Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32
  1. #11
    sleepagent is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,505

    Re: Stick to the SYSTEM or Adapt to the TALENT?

    "MaxVike" wrote:
    "sleepagent" wrote:
    I was down in DC late last week having dinner with a friend . . . who happens to be an EAGLES fan.


    Obviously the topic of football came up, and I shared with him the extreme displeasure a lot of Vikings fans have with BC being resistant to make adjustments according to the players . . . and not his system.

    He told me that ANDY REID is the same way, and he's probably using what he learned in Philadelphia as a basis for his system.
    Implement a system and make the players conform / learn it.

    Now that lead to another conversation over which is better . . . stick to the system OR adapt to the talent.

    What does everyone here think??

    Sleep, I LIVE in Delaware...all of my friends are Eagles fans.
    They are all chirping about Reid and are saying 'I told you so' about Childress being stubborn and quirky.
    Thanks for bringing a relevant, timely topic.

    I say it's a hybrid...in other words, you adapt your system to the talent you have.
    Not really a cop-out, I'll try to illustrate my point.
    Everyone knows the WCO (or, whatever it is the Vikes are running), has hundreds of plays.
    Callahan, at Nebraska, overwhelmed his first QB with the complexity of his offense (the same WCO that Gannon set the percent complete NFL record running), and cut it back to run only 30-40% of the plays.
    That's college, however, Montana didn't have immediate success with the entire playbook...it took him time to learn.
    Ditto for McNabb and the aforementioned Gannon.
    As they became more comfortable in the offense, the playbook was expanded and catered to the QB.
    Until then, they were charged to execute the plays within their skill set as they came up the curve.
    I was priveledged enough to speak to one of the QBs mentioned above about this very topic prior to the season.
    Another point he made was that, the "script" that Walsh, Gruden, Reid, and others have deployed is designed to set up the opponents such that the offense can fully exploit its strengths and the defenses weaknesses...it is also meant to capitalize on the QB's 'best plays' from the prior week's practice.

    The Vikes trouble is that they don't yet have a QB who can operate the offense efficiently enough to win.
    I think Childress has scaled the offense back so much that we haven't even seen 30% of the plays...because we don't have a capable QB.
    Our receivers and RBs have enough talent to run the WCO.
    Not sure if our O-linemen are up to the zone blocking task...I don't know enough about that; I've read some criticism to that effect.
    Go Fighting Blue Hens!
    ;D

    Damn EAGLES fans are everywhere, eh??

    Great response there.
    I think what you said kind of crystalizes what many people have been trying to say here.

    "No Greater Friend . . . No Worse Enemy. U.S. MARINES"
    "FIND YOUR PASSION AND MAKE IT HAPPEN!"
    "SUCCESS LOOKS EASY TO THOSE THAT WEREN'T THERE WHEN IT WAS BEING ACHIEVED!"

  2. #12
    sleepagent is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,505

    Re: Stick to the SYSTEM or Adapt to the TALENT?

    "COJOMAY" wrote:
    I didn't vote for either because it's bit of both. If you always adapt to players then you got no system at all and you may as well be drawing plays on the ground like sandlot football because everything changes season to season as you get new players.
    But on the other hand, you don't become so rigid in the system that nothing else matters. For example, under Tice we always had a man-to-man blocking system. Childress changed it to a zone and brought in some good players who were used to man-to-man. Yet Childress insists on zone blocking. Now, how big of a leap is it to have man-to-man blocking and yet keep the rest of your "system" in place? By that I mean the overall concept.
    Naturally there is always a system . . . but if part of it doesn't work . . . like your example of the OL, that's where I would like to see an adjustment by the Head Coach.

    My big problem with BC is he seems to be too pigheaded to make even the smallest changes to his system.
    He's living by the word of his system.
    I may be wrong on that approach, but its what I see and read about.

    "No Greater Friend . . . No Worse Enemy. U.S. MARINES"
    "FIND YOUR PASSION AND MAKE IT HAPPEN!"
    "SUCCESS LOOKS EASY TO THOSE THAT WEREN'T THERE WHEN IT WAS BEING ACHIEVED!"

  3. #13
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: Stick to the SYSTEM or Adapt to the TALENT?

    "sleepagent" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    Another "What do you think" thread.

    Hey my friend, I've told everyone what I think on this subject.
    You tell us for a change.

    Give me some examples of how to use AD better.
    Should he start doing multiple cuts or stick to one cut running?

    How will that effect the line play?

    Give me some examples of Line Blocking that you would employ.
    Should we pull the gaurds more?


    What alignments should our WR's use?
    Should they motion more? Less?

    Please dazzle me with your football knowledge.

    ;D
    You are getting into the finer details of football, not the general stuff we were speaking of.

    I think every team has and needs a system, but I'm the type to believe you adapt to the talent around you.

    AD is a beast of a runner.
    He is gonna wear down a defense and punish them.
    We need to conform to his strengths and keep him active LATE in the game as we will stand a much better chance of watching him break out a long TD run later in the games.
    CT is not of the same mold . . . in fact, he will wear down as the game goes on.
    So if the Coach is committed to the two back system, I would much rather see CT start the game and AD end the game.
    For me, because you asked, I would use AP as my only back unless he's hurt or just plain worn out.
    He's my workhorse.

    Our line seems to have problems with this new zone blocking type system that is /was being installed.
    I don't like it . . . again, play to the strength of the line.
    By having a single workhorse, the line doesn't have to keep adjusting to who is in the game.
    I'm sure if BC would commit to AP, the line would respond in kind.

    Pulling guards, trap blocking, . . . all of the above.
    The type of blocking that is done is based upon what the defense gives you or takes away from you.
    As you know, being of a single mindset isn't gonna work.

    I like quick short passes, swing passes out of the backfield to tighten up the box and then homerun balls when the defense adjusts . . . in short the LINEHAN approach.
    Give the rock to AP, and mix in short passes with the occasion deep throw to keep them honest.
    At last, someone answers the challenge.
    I am always asking for details.
    I hate talking generalities and cliches when it comes to football.
    I hate posters who post such and can't talk in detail.

    I agree, you should adapt to a certain extent but don't you think that the staff has been bringing in talent to match the system?
    Who doesn't fit the WCO style of ball?


    I think our RB's do.
    Both can run as well as catch the ball in the flats as well.
    You might get some push back from guys on here if you think AD should finish the game vice playing the whole game.
    I for one would run him until he drops and then run him some more.
    Of course then we would only have CT left.
    Take a look at what happens with RB's (Addai, Cadilac etc) as they try to be a one back workhorse.
    Just doesn't work IMHO anymore as the Defenses are just bigger and faster and keep getting faster.
    Kindof like the 2 back set.
    Let the hot hand run and spell him with the other guy.

    I kindof disagree with you on the whole argument of the line having to adjust to the RB.
    RBs adjust to the liine and not the other way around.
    How many times do you hear a commentator say something along the lines of......"He was very patient and allowed the wholes to develop" or something like that.
    In fact a knock on young RB's is that they hit the hole a little to fast when the get to the NFL and don't wait for the OL to open holes.

    The line just needs to do its job and let the RB hit the whole.

    Our WR's seem to be ideally suited for the scheme, 1 quick off the line/precise route runner (B-wade), 1 Big Physical precise route runner (Rice) and a guy that can stretch the field (T-will).
    I also (although we haven't seen him much) like what Allison can add if he gets some reps/experience.

    It seems that our TE's fit the scheme.
    That calls for a mix of TE's that can block and TE's that can exploit the seams.
    A little bit of knock on Shank that he isn't a good blocker, but heck, I don't think he was brought in to block.
    That is what we have Klieny for.
    Shank seems to be able to catch most anything that gets close.

    Seems like alot of discussion is being touted about the whole Zone Blocking scheme we run when in fact (I was corrected by Del) we run it only as situations dictate.
    Again, I don't think it is the scheme but rather, I am getting more and more convinced that Birk is messing up with his calls/adjustments at the line based on what the D is showing or not showing.
    Throw in some lazy play by McKinnie and youth at the RT spot and you have a disaster in the making.
    Again, I don't think it is scheme orientated at all but just poor execution.

    Only real issue I have, again, with what the staff is doing is focused on the poor play at the OL.
    All the other stuff, including the 4 picks in the Lions game by our young QB can be fixed.
    Again, not scheme related but rather experience type of stuff.

    Very nice post my friend.
    I like it when people can back up points with real football talk.
    Thats what I come on here for.
    ;D
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  4. #14
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: Stick to the SYSTEM or Adapt to the TALENT?

    "Mr" wrote:
    Give Peterson more carries.

    Bring in some right side OL talent.

    Throw to Rice more.

    Use Williamson deep.

    Use Wade underneath.

    Tell TJack if no one is open to just bolt or throw it away.

    Get the defense off the field for more than 4 plays at a time.




    With the talent we have in place, it shouldn't be that hard to coach. The steeler approach will work just fine... and we have more talent at the "skill" positions than they did in 05.
    So are you saying we have the talent to fit the scheme then?
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  5. #15
    COJOMAY is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,005

    Re: Stick to the SYSTEM or Adapt to the TALENT?

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "Mr" wrote:
    Give Peterson more carries.

    Bring in some right side OL talent.

    Throw to Rice more.

    Use Williamson deep.

    Use Wade underneath.

    Tell TJack if no one is open to just bolt or throw it away.

    Get the defense off the field for more than 4 plays at a time.




    With the talent we have in place, it shouldn't be that hard to coach. The steeler approach will work just fine... and we have more talent at the "skill" positions than they did in 05.
    So are you saying we have the talent to fit the scheme then?
    Leave it to you Marrdro to flesh out the answers.
    LOL
    Kentucky Vikes Fan

    When you require nothing, you get nothing; when you expect nothing, you will find nothing; when you embrace nothing, all you will have is nothing.

  6. #16
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: Stick to the SYSTEM or Adapt to the TALENT?

    "vikings_fan66" wrote:
    I have always thought that any coach can install a system and stubbornly adhere to it

    But, a great or good coach is one who is able to recognize the type of tlane he has on his team and then adjusts his sysytems according to his talent

    Just my thoughts
    Who doesn't fit the scheme?
    What talents are they lacking? Again, I believe the staff has been spending the last two years brining in the right talent.


    Now all they have to do is get the up to speed on it.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  7. #17
    MetalMike-LoudVike's Avatar
    MetalMike-LoudVike is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,291

    Re: Stick to the SYSTEM or Adapt to the TALENT?

    I said adapt to the talent. This way your utilizing the pieces on the chessboard correctly. More Bang for your buck. But also it is easy to say adapt the talent, when your 3 games behind the divison leader right now. But if the System produces results and the W's are rolling in thats good too.
    I suppose this is gonna make me a compromised person. AWW the feeling of Awkwardness.
    IN THE PITS ON THE RIVER BEDS EVRY VIKING FAN WILL RISE & VAHALLA SHALL REJOICE WITH THE MOST GLORIOUS PRIZE LOMBARDI'S TROPHY

  8. #18
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: Stick to the SYSTEM or Adapt to the TALENT?

    "COJOMAY" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "Mr" wrote:
    Give Peterson more carries.

    Bring in some right side OL talent.

    Throw to Rice more.

    Use Williamson deep.

    Use Wade underneath.

    Tell TJack if no one is open to just bolt or throw it away.

    Get the defense off the field for more than 4 plays at a time.




    With the talent we have in place, it shouldn't be that hard to coach. The steeler approach will work just fine... and we have more talent at the "skill" positions than they did in 05.
    So are you saying we have the talent to fit the scheme then?
    Leave it to you Marrdro to flesh out the answers.
    LOL
    My friend.
    You know I only hover around on this site to talk real talk about football and the Vikes.
    I love this stuff.
    ;D
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  9. #19
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,935

    Re: Stick to the SYSTEM or Adapt to the TALENT?

    "MaxVike" wrote:
    "sleepagent" wrote:
    I was down in DC late last week having dinner with a friend . . . who happens to be an EAGLES fan.


    Obviously the topic of football came up, and I shared with him the extreme displeasure a lot of Vikings fans have with BC being resistant to make adjustments according to the players . . . and not his system.

    He told me that ANDY REID is the same way, and he's probably using what he learned in Philadelphia as a basis for his system.
    Implement a system and make the players conform / learn it.

    Now that lead to another conversation over which is better . . . stick to the system OR adapt to the talent.

    What does everyone here think??

    Sleep, I LIVE in Delaware...all of my friends are Eagles fans.
    They are all chirping about Reid and are saying 'I told you so' about Childress being stubborn and quirky.
    Thanks for bringing a relevant, timely topic.

    I say it's a hybrid...in other words, you adapt your system to the talent you have.
    Not really a cop-out, I'll try to illustrate my point.
    Everyone knows the WCO (or, whatever it is the Vikes are running), has hundreds of plays.
    Callahan, at Nebraska, overwhelmed his first QB with the complexity of his offense (the same WCO that Gannon set the percent complete NFL record running), and cut it back to run only 30-40% of the plays.
    That's college, however, Montana didn't have immediate success with the entire playbook...it took him time to learn.
    Ditto for McNabb and the aforementioned Gannon.
    As they became more comfortable in the offense, the playbook was expanded and catered to the QB.
    Until then, they were charged to execute the plays within their skill set as they came up the curve.
    I was priveledged enough to speak to one of the QBs mentioned above about this very topic prior to the season.
    Another point he made was that, the "script" that Walsh, Gruden, Reid, and others have deployed is designed to set up the opponents such that the offense can fully exploit its strengths and the defenses weaknesses...it is also meant to capitalize on the QB's 'best plays' from the prior week's practice.

    The Vikes trouble is that they don't yet have a QB who can operate the offense efficiently enough to win.
    I think Childress has scaled the offense back so much that we haven't even seen 30% of the plays...because we don't have a capable QB.
    Our receivers and RBs have enough talent to run the WCO.
    Not sure if our O-linemen are up to the zone blocking task...I don't know enough about that; I've read some criticism to that effect.
    Very nice.
    I should have read your post before I replied to the originator of the thread.

    Do you think that TJ will come around?
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  10. #20
    sleepagent is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,505

    Re: Stick to the SYSTEM or Adapt to the TALENT?

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "MaxVike" wrote:
    "sleepagent" wrote:
    I was down in DC late last week having dinner with a friend . . . who happens to be an EAGLES fan.


    Obviously the topic of football came up, and I shared with him the extreme displeasure a lot of Vikings fans have with BC being resistant to make adjustments according to the players . . . and not his system.

    He told me that ANDY REID is the same way, and he's probably using what he learned in Philadelphia as a basis for his system.
    Implement a system and make the players conform / learn it.

    Now that lead to another conversation over which is better . . . stick to the system OR adapt to the talent.

    What does everyone here think??

    Sleep, I LIVE in Delaware...all of my friends are Eagles fans.
    They are all chirping about Reid and are saying 'I told you so' about Childress being stubborn and quirky.
    Thanks for bringing a relevant, timely topic.

    I say it's a hybrid...in other words, you adapt your system to the talent you have.
    Not really a cop-out, I'll try to illustrate my point.
    Everyone knows the WCO (or, whatever it is the Vikes are running), has hundreds of plays.
    Callahan, at Nebraska, overwhelmed his first QB with the complexity of his offense (the same WCO that Gannon set the percent complete NFL record running), and cut it back to run only 30-40% of the plays.
    That's college, however, Montana didn't have immediate success with the entire playbook...it took him time to learn.
    Ditto for McNabb and the aforementioned Gannon.
    As they became more comfortable in the offense, the playbook was expanded and catered to the QB.
    Until then, they were charged to execute the plays within their skill set as they came up the curve.
    I was priveledged enough to speak to one of the QBs mentioned above about this very topic prior to the season.
    Another point he made was that, the "script" that Walsh, Gruden, Reid, and others have deployed is designed to set up the opponents such that the offense can fully exploit its strengths and the defenses weaknesses...it is also meant to capitalize on the QB's 'best plays' from the prior week's practice.

    The Vikes trouble is that they don't yet have a QB who can operate the offense efficiently enough to win.
    I think Childress has scaled the offense back so much that we haven't even seen 30% of the plays...because we don't have a capable QB.
    Our receivers and RBs have enough talent to run the WCO.
    Not sure if our O-linemen are up to the zone blocking task...I don't know enough about that; I've read some criticism to that effect.
    Very nice.
    I should have read your post before I replied to the originator of the thread.

    Do you think that TJ will come around?
    Out of breath already Marrdro??
    ;D

    "No Greater Friend . . . No Worse Enemy. U.S. MARINES"
    "FIND YOUR PASSION AND MAKE IT HAPPEN!"
    "SUCCESS LOOKS EASY TO THOSE THAT WEREN'T THERE WHEN IT WAS BEING ACHIEVED!"

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Henne, getting stick from all angles!
    By Johnson14 in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-17-2011, 06:47 PM
  2. Women stick together against cheating lover
    By Zeus in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-04-2009, 12:43 PM
  3. Stick Figures in Peril
    By BadlandsVikings in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-12-2007, 04:46 PM
  4. Lions plan to stick with Harrington
    By singersp in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 02-23-2006, 06:14 AM
  5. Stick a fork in the pack!!
    By skogs02 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 10-12-2004, 02:02 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •