Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 56
  1. #21
    RK.'s Avatar
    RK.
    RK. is offline Ring of Fame Rally Cross II Champion
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    4,462
    Exactly where does Frazier figure into all this?? Musgrave is following the head coach's lead IMO.
    That is where the buck stops. The OC makes the play calls but the design of the team and game is on the head coach's desk.

    WWBGD

  2. #22
    smegmavike is offline Coordinator
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    893
    Quote Originally Posted by NodakPaul View Post
    This is an ongoing fallacy that been proven wrong multiple times. Everyone is so convinced that we run a vanilla run-run-pass offense that they see it even when it isn't there.

    Here is the pass/run breakdown by down and quarter:
    First Quarter
    First Down - 2 Runs, 0 Passes
    Second Down - 1 Run, 0 Passes
    Third Down - 0 Runs, 1 Pass

    Second Quarter
    First Down - 4 Runs, 4 Passes
    Second Down - 1 Run, 3 Passes
    Third Down - 0 Runs, 2 Passes

    Third Quarter
    First Down - 4 Runs, 4 Passes
    Second Down - 3 Runs, 3 Passes
    Third Down - 0 Runs, 3 Passes

    Forth Quarter
    First Down - 3 Runs, 3 Passes
    Second Down - 1 Run, 4 Passes
    Third Down - 0 Runs, 4 Passes
    Forth Down - 0 Runs, 2 Passes

    As far as I can tell, we only had 1 series that followed the run-run-pass pattern, and that was the second series in the first quarter. Considering we ran a grand total of four plays in the first quarter that isn't saying much. The second and third quarters, when we had the lead, was actually very balanced. The fourth quarter started out balanced, but became more pass favored toward the end as we tried to erase a 10 point deficit.

    There are some things that do jump out at me. For instance, we passed on every single 3rd and 4th downs. And we only converted 3 of 12 of them. That is a problem. Why we were passing instead of running on 3rd and 1 when we have the best running back in the NFL is beyond me... I get it, AD is not an every down back, and Detroit was doing a good job of shutting him down... but still.

    If anything, I would have rather seen Musgrave get MORE conservative, and go more run heavy. I trust AD more than Ponder, even when Detroit was shutting him down.
    Your stats are off a little bit but more importantly, if you look at the play by play you will find there were 11 offensive series, not counting the kneel down to end the first half.
    The sequence of first down run, second down run, third down pass occurred in 5 of those 11 series. You could say that series 2 was a third down run, but it was a pass play where Ponder scrambled and ran. A pass was called.
    The Vikings had the lead until the second series of the second half. While winning they had 6 runs and 5 passes on first down, 3 runs 4 passes on second and 1 run and 3 passes on third down. I'm counting the third down scramble as a run in this case. So 10 runs 12 passes with the lead.

    Once behind they had 8 runs and 5 passes on first down. 3 runs and 7 passes on second down, and 0 runs and 6 passes on third down. And one or two fourth down passes. That's 11 runs and 19 passes. which is expected when playing from behind for most of the second half. Over all I have 21 runs and 31 passes.
    So there is balance there, yes. But the point that Musgrave called the run, run, pass pattern in five out of eleven offensive series makes the team predictable.
    I recall thinking that Jerry Burns and Brian Billick were creative offensive coordinators. I have yet to think of Musgrave in those terms.
    Last edited by smegmavike; 09-09-2013 at 02:21 PM.

  3. #23
    tastywaves's Avatar
    tastywaves is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,879
    Quote Originally Posted by scycon View Post
    People giving Musgrave excuses is an utter joke. Part of being an offensive coordinator is designing a scheme that your able to run with your current personnel.

    The guy seems to be utterly allergic to running traps, draws and screens (all of which we should have no problem doing) to keep the defense on it's toes with any consistency. Sure he might sprinkle one in here and there (hilariously they usually work but he must not take much note of it) but he's completely ineffective at using them like the more robust and creative NFL offenses do. The guy has zero mystique with his formations. The majority of the time the play call is pretty obvious based on our formation alone. We throw incomplete on first down and then line up like we're going to run (2 back, 2 TE), then we ACTUALLY run. No rules say you can't send out 3 wide and a TE on first down to mix it up or even run out of that formation to throw the opposition off. It's unbelievable how pathetically insipid his offensive scheme is and you can't even blame stuff like this on Ponder! This is all stuff that the coordinator controls.

    Running a QB waggle to the opposite of Ponders throwing side on 3rd and 1 (I think that was the situation at least) was the biggest tell that this coordinator is completely inept. Why in the world would you have a quarterback that is inconsistent at making routine throws even attempt this. There isn't a harder throw you can ask the kid to make.

    Zero use of Patterson. We saw a bubble screen in the third quarter and who would have guessed it would actually be successful. Don't we all know that Patterson is someone we just need to get the ball to whether it be on a screen, end-around or directly from the backfield? Why do we have him riding pine pony the majority of the game? You'd think scheming around Harvin he'd understand that Patterson has many of the same strengths. Isn't that why we drafted him? We don't need him on the sidelines "learning" all the time because he already can use his skill set in many situations that don't rely on him using anything other than his raw speed and elusiveness.

    I don't want to hear anything about how he can't do much because of Ponder. That's a biggest cop out I've ever heard. This is, what, his third time as an OC in the NFL? The guy is frankly not any good at his job, never has been, and almost certainly never will be. We have the best running back in the NFL, a much and improved and even what I'd call above average receiving corps with Jennings, Simpson, Wright and Patterson, a Pro Bowl tight end in Rudolph and a solid offensive line (who admittedly played terrible yesterday, but we were up against one of the best defensive fronts in the NFL on paper, and frankly I think it's more likely they were under prepared with how to deal with them because our coordinator is trash and still couldn't figure out their defense despite having an entire off season to plan against it). There are no more excuses. Even if Ponder is a mediocre quarterback any coordinator worth his salt could be creative enough to scheme around it with the rest of the offensive weapons we have to hang with the rest of the league. I don't think it's much of a bold statement that Ponder suffers more because of Musgrave than Musgrave does scheming around Ponder.
    I think you won the essay contest for "why we should fire Bill Musgrave".

  4. #24
    Mr Anderson's Avatar
    Mr Anderson is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,692
    Quote Originally Posted by RK. View Post
    Exactly where does Frazier figure into all this?? Musgrave is following the head coach's lead IMO.
    That is where the buck stops. The OC makes the play calls but the design of the team and game is on the head coach's desk.
    That's my biggest problem with Frazier's apparent lack of intensity on the sideline and in the locker room. What's he like in coaches meetings? How high of a standard does he hold his assistants to? They need to be held accountable just like players are. And while subtlety and calm can work to keep a group of players under control in a violent, chaotic environment, I don't know how well it works from Monday to Saturday to get a coaching staff, which is absent from the direct violence and intensity of the game, to step up their performance.

  5. #25
    Webby's Avatar
    Webby is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Aug 1998
    Location
    A, A
    Posts
    8,976
    Blog Entries
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by scycon View Post
    People giving Musgrave excuses is an utter joke. Part of being an offensive coordinator is designing a scheme that your able to run with your current personnel.

    The guy seems to be utterly allergic to running traps, draws and screens (all of which we should have no problem doing) to keep the defense on it's toes with any consistency. Sure he might sprinkle one in here and there (hilariously they usually work but he must not take much note of it) but he's completely ineffective at using them like the more robust and creative NFL offenses do. The guy has zero mystique with his formations. The majority of the time the play call is pretty obvious based on our formation alone. We throw incomplete on first down and then line up like we're going to run (2 back, 2 TE), then we ACTUALLY run. No rules say you can't send out 3 wide and a TE on first down to mix it up or even run out of that formation to throw the opposition off. It's unbelievable how pathetically insipid his offensive scheme is and you can't even blame stuff like this on Ponder! This is all stuff that the coordinator controls.

    Running a QB waggle to the opposite of Ponders throwing side on 3rd and 1 (I think that was the situation at least) was the biggest tell that this coordinator is completely inept. Why in the world would you have a quarterback that is inconsistent at making routine throws even attempt this. There isn't a harder throw you can ask the kid to make.

    Zero use of Patterson. We saw a bubble screen in the third quarter and who would have guessed it would actually be successful. Don't we all know that Patterson is someone we just need to get the ball to whether it be on a screen, end-around or directly from the backfield? Why do we have him riding pine pony the majority of the game? You'd think scheming around Harvin he'd understand that Patterson has many of the same strengths. Isn't that why we drafted him? We don't need him on the sidelines "learning" all the time because he already can use his skill set in many situations that don't rely on him using anything other than his raw speed and elusiveness.

    I don't want to hear anything about how he can't do much because of Ponder. That's a biggest cop out I've ever heard. This is, what, his third time as an OC in the NFL? The guy is frankly not any good at his job, never has been, and almost certainly never will be. We have the best running back in the NFL, a much and improved and even what I'd call above average receiving corps with Jennings, Simpson, Wright and Patterson, a Pro Bowl tight end in Rudolph and a solid offensive line (who admittedly played terrible yesterday, but we were up against one of the best defensive fronts in the NFL on paper, and frankly I think it's more likely they were under prepared with how to deal with them because our coordinator is trash and still couldn't figure out their defense despite having an entire off season to plan against it). There are no more excuses. Even if Ponder is a mediocre quarterback any coordinator worth his salt could be creative enough to scheme around it with the rest of the offensive weapons we have to hang with the rest of the league. I don't think it's much of a bold statement that Ponder suffers more because of Musgrave than Musgrave does scheming around Ponder.
    nice work, sir. SKOL

  6. #26
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,271
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr Anderson View Post
    If Ponder's playing, Musgrave needs to trust him. You miss all of the shots you don't take. They should be playing to win, not survive. No matter who's at the helm. And if he can't do it, replace him. It's that simple.
    Musgrave did trust him. For those who paid attention, Ponder was throwing deeper passes & more passes over 10 yards than he has before. 3 INT's later, Musgrave brought Ponder back down to his comfort zone to avoid more turnovers & destroying any confidence Ponder might have had in himself.

    Musgrave certainly isn't ideal, but given that he did seem to open it up more for Cassel in preseason than he did for Ponder, it gives credence that Musgrave does try to play within the QB's limits to be successful. Ponder has difficulty hitting receivers on the fly, thus not so many slants. We saw that again yesterday on the throw that was low & behind Jennings that he miraculously caught.

    Go back & look at how many deeper pass attempts Ponder was given.
    Last edited by singersp; 09-10-2013 at 07:39 AM.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  7. #27
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,271
    Quote Originally Posted by C Mac D View Post
    For a team that hired Brad Childress as HC, resumes obviously don't matter much to our front office.
    *cough* Fran Foley

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  8. #28
    Reignman is offline Asst. Coach
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    630
    Quote Originally Posted by NodakPaul View Post
    Why we were passing instead of running on 3rd and 1 when we have the best running back in the NFL is beyond me... I get it, AD is not an every down back, and Detroit was doing a good job of shutting him down... but still.
    The other problem is we always take AD out on 3rd downs, so if we all of a sudden leave him in it's kinda telegraphing the play. I think AD should be left in on more 3rd n shorts so we can use the PA ... oh wait, Ponder stinks at selling that too.

  9. #29
    Mr Anderson's Avatar
    Mr Anderson is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,692
    Quote Originally Posted by singersp View Post
    Musgrave did trust him. For those who paid attention, Ponder was throwing deeper passes & more passes over 10 yards than he has before. 3 INT's later, Musgrave brought Ponder back down to his comfort zone to avoid more turnovers & destroying any confidence Ponder might have had in himself.

    Musgrave certainly isn't ideal, but given that he did seem to open it up more for Cassel in preseason than he did for Ponder, it gives credence that Musgrave does try to play within the QB's limits to be successful. Ponder has difficulty hitting receivers on the fly, thus not so many slants. We saw that again yesterday on the throw that was low & behind Jennings that he miraculously caught.

    Go back & look at how many deeper pass attempts Ponder was given.
    For those who paid attention, I didn't mention throwing down field one time in my post. I'm talking about what happens before the snap, receivers having route options and the QB knowing where they'll be, protection adjustments, hot routes, kill calls and audibles. I even specifically mentioned I don't have a problem with play selection.

    Throwing down field shouldn't a trust issue, and I don't think it is. Not at any level after pop-warner. Changing the call the line of scrimmage, however, is not something you really see in most games below the NFL.

    Deep routes against coverage designed to stop them are pointless (unless you have an amazing deep threat or jump ball type of receiver.) You can trust anybody to just chuck it down there. I'm not necessarily saying that's what they did on Sunday, just trying to further my point that attempting deeper passes implies no significant element of trust between coach and quarterback. It should be expected that he completes the pass to an open man. Not being able to trust an NFL quarterback to do that might indicate some kind of personality disorder. A coach needs to trust his players to make the right calls when he can't.

    I don't dislike Musgrave, or think he should be fired. I don't think Ponder should be benched or is hopeless, yet. I just don't think this team can succeed unless the training wheels come off and Ponder is given free rein.

  10. #30
    vikesrgreat2 is offline Starter
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Wausau, WI
    Posts
    224
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Reignman View Post
    The other problem is we always take AD out on 3rd downs, so if we all of a sudden leave him in it's kinda telegraphing the play. I think AD should be left in on more 3rd n shorts so we can use the PA ... oh wait, Ponder stinks at selling that too.
    Here's a novel idea. Instead of taking your most talented players OFF the field on 3rd down, why not try putting your most talented players ON the field on 3rd down??? Make it so that the opponent doesn't know who's getting snapped the ball, or where the ball's going. With the way our offense is going, what do we have to lose?

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

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
  •