it,  and its pretty well known that our OL the last decade hasn't been worth a shit on moving people out of the way and imposing their will when the other team knows its coming.   Its hardly a rare occurrence to see the O fail to convert a short yardage run in a critical situation.

@"greediron" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"greediron" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I can see us passing more this year, especially on 1st down, but with Dalvin Cook and a very good run blocking line and system, this will remain a run-first team. 

It needs to be a do whatever the defense is showing a weakness for.  To many times we got predictable and couldn't move the ball,  that happens to great OL,  when the stack the box throw them out of it.

Yes, but for too many, "predictable" simply means running the ball. If it goes for 1, it's predictable. If Dalvin busts it for 60, nobody talks about how predictable it was. Thing is, even those 1 yard gains are useful. 

1 yard gains have their place,  but when we are simply trying to "impose our willingness to run on a stacked defense and end up not at least flipping field position,  then those one yard gains are futile.  It seems to often under Zimmer that our game plan is to simply run the clock on a narrow lead and they end up going 3 and out at inopportune times.

I remember a tight game last year--Titans, Cowboys, can't remember who--where all we had to do was get a first down, run off about 90 seconds and the game was ours. We went three and out and took about 20 seconds off the clock because we passed on all three of the downs. We lost. 

Why did they do this? I suspect because the defense expected them to run and stacked the box. For the most part, offenses will take what the defense gives them, but sometimes it's best to ignore that and just do what you do well, especially if the situation calls for it. 

Pretty easy to throw out a general criticism about Zimmer being to conservative.  It is just a fan thing, fans want excitement and if we lose 1 game in a boring way, the confirmation bias sets in.  All those other losses that don't confirm the bias are just losses.

Fans want wins,  I dont give a shit how they do it,  and its pretty well known that our OL the last decade hasn't been worth a shit on moving people out of the way and imposing their will when the other team knows its coming.   Its hardly a rare occurrence to see the O fail to convert a short yardage run in a critical situation.

So which was it, conservative coach or shitty o-line?  

I think the shitty o-line had more to do with getting whipped up front by the bears twice a year.  Cuz passing hasn't worked against that D-line either.

@"greediron" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said:

@"MaroonBells" said: I can see us passing more this year, especially on 1st down, but with Dalvin Cook and a very good run blocking line and system, this will remain a run-first team. 

It needs to be a do whatever the defense is showing a weakness for.  To many times we got predictable and couldn't move the ball,  that happens to great OL,  when the stack the box throw them out of it.

Yes, but for too many, "predictable" simply means running the ball. If it goes for 1, it's predictable. If Dalvin busts it for 60, nobody talks about how predictable it was. Thing is, even those 1 yard gains are useful. 

1 yard gains have their place,  but when we are simply trying to "impose our willingness to run on a stacked defense and end up not at least flipping field position,  then those one yard gains are futile.  It seems to often under Zimmer that our game plan is to simply run the clock on a narrow lead and they end up going 3 and out at inopportune times.

I remember a tight game last year--Titans, Cowboys, can't remember who--where all we had to do was get a first down, run off about 90 seconds and the game was ours. We went three and out and took about 20 seconds off the clock because we passed on all three of the downs. We lost. 

Why did they do this? I suspect because the defense expected them to run and stacked the box. For the most part, offenses will take what the defense gives them, but sometimes it's best to ignore that and just do what you do well, especially if the situation calls for it. 

Pretty easy to throw out a general criticism about Zimmer being to conservative.  It is just a fan thing, fans want excitement and if we lose 1 game in a boring way, the confirmation bias sets in.  All those other losses that don't confirm the bias are just losses.

You would think that if the offense was so predictable and antiquated, they would have been easy to stop. Yet, only green bay and Kansas City averaged more yards per game.  Even top half (14) in passing yards.

If our offense would have been able to play our defense last year, our numbers would have been considerably higher.