Wet blanket or realist?

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.

@"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.

@"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.

@"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.

It is easier than ever to guess (and yes all analysts have to guess to a degree) at what the line calls are because of technology. All 22 film makes it a bit easier to take a look at personnel on the field for both offense and Defense and using that and taking into account a team's tendencies and those of standard protection schemes it becomes fairly easy to start to put together a picture to grade with. However, what it might not show is that the called out protections assignments may have been wrong on the part of the person making the calls. And if that happened it is entirely possible that the linemen in fact DID execute correctly based on the assignments that were called out.  Ideally what we would like to know is in the post game grading and film sessions did the coaches point out where the protection schemes were wrong on a given play OR were there players that missed their protection assignments?

Undoubtedly technology is offering more analysis in today's media and less of us just taking a poetic offering from a journalist who  has to go off of only what they saw....... However in the end in the past the journalist may have actually been more correct because their analysis would have been roughly... The offensive line played well... Or the Offensive line played poorly. 

In the end we are all on the outside even with the tools at our disposal but it sure is fun trying to figure out how well the team is doing. Right? 

@"JimmyinSD" said: 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.

Good point, we always need to remember that the opponents are doing their best to make plays as well.  That is sort of my point, 10 plays, most of them actual positive plays, that he found issues with.  That should be a much more positive article.

I like Arif's articles they are usually very well thought out and this one is no different.  I don't view his take as a wet blanket at all not when you analyze the whole picture.  Many people will pick and chose one or two plays and make a declaration without the full game.  

Plus we all knew this OL was/is a WIP that will make many mistakes hopefully that they learn from as the season goes on.  IMO - Easton has the highest jump to make and is not overly experienced at Guard.  He made a lot of misreads in the last preseason game and in this first real game.  The young interior is going to be under Steeler fire early and often this Sunday.

We are building towards an average OL.  Last week, and even in preseason, I have seen cleaner pockets for Same to throw in then I have seen in years.  So occasional screw ups are expected and would be a huge jump up from occasional decent blocking.

@"StickyBun" said:

...

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.