Thread: Brad Childress Doesn't Need to Go, But Someone Does

"mountainviking" wrote:

Sometimes, it seems like we only have one gameplan...we're going to run at you and then run some more, and maybe later we'll try a pass...probably a short one on third and long.
Then we're going to hope our STs don't floop it up so our Defense can win the game for us.
OK, so its not really all that bad all the time, but we knew that if we faced Philly they would blitz the hell out of us, yet we didn't seem to have any plays planned to beat it.
How about setting up a screen?
How bout a slant?
How bout rolling the QB out immediatly after the ball is in his hands?
We saw none of that til late in the game when it was pretty much over.
That is what I have a problem with.
You can't always just match up head to head and grind out a win, you have to set your guys up for success.

I think part of this comes from maturity of a team too.
We are a fairly young team, no, not the youngest, but we have youth in key positions.
That youth makes it a bit harder to change up the game plan week in and week out.
A coach may have to choose between moderately executing a new whiz bang sure fire game plan or superbly executing a less tailored game plan.
I don't see the team as a whole ready to do that tailoring yet.
As our team matures over the next few seasons I would hope to see that happen more and more.

"ejmat" wrote:

"bleedpurple" wrote:

"singersp" wrote:

"Mr" wrote:

"Caine" wrote:

The author - Andy R - must not really know that much about the Vikings.
In trying to be clever, he stuck his foot in his mouth.

The fact is, the offense needs an upgrade.
I'm not talking about going after a solid right tackle, wide receiver, or even a quarterback.
I'm talking about Vikings offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell.

If Andy R had even the slightest degree of knowledge about the Vikings, he would have known that Bevell was hired by Childress for 3 reasons:

1:
Chiller, who had NEVER called the plays (Not at Wisconsin, and not in Philly), wanted to.
2:
Bevell was a QB at Wisconsin while Chiller was there, so Chiller knew he could railroad him.
3:
Bevell was in no way shape or form ready to be an OC, so - again - Chiller knew he could have it HIS way.

So while Andy R is right, Bevell has to go, he's wrong in why he thinks so, and doubly wrong when he believes that this is not related to Chiller.

Bottom line, Chiller needs to go, and he needs to take Bevell with him.....

...and Andy R should get his facts straight before submitting articles.

Caine

Good post Caine, but I'm also going to add somewhat of a concluding fact.

Andy R is triply wrong if he thinks getting rid of Bevell will make a difference.

kaka del rio!

If Childress brought in a qualified OC that actually knew what he was doing & Childress actually let him run the offense instead of sticking his nose in it & doing it his way, we'd be an improved team.

There is no doubt in my mind.

Childress sticks his nose in the offense side of the game & tends to leave the defensive coordinator run that side of the ball game.

WE have had 2 DC's. Tomlin & Frazier. Tomlin was offered a HC job & took it, Frazier has interviews for HCing jobs as well.

How many offers has Bevell had? How many offers have any of our offensive coaches had elsewhere?

I'm with you Singer... I think Chilly may have some input on the defense but he pretty much leaves them alone... I think a new offensive coordinator, someone who knows what they are doing and is a little bit more creative would go a long way to improving the offense..

with that said, however, depending on who we have a QB, they play calling does get a bit better... not much but a bit..

I think halftime adjustments leave a lot to be desired as well!!

First, Childress as a HC should be sticking his nose into every aspect of the game.
That is his job.


Second, I do think the Vikes made adjustments.
The problem that I remember is that they only made adjustments when they were losing.
In other words when they were leading at half time they were complacent with how things were going and didn't make changes.
For the games they were losing though I do remember adjustments being made.

yes he should be putting his nose in all aspects of the game, but i guarantee you he's more involved in the offense than he is defense and special teams..

i look at making adjustments related to how/what they were doing before halftime compared to how they played after halftime..
Alot of times we were either playing well, winning/within reach (1 score) only to come out of half time and whether we won or not, didn't play as well after the half, because of what teams were doing against us in the second half...

a good example would be Tampa and the Eagles playoff game... both losses...

"bleedpurple" wrote:

"ejmat" wrote:

"bleedpurple" wrote:

"singersp" wrote:

"Mr" wrote:

[quote author=Caine link=topic=50890.msg919896#msg919896 date=1236554148]
The author - Andy R - must not really know that much about the Vikings.
In trying to be clever, he stuck his foot in his mouth.

The fact is, the offense needs an upgrade.
I'm not talking about going after a solid right tackle, wide receiver, or even a quarterback.
I'm talking about Vikings offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell.

If Andy R had even the slightest degree of knowledge about the Vikings, he would have known that Bevell was hired by Childress for 3 reasons:

1:
Chiller, who had NEVER called the plays (Not at Wisconsin, and not in Philly), wanted to.
2:
Bevell was a QB at Wisconsin while Chiller was there, so Chiller knew he could railroad him.
3:
Bevell was in no way shape or form ready to be an OC, so - again - Chiller knew he could have it HIS way.

So while Andy R is right, Bevell has to go, he's wrong in why he thinks so, and doubly wrong when he believes that this is not related to Chiller.

Bottom line, Chiller needs to go, and he needs to take Bevell with him.....

...and Andy R should get his facts straight before submitting articles.

Caine

Good post Caine, but I'm also going to add somewhat of a concluding fact.

Andy R is triply wrong if he thinks getting rid of Bevell will make a difference.

kaka del rio!

If Childress brought in a qualified OC that actually knew what he was doing & Childress actually let him run the offense instead of sticking his nose in it & doing it his way, we'd be an improved team.

There is no doubt in my mind.

Childress sticks his nose in the offense side of the game & tends to leave the defensive coordinator run that side of the ball game.

WE have had 2 DC's. Tomlin & Frazier. Tomlin was offered a HC job & took it, Frazier has interviews for HCing jobs as well.

How many offers has Bevell had? How many offers have any of our offensive coaches had elsewhere?

I'm with you Singer... I think Chilly may have some input on the defense but he pretty much leaves them alone... I think a new offensive coordinator, someone who knows what they are doing and is a little bit more creative would go a long way to improving the offense..

with that said, however, depending on who we have a QB, they play calling does get a bit better... not much but a bit..

I think halftime adjustments leave a lot to be desired as well!!

First, Childress as a HC should be sticking his nose into every aspect of the game.
That is his job.


Second, I do think the Vikes made adjustments.
The problem that I remember is that they only made adjustments when they were losing.
In other words when they were leading at half time they were complacent with how things were going and didn't make changes.
For the games they were losing though I do remember adjustments being made.

yes he should be putting his nose in all aspects of the game, but i guarantee you he's more involved in the offense than he is defense and special teams..

i look at making adjustments related to how/what they were doing before halftime compared to how they played after halftime..
Alot of times we were either playing well, winning/within reach (1 score) only to come out of half time and whether we won or not, didn't play as well after the half, because of what teams were doing against us in the second half...

a good example would be Tampa and the Eagles playoff game... both losses...
[/quote]

Don't forget about the Colts game too.
It appears they were just being complacent and that what bothers me.


He should be more involved with the offense because that is what he knows.
It's like most coaches have a specialty and they usually stayed more involved in what their specialty is.

"ejmat" wrote:

"bleedpurple" wrote:

"ejmat" wrote:

"bleedpurple" wrote:

"singersp" wrote:

[quote author=Mr Anderson link=topic=50890.msg919942#msg919942 date=1236568096]
[quote author=Caine link=topic=50890.msg919896#msg919896 date=1236554148]
The author - Andy R - must not really know that much about the Vikings.
In trying to be clever, he stuck his foot in his mouth.

The fact is, the offense needs an upgrade.
I'm not talking about going after a solid right tackle, wide receiver, or even a quarterback.
I'm talking about Vikings offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell.

If Andy R had even the slightest degree of knowledge about the Vikings, he would have known that Bevell was hired by Childress for 3 reasons:

1:
Chiller, who had NEVER called the plays (Not at Wisconsin, and not in Philly), wanted to.
2:
Bevell was a QB at Wisconsin while Chiller was there, so Chiller knew he could railroad him.
3:
Bevell was in no way shape or form ready to be an OC, so - again - Chiller knew he could have it HIS way.

So while Andy R is right, Bevell has to go, he's wrong in why he thinks so, and doubly wrong when he believes that this is not related to Chiller.

Bottom line, Chiller needs to go, and he needs to take Bevell with him.....

...and Andy R should get his facts straight before submitting articles.

Caine

Good post Caine, but I'm also going to add somewhat of a concluding fact.

Andy R is triply wrong if he thinks getting rid of Bevell will make a difference.

kaka del rio!

If Childress brought in a qualified OC that actually knew what he was doing & Childress actually let him run the offense instead of sticking his nose in it & doing it his way, we'd be an improved team.

There is no doubt in my mind.

Childress sticks his nose in the offense side of the game & tends to leave the defensive coordinator run that side of the ball game.

WE have had 2 DC's. Tomlin & Frazier. Tomlin was offered a HC job & took it, Frazier has interviews for HCing jobs as well.

How many offers has Bevell had? How many offers have any of our offensive coaches had elsewhere?

I'm with you Singer... I think Chilly may have some input on the defense but he pretty much leaves them alone... I think a new offensive coordinator, someone who knows what they are doing and is a little bit more creative would go a long way to improving the offense..

with that said, however, depending on who we have a QB, they play calling does get a bit better... not much but a bit..

I think halftime adjustments leave a lot to be desired as well!!

First, Childress as a HC should be sticking his nose into every aspect of the game.
That is his job.


Second, I do think the Vikes made adjustments.
The problem that I remember is that they only made adjustments when they were losing.
In other words when they were leading at half time they were complacent with how things were going and didn't make changes.
For the games they were losing though I do remember adjustments being made.

yes he should be putting his nose in all aspects of the game, but i guarantee you he's more involved in the offense than he is defense and special teams..

i look at making adjustments related to how/what they were doing before halftime compared to how they played after halftime..
Alot of times we were either playing well, winning/within reach (1 score) only to come out of half time and whether we won or not, didn't play as well after the half, because of what teams were doing against us in the second half...

a good example would be Tampa and the Eagles playoff game... both losses...
[/quote]

Don't forget about the Colts game too.
It appears they were just being complacent and that what bothers me.


He should be more involved with the offense because that is what he knows.
It's like most coaches have a specialty and they usually stayed more involved in what their specialty is.

dont' you think that is the problem.. this lame pathetic offense is his specialty and it's painfully stagnant, inept and not very good... esp. when it comes to pass blocking and passing in general!
[/quote]

"bleedpurple" wrote:

"ejmat" wrote:

"bleedpurple" wrote:

"ejmat" wrote:

"bleedpurple" wrote:

[quote author=singersp link=topic=50890.msg919972#msg919972 date=1236592264]
[quote author=Mr Anderson link=topic=50890.msg919942#msg919942 date=1236568096]
[quote author=Caine link=topic=50890.msg919896#msg919896 date=1236554148]
The author - Andy R - must not really know that much about the Vikings.
In trying to be clever, he stuck his foot in his mouth.

The fact is, the offense needs an upgrade.
I'm not talking about going after a solid right tackle, wide receiver, or even a quarterback.
I'm talking about Vikings offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell.

If Andy R had even the slightest degree of knowledge about the Vikings, he would have known that Bevell was hired by Childress for 3 reasons:

1:
Chiller, who had NEVER called the plays (Not at Wisconsin, and not in Philly), wanted to.
2:
Bevell was a QB at Wisconsin while Chiller was there, so Chiller knew he could railroad him.
3:
Bevell was in no way shape or form ready to be an OC, so - again - Chiller knew he could have it HIS way.

So while Andy R is right, Bevell has to go, he's wrong in why he thinks so, and doubly wrong when he believes that this is not related to Chiller.

Bottom line, Chiller needs to go, and he needs to take Bevell with him.....

...and Andy R should get his facts straight before submitting articles.

Caine

Good post Caine, but I'm also going to add somewhat of a concluding fact.

Andy R is triply wrong if he thinks getting rid of Bevell will make a difference.

kaka del rio!

If Childress brought in a qualified OC that actually knew what he was doing & Childress actually let him run the offense instead of sticking his nose in it & doing it his way, we'd be an improved team.

There is no doubt in my mind.

Childress sticks his nose in the offense side of the game & tends to leave the defensive coordinator run that side of the ball game.

WE have had 2 DC's. Tomlin & Frazier. Tomlin was offered a HC job & took it, Frazier has interviews for HCing jobs as well.

How many offers has Bevell had? How many offers have any of our offensive coaches had elsewhere?

I'm with you Singer... I think Chilly may have some input on the defense but he pretty much leaves them alone... I think a new offensive coordinator, someone who knows what they are doing and is a little bit more creative would go a long way to improving the offense..

with that said, however, depending on who we have a QB, they play calling does get a bit better... not much but a bit..

I think halftime adjustments leave a lot to be desired as well!!

First, Childress as a HC should be sticking his nose into every aspect of the game.
That is his job.


Second, I do think the Vikes made adjustments.
The problem that I remember is that they only made adjustments when they were losing.
In other words when they were leading at half time they were complacent with how things were going and didn't make changes.
For the games they were losing though I do remember adjustments being made.

yes he should be putting his nose in all aspects of the game, but i guarantee you he's more involved in the offense than he is defense and special teams..

i look at making adjustments related to how/what they were doing before halftime compared to how they played after halftime..
Alot of times we were either playing well, winning/within reach (1 score) only to come out of half time and whether we won or not, didn't play as well after the half, because of what teams were doing against us in the second half...

a good example would be Tampa and the Eagles playoff game... both losses...
[/quote]

Don't forget about the Colts game too.
It appears they were just being complacent and that what bothers me.


He should be more involved with the offense because that is what he knows.
It's like most coaches have a specialty and they usually stayed more involved in what their specialty is.

dont' you think that is the problem.. this lame pathetic offense is his specialty and it's painfully stagnant, inept and not very good... esp. when it comes to pass blocking and passing in general!
[/quote]

I blame Childress for the QB situation being bad.
I don't blame him for the offense being bad.
If I am correct they had the 12 ranked offense in the league in scoring (I may be wrong).
That is better than half the league.
In other words above average. A coaches job is to teach.
A players job is to learn and execute.
The INTs, fumbles and false starts are from players not executing.
These are grown professionals and at this stage in their career they should be able to execute.
It's funny to me how people beyach because they don't believe Childress does enough about things when players don't execute but the minute he takes AP out because of it they still beyatch.
That is just one example.
He also benched Cook but then Hicks was injured.
Not much more he could have done there.
Therefore, other than the QB situation of offense there is not a whole lot to blame Childress for.

I will admit they don't always call the play you or I would want but sometimes he calls plays that aren't expected and they work.
People seem to forget about those as well.
Remember the 99 yard TD to Berrian.
Remember the 4th down TD pass to Rice?
There is a lot Childress and Bevell aren't given credit for but they are blamed for any little thing that goes wrong.
I don't like Bevell and I still have a question about Chilly.
The difference is I see both sides of the coin whereas most only see the bad.

Fire Childress.

"singersp" wrote:

"Mr" wrote:

"Caine" wrote:

The author - Andy R - must not really know that much about the Vikings.
In trying to be clever, he stuck his foot in his mouth.

The fact is, the offense needs an upgrade.
I'm not talking about going after a solid right tackle, wide receiver, or even a quarterback.
I'm talking about Vikings offensive coordinator Darrell Bevell.

If Andy R had even the slightest degree of knowledge about the Vikings, he would have known that Bevell was hired by Childress for 3 reasons:

1:
Chiller, who had NEVER called the plays (Not at Wisconsin, and not in Philly), wanted to.
2:
Bevell was a QB at Wisconsin while Chiller was there, so Chiller knew he could railroad him.
3:
Bevell was in no way shape or form ready to be an OC, so - again - Chiller knew he could have it HIS way.

So while Andy R is right, Bevell has to go, he's wrong in why he thinks so, and doubly wrong when he believes that this is not related to Chiller.

Bottom line, Chiller needs to go, and he needs to take Bevell with him.....

...and Andy R should get his facts straight before submitting articles.

Caine

Good post Caine, but I'm also going to add somewhat of a concluding fact.

Andy R is triply wrong if he thinks getting rid of Bevell will make a difference.

BULLSHIT!

If Childress brought in a qualified OC that actually knew what he was doing & Childress actually let him run the offense instead of sticking his nose in it & doing it his way, we'd be an improved team.

There is no doubt in my mind.

Childress sticks his nose in the offense side of the game & tends to leave the defensive coordinator run that side of the ball game.

WE have had 2 DC's. Tomlin & Frazier. Tomlin was offered a HC job & took it, Frazier has interviews for HCing jobs as well.

How many offers has Bevell had? How many offers have any of our offensive coaches had elsewhere?

I agree that if we had a real offensive coordinator that Childress let run the offense we'd be great.

But there lies the problem, Childress wants to run the offense and he's going to do what he wants as a head coach with great support from the owner.

Which is why I said getting rid of Bevell would make no difference at all.

"C" wrote:

Fire Childress.

Excellent point CMacC.
I can't believe I didn't think of that
;D

"C" wrote:

Fire Childress.

"Prophet" wrote:

"singersp" wrote:

....How many offers has Bevell had? How many offers have any of our offensive coaches had elsewhere?

Admit it, you were surprised when Ferraro was hired away.

Ferraro was a ST coach, not an offensive coach.

I don't think there was a soul here, myself included, that didn't get a chuckle or breathed a sigh of relief the day Ferraro signed elsewhere.