OFFICIAL COLTS vs VIKINGS POSTGAME DISCUSSION

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AngloVike

well I'll go early on that - as my wife would testify to - two things indicated coaching to me. Firstly penalties - odd ones I'll tolerate but when they actually allow the opposition to continue drives when they should have been stopped then I'll get mad about that. I'm all for aggressive play but dumbass hits, tackles etc aren't the way to go - yes that is on the player ( as he's the one committing the offence ) but also on the coaching staff for not jumping on said players when they come off the pitch.
Secondly interest in the game and wanting to get on with it. It was especially noticeable in the 4th quarter when, not only were we trailing the score, we didn't seem to hustle up to the line to run the next play. Hello?? I thought you're there to play football and not out for a gentle afternoon stroll - hell my wife walked quicker than that over the weekend when we were away and she's not in good health !
The offense was that slow that even the FOX muppets calling the game noticed it so you know it was really slow.

Much as I like Frazier this team is starting to take on his personality, which at present is somewhere between a zombie and 'body on morgue table' in CSI. At present he and the entire coaching staff are coaching themselves out of a job come December.

---

LOL, I started a new spreadsheet......One for our wives who make good points that are then articulated by their husbands....

Tell your wife she is now the leader on that particular spreadsheet.

JK, back to your one point, penalties....I think the late hit by JA is a very telling one. He started to chirp excuses in the press last week. Before that he was miffed about the thought of rotating him out. Won't be long and the long haired one will probably be all over the coaching staff.

I think we need to get rid of him before that starts.

We would take a huge blow from the fanbase that only looks for big name recognition, but I bet we wouldn't even miss him this year if we plugged Griff into his spot or put Griff on LDE and put Rob over at RDE were he is better suited. That might help K-dubb and Guion a bit.

I'd like to see more Ballard as well. Sure looks like he added the beef to play 3 tech. Saw his number in the backfield late last week.

''We've got to do better,'' coach Leslie Frazier said. ''The way our team is built, we're going to play a lot of close games.'' Quote from an online article. Guess we need to build the team differently. Why not build one to dominate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marrdro

You have completely missed my points and you clearly don't understand what the heck our scheme is supposed to be doing.

And I didn't want our "Ball Hawking" safety gone for any other reason than he didn't want to play in the scheme (not my fault) and he was a ex PUKER (again, not my fault).

Absolutely stupid to have a cat on the team that refuses to play the scheme the coaches want him to play for goodness sake.

Look, it isn't like I'm in love with the scheme for cripes sake. Not sure why you have a bug up your ass trying to make it out that way.

All I'm doing is pointing out the issues we have trying to run that scheme. Pop your head out of your ass, get the burr out from under your fricken saddle and you might just fricken see that.

---

My head isn't up my ass. You need to take you're blinders off & quit looking solely at the warpig issue. I don't believe our DB's are fine or at the least, the scheme isn't & we are flushing QB's out of the pocket. Why are we settling for DB's that aren't fast enough or athletic enough to play man-to-man?

If you have DB's that can play man-to-man they can play zone as well. If you have DB's that can play zone they may not be able to play man-to-man. Which type of DB do you want, the kind we have or the type that can do it all?

Don't get me wrong, I'd like a beast in the middle that can bring pressure just as much as you do. It would also help us in stopping the run. Reality is though, with todays athletic QB's they are hitting receivers while they are on the run after being flushed out of the pocket & our DB's are leaving them too much room. Result: pass completion.

At the end of the day, right now, today, we have who we have & we need to change the scheme to fit the players we have, rather than continually trying to shove a square peg in a round hole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by singersp

So, if in order for the T2 to work at all it requires this beast of a warpig, which we don't have & a speedy MLB with great tackling abilities, which we don't have, then why are we trying to run it?

Good question!! I think they are trying to get some players like Smith in the secondary but they aren't drafting the players to play this D. I can agree with you on that.


Clearly, you're both saying we haven't got the players to run it & if that's the case, we shouldn't be running a scheme we don't have the players to run it.

Teams don't try to win ball games with a running attack, continually pounding the ball, if they haven't got a decent RB.

Even if we had said warpig & got even more pressure on the QB than we already are, it doesn't change the fact that the QB's will still complete passes on the run to his intended receivers because our DB's are often times leaving them way too much room.

I agree again, I think the coaches are to blame and not the players. Bad D calls in critical situations. I saw in week one a DB gave a WR at least a seven yard cushion on 3rd and 3. You know the quick slant is coming and that's what happened. They need to draft for the scheme but also coach better within the scheme.


And when our safties are playing prevent defense to avoid giving up the big play, it's hard for them to be "ball hawking". We had a ball hawking safety a few years back on our team, incidentally Marrdro wanted him gone, but our defensive coach hand cuffed his ball hawking abilities in the name of the T2.

That D-coach was Frazier.

---

Coach Frazier is horrible and the only reason he has this job is because Zygie is still paying off Childress. Some idiot gave him an extension and a boatload of money right before they fired him. Once we get Childress off the books YOU CAN BET they will look for a REAL head coach. The Chin maybe, anyone!?!?!?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NodakPaul

I don't put it all on Childress - I put it on an ineffective system made up of compromises. When nobody is in charge and all authority is averaged out you get players that are just that - average. With a single person in charge he is better able to make personnel decisions that fit his vision. No whether that vision works out or not remains to be seen, but at least it is a single vision, not three.

And I actually like Robinson as a pick, although it is early to tell. If we end up with 4 starters out of this year's draft I would be happy.

---

I wanted Lavonte David with that pick. He is a WLB that runs like a deer and makes plays! That's right a playmaker on D. Now I didn't mind this pick but in five years when they are both in their primes I would rather have a playmaker then a solid nickel CB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marrdro

Excellent discsussion points my friend. I would have went either WR (score more points/give the QB a target who gets open) or DL (and not another 3 tech).

I'm kindof sick and tired of watching them try to fix the scheme by throwing DB's at it instead of just drafting one guy.

Think about how good our D would be with a cat like Raji, Suh, Poe, ect.

Something to watch that I did for the first time this weekend, watch how hard our LB'rs work to get to the gap. Chad and Erin get there, but they usually get there after fighting off a blocker. The reason they have to do that is because guys like JA, K-dubb, Guion aren't demanding doubles.

Again, something someone pointed out that I've never paid attention to.

---

My short and only counter to that is we still sucked in pass protection when we had fat pat. The run protection was at the top but with piss poor secondary play and a NT that was doubled we still made mediocre QB's look like HOF material.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marrdro
Think about how good our D would be with a cat like Raji, Suh, Poe, ect.

---

How good has Detroit's defense held up the past 2 weeks against Bradford and Smith throwing against them? Looks to me like they need better DB's and not that war pig you speak of. And before the War Pig i would throw a franchise MLB in there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by singersp

My head isn't up my ass. You need to take you're blinders off & quit looking solely at the warpig issue. I don't believe our DB's are fine or at the least, the scheme isn't & we are flushing QB's out of the pocket. Why are we settling for DB's that aren't fast enough or athletic enough to play man-to-man?

If you have DB's that can play man-to-man they can play zone as well. If you have DB's that can play zone they may not be able to play man-to-man. Which type of DB do you want, the kind we have or the type that can do it all?

I have been wondering that same thing. Why not draft CB who excel in man coverage and teach them zone, it i snot rocket science.


Don't get me wrong, I'd like a beast in the middle that can bring pressure just as much as you do. It would also help us in stopping the run. Reality is though, with todays athletic QB's they are hitting receivers while they are on the run after being flushed out of the pocket & our DB's are leaving them too much room. Result: pass completion.

At the end of the day, right now, today, we have who we have & we need to change the scheme to fit the players we have, rather than continually trying to shove a square peg in a round hole.

---

When the rubber hits the road we ar enot drafting players to play this scheme, other than zone coverage CB. What a bunch of crap that is!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Purple Floyd

I agree with that 100% but I strongly believe that we didn't really fix our problem because in the end Spielman didn't get to bring in his own staff but rather Wilf selected the staff that is charged with implementing the scheme and the talent and Spielman has no control over the coaches, and the coaches don't have any control over the players that are brought in ( At least on the surface, they may collaborate but it would be outside the defined responsibilities).

---

That is a good point. If the Vikings continue to play like we have the past two weeks, I wonder if Spielman will have the authority to shitcan Frazier. I sincerely hope so - not because I want another coaching change, but because I want a GM with the authority to run the organization.

It sounded to me when the changes were made that Frazier reports directly to Wilf. I would think and changes come directly from him and with Childress still cashing paychecks I am guessing nothing happens until he is only on the hook for 1 coach. After all, we are not in the race for the division and the stadium is passed. He more than likely feels he has the ability at this point to balance the books and clean up the contracts before he does anything.