Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 100
  1. #11
    V4L's Avatar
    V4L
    V4L is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    20,612

    Re: The Childress Era: Play Calling (2006-2008)

    "Articnv" wrote:
    i think coaches already no thsi or we woudlnt be out coached every week
    Yup

    They do look at play calling tendencies alot

    Cool to see it first hand though!

  2. #12
    gregair13's Avatar
    gregair13 is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Edmonton, AB
    Posts
    14,601

    Re: The Childress Era: Play Calling (2006-2008)

    "Prophet" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    I just entered all of that data into my lotus 1-2-3 and then took the results and asked my magic 8 ball what it all meant.


    It told me to fire childress.
    Damn it!
    I forgot about the magic 8 ball.....that would have saved me a lot of time.
    Fuck.
    Instead of reading all those stats, I just read these two posts and know what ya'll are trying to say
    We're bringing purple back.

  3. #13
    ragz's Avatar
    ragz is offline GM
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,114

    Re: The Childress Era: Play Calling (2006-2008)

    well one thing this does disprove, is the theory that the playcalling was conservative cuz jackson sux or its all he can handle.
    considering he started at best half of those games and the same trend continued.
    its no secret that our short passing game has proven to be no passing game.
    thats why this talk of us opening up the playbook for ferrotte has more to do with ineffectiveness as a whole than just the qb position.


    i've been to one minnesota game due to living in florida and all.
    and it was the green bay game in minnesota in 2006.
    i remember me and my brother complaining about how we are never taking any shots down field and how the ball is outta the qbs hands so quickly and guys aren't open.
    well in that game we hit like 2 plays downfield on our typical drop and heave streaks we run.
    problem was that was it, and our 3rd attempt lead to johnson overthrowing a wr by about 15 yards that got picked and we never got in the game again.
    now that was probably midseason 2006, and it took till week 4 against tennesse for him to run more 3 wr sets, shotgun, double moves, playaction, or just flat out mix it up.
    and we are still struggling to score points.


    he sux.
    and did you hear his quote again today.
    more shit about him seeing eager eyes in the team.
    here he goes again seeing things in players eyes.
    it reminds me of when bush made that statement about looking into russia's premier putin.
    how bout you try coaching some players up some, instead of looking in their eyes all the time.
    they're probably eager to punch him in the nose.
    "self improvement's masturbation.
    now self destruction" that's enlightenment

  4. #14
    StillPurple is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,255

    Re: The Childress Era: Play Calling (2006-2008)

    Well, impressive work, first off.

    The thing is, I can just see it for myself every Sunday (and Monday). We have "Chicago Bears Syndrome": being way too predictable on offense. How many times do we run AD off tackle left ? And yet, we never seem to throw him the ball. If I were Childress, I would have thrown 500 passes to AD in practice every day. This offense is like watching a Big 10 Team. We need to "open up the playbook"", which is a saying I hate, btw. First off, we need a decent playbook in the first place. Why do we abandon the play-action so fast. Why not run AD up the middle and then have him throw the ball back and do a flee-flicker, when the safeties are in the box ? We need more slant passes. Stuff like that.

    I want to see us be more like the Saints and less like the Bears in our overall playcalling.

    The fact is, our defense WILL keep us in a lot of games that we should not be in in the 4th quarter, but by playing the game so close to the vest, we have lost some games.

  5. #15
    VikingMike's Avatar
    VikingMike is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: The Childress Era: Play Calling (2006-2008)

    Prophet, I applaud your work...a lot of number-crunching here...must have kept you up all night.

    I took the percents and looked at how they compare this year v. the two previous years, and v. the total. For purposes of comparison, I combined the similar type passes (short or long) together, as well as all rushes together. The significant differences are as follows:

    2008 v. 2006:

    1st down - short passes down 24.1%

    1st down - deep passes up 48.2%

    3rd down - deep passes down 39.8%

    2008 v. 2007:

    2nd down - deep passes up 41.7%

    3rd down - deep passes up 47.7%

    3rd down - rushes down 71.4%

    2008 v. 2006-08:

    1st down - deep passes up 25.9%

    2nd down - deep passes up 20.4%

    3rd down - rushes down 27.6%

    Much of this makes sense, but I don't like us getting away from rushing on 3rd down...71.4% down from last year. Of course, that will probably change with McKinnie returning.

    Perhaps it's not so much what plays (pass v. rush) are called or when they are called, but rather the plays themselves. I've always believed that simple is better than complex, and the obvious is not the best approach, e.g., I would like to see us run the ball from a spread offense. Who says you can't run when you've got 3 WR's and a TE in the slot? Our linemen could blow out a hole you could drive a truck through.

    The goal of the offense is to score TD's, not just to make plays trying not to turn over the ball. We must punch the ball over the goal line. On a number of occasions, I feel we were timid in our play calling. For example, why do we throw a pass 2-3 yards from scrimmage on 3rd and 7, and expect him to make the first down? I'd like to see us throw a pass where the receiver is 10-12 yards downfield. I don't want us to thrown long on 3rd and 1, but I love to go long on 2nd and 1.

    Finally, to me "opening up the playbook" means gearing plays that fit the players we have, not pigeon-holing the players into a system. We have to use each player's strengths...and we have to be more emotional, enthusiastic, motivated and less cerebral. I want to see some fire.
    Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. - H.L. Mencken

    Come from the land of the ice and snow...

  6. #16
    VikingsTw is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,144

    Re: The Childress Era: Play Calling (2006-2008)

    I still think the bottom line comes down to execution, we talk about opening up the playbook and such but when it really comes down to it its all about execution. And guess what, if we executed the offense properly like we have at times it would be a "kick ass offense". But you cannott excute this offense with penalties, turnovers, drops, ect ect the sh*t we been dealing with.

    I do agree though it does have its moments when its predictable don't get me wrong, most of predictabilty stems directly from the personel we have on the field. When we run a one WR set with Bobby Wade in the game the opposing defense knows exactly whats coming before it gets there, simply because our run blocking personal is on the field. We need to be consistent with our personel and our sets, Bobby Wade needs to be a full time slot WR while Berrian, Rice and Allison are the only ones that should be split out wide. Teams study our offense and they know our personel and they understand what we're about to do.

  7. #17
    ragz's Avatar
    ragz is offline GM
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,114

    Re: The Childress Era: Play Calling (2006-2008)

    "VikingsTw" wrote:
    I still think the bottom line comes down to execution, we talk about opening up the playbook and such but when it really comes down to it its all about execution. And guess what, if we executed the offense properly like we have at times it would be a "kick jiggly butt offense". But you cannott excute this offense with penalties, turnovers, drops, ect ect the sh*t we been dealing with.

    I do agree though it does have its moments when its predictable don't get me wrong, most of predictabilty stems directly from the personel we have on the field. When we run a one WR set with Bobby Wade in the game the opposing defense knows exactly whats coming before it gets there, simply because our run blocking personal is on the field. We need to be consistent with our personel and our sets, Bobby Wade needs to be a full time slot WR while Berrian, Rice and Allison are the only ones that should be split out wide. Teams study our offense and they know our personel and they understand what we're about to do.
    sorry tw but i cant agree.
    i mean obviously execution is a major issue and has been for 3 years.
    but that falls on the coach too.
    and secondly, the idea of a short passing game when you have most of the defense at the line of scrimmage playing the run just doesnt make sense.
    i mean you can come back to the short passing game once you loosen them up and make them fear you will beat them.
    but the truth is we haven't done that enough.
    whether its execution or not, i have not seen enough attempts the get the ball downfield as a whole through 3 years.
    until maybe this past week.
    not to mention a handful of games where we go into the 2nd half and have hardly thrown any passes let alone balls downfield.


    the bottom line is we have been trying to win like the chicago bears since he got here.
    run the ball and play defense.
    except our defense hasnt been good enough to hold teams to 10 points while we score 13.
    and our run game has not been efficient enough to punch balls in the endzone.
    i mean as much as we do run the ball well, the fact is its in a lot of chunks.
    were not grinding out first downs, we run for 1 yard, 2 yard, 40 yards.
    and to go back to stillpurples reference to the bears.
    the sad thing is they have gotten big games outta grossman, and look at orten last week throwing 3 tds.
    we haven't really even come close to that in 36 games under childress.
    so as i've said many of times the fundamentals of how he thinks he has to win are wrong.
    and it can't be a coincidence that we are literally the only team in the last 3 years that cant get one big day out of a qb or wr.
    "self improvement's masturbation.
    now self destruction" that's enlightenment

  8. #18
    Vikeman is offline Asst. Coach
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    641

    Re: The Childress Era: Play Calling (2006-2008)

    "COJOMAY" wrote:
    Gee, thanks for doing all that work prophet. Now all the coaches that play us know how "dependable" we are to do certain thing in certain situations and make it even tough on us. LOL
    Yeah! LOL
    Did he remember to e-mail Sean Peyton a copy of the Vikes playbook???
    Just curious--how long did it take to produce all that info.???
    A good friend will help you move...a best friend will help you move a body.

  9. #19
    ThorSPL's Avatar
    ThorSPL is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    3,422

    Re: The Childress Era: Play Calling (2006-2008)

    I think our fans would like to have Les Miles (LSU) calling plays for us. You don't get the nickname "Lestickles" for nothing!


    Trust me, I'm a doctor.

    www.twitter.com/ThorSPL

  10. #20
    StillPurple is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,255

    Re: The Childress Era: Play Calling (2006-2008)

    The Vikings obviously have an "inside-out" philosophy to the game: i.e. build from the line out, not build WR and the so-called "skill positions" first. This results in us running the ball and stopping the run. We try to "establish the run". Most teams in the NFL now come out throwing all over and they have an "outside-in" mentality of getting good wide-outs and a good QB and then worrying about the line after that. Also, most teams throw and then when they build up a lead, they then "establish the run" in the second half of the game. We do the opposite, I think.

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 62
    Last Post: 10-22-2007, 04:33 PM
  2. Offensive Play-calling: off or not ?!
    By StillPurple in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-21-2007, 06:58 AM
  3. Childress Reconsidering Play-Calling Duties?
    By PurplePumpkin in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-23-2006, 01:00 PM
  4. Offensive Play Calling
    By loudog in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 11-10-2004, 05:59 PM
  5. Play calling is horrable
    By VikingsTw in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-03-2003, 12:47 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
  •