Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 31
  1. #11
    Del Rio Guest

    Re: Vikings Front Office Studying Talent

    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    That being said, there certainly were new coaching staffs who started out with less talent than we had and still got their teams working together better than Childress did. Look at Green Bay,who we all thought was going to be one of the worst teams in years with all of the losses and their new head coach, but McCarthy got his team inspired to work together and they beat the Childress led team twice. Mangini got the Jets playing well enough to beat the Pats once and they manhandled the Childress led team and left him looking dazed and confused on the sideline. I guess we can say that he was able to beat Detroit for what that is worth. I can only imagine if we had played the perennially pathetic saints and their new Coach how we would have done. IMO these guys have a better eye for talent or at least know how to get that talent to work together,which in the end is the key.
    Having less talent or more talent really is meaningless. Childress is installing an entirely new scheme. Some of the other coaches you mentioned are installing offenses that are familiar to the talent they have inherited.

    Should you coach to your players strengths? Absolutely.

    Should you abandon your scheme because your players are not executing it better? Absolutely not.

  2. #12
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Vikings Front Office Studying Talent

    "Del" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    That being said, there certainly were new coaching staffs who started out with less talent than we had and still got their teams working together better than Childress did. Look at Green Bay,who we all thought was going to be one of the worst teams in years with all of the losses and their new head coach, but McCarthy got his team inspired to work together and they beat the Childress led team twice. Mangini got the Jets playing well enough to beat the Pats once and they manhandled the Childress led team and left him looking dazed and confused on the sideline. I guess we can say that he was able to beat Detroit for what that is worth. I can only imagine if we had played the perennially pathetic saints and their new Coach how we would have done. IMO these guys have a better eye for talent or at least know how to get that talent to work together,which in the end is the key.
    Having less talent or more talent really is meaningless. Childress is installing an entirely new scheme. Some of the other coaches you mentioned are installing offenses that are familiar to the talent they have inherited.

    Should you coach to your players strengths? Absolutely.

    Should you abandon your scheme because your players are not executing it better? Absolutely not.

    But should you install a scheme that your players are not built to execute?
    That to me says alot in an age where you have basically a new team every year and with the injuries that occur,even if you have the perfect starting team in place for a system at training camp,by mid season the roster generally looks much different. I will take a person who runs his company to the strengths of his employees any day to someone who thinks they have the perfect business model if only they can hire the right
    people to run it. Now that the scheme has had a year of installation we will certainly get a pretty good picture of how good he is going to be.


  3. #13
    Caine's Avatar
    Caine is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,139

    Re: Vikings Front Office Studying Talent

    There are arguements both ways on this topic.
    Should Childress fit his scheme to his players, or fit the players to the scheme?

    I suppose, to be honest, it pays off in the long run to fit the players to the scheme.
    After all, how else are you going to know who can and who can't hack it if you never try?
    So, Childress is trying...and many of our guys couldn't hack it.

    The next step will be to go out and get people who CAN hack it.
    Guys who fit the scheme.
    They may not be the biggest names in the NFL...right now...but how do you think the big name guys got to be big name guys?
    They play in schemes that fit their abilities.

    When I forget about the dabacle that was this season, and think logically about the situation, I realize that Childress will need time to bring in people who can run his offense.
    That doesn't happen in a single season.
    So, if Childress is as sharp as Zygi thinks he is, this season was really one long grading period, and this off season will be where the nucleus of the "New" Vikings are added to.
    Look for the roster to shuffle a great deal on Offense over the next 2 years.

    Caine

  4. #14
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: Vikings Front Office Studying Talent

    "Caine" wrote:
    There are arguements both ways on this topic.
    Should Childress fit his scheme to his players, or fit the players to the scheme?

    I suppose, to be honest, it pays off in the long run to fit the players to the scheme.
    After all, how else are you going to know who can and who can't hack it if you never try?
    So, Childress is trying...and many of our guys couldn't hack it.

    The next step will be to go out and get people who CAN hack it.
    Guys who fit the scheme.
    They may not be the biggest names in the NFL...right now...but how do you think the big name guys got to be big name guys?
    They play in schemes that fit their abilities.

    When I forget about the dabacle that was this season, and think logically about the situation, I realize that Childress will need time to bring in people who can run his offense.
    That doesn't happen in a single season.
    So, if Childress is as sharp as Zygi thinks he is, this season was really one long grading period, and this off season will be where the nucleus of the "New" Vikings are added to.
    Look for the roster to shuffle a great deal on Offense over the next 2 years.

    Caine
    I think you need to do a little of both. While on one hand you are trying to aquire the players that fit your scheme on the other you have the players you already have. IMO, you need to adjust that scheme somewhat to fit to the players you have to work with. Especially in the play calling department.

    You can then make player aquisitions as you go along that better fit your original scheme & tweak & fine tune it as you go along with roster/player movers, working towards your original goal.

    I agree & I believe I posted it in one of the other threads, this year was a year to really evaluate the players he was dealt with so he could decide what his next moves would be.

    There was very little time & opportunity to evaluate the players he had, between the time he took the reins & FA & the draft. Game film & mini camps don't tell you the whole story, because those players were running the previous coaches schemes.

    He needed to implement his scheme & see how well the players adapted to it & how well they played it, before he could effectively evaluate each & every player.

    It will be interesting to see what his moves are this offseason. One thing is for sure, I don't think in another years time, he's going to find & acquire all the players he needs that can run his scheme the way he wants to run it. Those players need to be taught & evaluated throughout the season as they come on board as well.

    That is why I say he needs to adjust his scheme slightly to fit his players as he goes along & fine tune the team to reach his optimal target.

    The problem I see with that is the amount of time it will take to reach that goal. Once you find the people that fit your scheme & can execute it, you'd better lock them up with a long term contract or with player turnover being what it is in the NFL, you might find yourself always trying to find players that fit your scheme to replace ones you might lose in FA.


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

  5. #15
    Del Rio Guest

    Re: Vikings Front Office Studying Talent

    It is a fallacy to think coaches change a scheme to fit a player. It would be insane to do and is not a practical request especially with the turn around rate of players and the free agency market.

    You can take one of the bets examples of this, Jim Mora Jr. in Atlanta dealing with Vick, he allowed him to play, but he was still trying to get him to be more of a passer all the way up until the end.

    Having Randy Moss and drawing plays just for Randy Moss is not neccissarily changing your Scheme.

  6. #16
    Del Rio Guest

    Re: Vikings Front Office Studying Talent

    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    That being said, there certainly were new coaching staffs who started out with less talent than we had and still got their teams working together better than Childress did. Look at Green Bay,who we all thought was going to be one of the worst teams in years with all of the losses and their new head coach, but McCarthy got his team inspired to work together and they beat the Childress led team twice. Mangini got the Jets playing well enough to beat the Pats once and they manhandled the Childress led team and left him looking dazed and confused on the sideline. I guess we can say that he was able to beat Detroit for what that is worth. I can only imagine if we had played the perennially pathetic saints and their new Coach how we would have done. IMO these guys have a better eye for talent or at least know how to get that talent to work together,which in the end is the key.
    Having less talent or more talent really is meaningless. Childress is installing an entirely new scheme. Some of the other coaches you mentioned are installing offenses that are familiar to the talent they have inherited.

    Should you coach to your players strengths? Absolutely.

    Should you abandon your scheme because your players are not executing it better? Absolutely not.

    But should you install a scheme that your players are not built to execute?
    That to me says alot in an age where you have basically a new team every year and with the injuries that occur,even if you have the perfect starting team in place for a system at training camp,by mid season the roster generally looks much different. I will take a person who runs his company to the strengths of his employees any day to someone who thinks they have the perfect business model if only they can hire the right
    people to run it. Now that the scheme has had a year of installation we will certainly get a pretty good picture of how good he is going to be.

    Yes there is turnover in the NFL and that is exactly why you can't be flip flopping your scheme every season just because you get new faces. You need to install your scheme get a solid base of players and work within the draft and FA to get players that FIT YOUR NEEDS, not the other way around. It isn't a practical request to have a coach directing from the hip and changing entire systems for a handful of players. If they can't play your system you get rid of them.

  7. #17
    cogitans is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    6,403

    Re: Vikings Front Office Studying Talent

    "Del" wrote:
    It is a fallacy to think coaches change a scheme to fit a player. It would be insane to do and is not a practical request especially with the turn around rate of players and the free agency market.

    You can take one of the bets examples of this, Jim Mora Jr. in Atlanta dealing with Vick, he allowed him to play, but he was still trying to get him to be more of a passer all the way up until the end.

    Having Randy Moss and drawing plays just for Randy Moss is not neccissarily changing your Scheme.
    However that is true, and will be so in the long run when you get to mold your own roster, a good coach can still adjust his scheme somewhat from year to year I believe, to get the best out of his current roster.

    A good example is what Mike Nolan did this year in SF. Nolan is from Baltimore, and wants to run the 3-4 like they do. Still this year he switched it to a 4-3 scheme not long in to the season, and they actually started playing some pretty ok D. Still he'll probably get players in that fit, so he can go back to his prefered 3-4 later on.

    Thanks to PPE for the sig.

  8. #18
    Del Rio Guest

    Re: Vikings Front Office Studying Talent

    "cogitans" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    It is a fallacy to think coaches change a scheme to fit a player. It would be insane to do and is not a practical request especially with the turn around rate of players and the free agency market.

    You can take one of the bets examples of this, Jim Mora Jr. in Atlanta dealing with Vick, he allowed him to play, but he was still trying to get him to be more of a passer all the way up until the end.

    Having Randy Moss and drawing plays just for Randy Moss is not neccissarily changing your Scheme.
    However that is true, and will be so in the long run when you get to mold your own roster, a good coach can still adjust his scheme somewhat from year to year I believe, to get the best out of his current roster.

    A good example is what Mike Nolan did this year in SF. Nolan is from Baltimore, and wants to run the 3-4 like they do. Still this year he switched it to a 4-3 scheme not long in to the season, and they actually started playing some pretty ok D. Still he'll probably get players in that fit, so he can go back to his prefered 3-4 later on.
    Yes I believe when you have a solid base, and a solid understanding of what you have you can make adjustments. Most teams experiment with the 3-4 and I imagine even the 49ers were running it off and on depending on the situation all the way until the end of the season.

    I do not feel Childress has a solid base here in Minny.

  9. #19
    cogitans is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    6,403

    Re: Vikings Front Office Studying Talent

    "Del" wrote:
    "cogitans" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    It is a fallacy to think coaches change a scheme to fit a player. It would be insane to do and is not a practical request especially with the turn around rate of players and the free agency market.

    You can take one of the bets examples of this, Jim Mora Jr. in Atlanta dealing with Vick, he allowed him to play, but he was still trying to get him to be more of a passer all the way up until the end.

    Having Randy Moss and drawing plays just for Randy Moss is not neccissarily changing your Scheme.
    However that is true, and will be so in the long run when you get to mold your own roster, a good coach can still adjust his scheme somewhat from year to year I believe, to get the best out of his current roster.

    A good example is what Mike Nolan did this year in SF. Nolan is from Baltimore, and wants to run the 3-4 like they do. Still this year he switched it to a 4-3 scheme not long in to the season, and they actually started playing some pretty ok D. Still he'll probably get players in that fit, so he can go back to his prefered 3-4 later on.
    Yes I believe when you have a solid base, and a solid understanding of what you have you can make adjustments. Most teams experiment with the 3-4 and I imagine even the 49ers were running it off and on depending on the situation all the way until the end of the season.

    I do not feel Childress has a solid base here in Minny.
    I like the solid base theory. That's at least an explanation.

    Also I know that there are diference between offense and defense in this matter. Fact remains though that the switch to 4-3 in SF were permanent for this season.

    However I still think my point remains, that if your a good coach you can find a way to squak your system to your current player base. Even if you plan of changing in the roster for the future.

    Thanks to PPE for the sig.

  10. #20
    Del Rio Guest

    Re: Vikings Front Office Studying Talent

    "cogitans" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    "cogitans" wrote:
    "Del" wrote:
    It is a fallacy to think coaches change a scheme to fit a player. It would be insane to do and is not a practical request especially with the turn around rate of players and the free agency market.

    You can take one of the bets examples of this, Jim Mora Jr. in Atlanta dealing with Vick, he allowed him to play, but he was still trying to get him to be more of a passer all the way up until the end.

    Having Randy Moss and drawing plays just for Randy Moss is not neccissarily changing your Scheme.
    However that is true, and will be so in the long run when you get to mold your own roster, a good coach can still adjust his scheme somewhat from year to year I believe, to get the best out of his current roster.

    A good example is what Mike Nolan did this year in SF. Nolan is from Baltimore, and wants to run the 3-4 like they do. Still this year he switched it to a 4-3 scheme not long in to the season, and they actually started playing some pretty ok D. Still he'll probably get players in that fit, so he can go back to his prefered 3-4 later on.
    Yes I believe when you have a solid base, and a solid understanding of what you have you can make adjustments. Most teams experiment with the 3-4 and I imagine even the 49ers were running it off and on depending on the situation all the way until the end of the season.

    I do not feel Childress has a solid base here in Minny.
    I like the solid base theory. That's at least an explanation.

    Also I know that there are diference between offense and defense in this matter. Fact remains though that the switch to 4-3 in SF were permanent for this season.

    However I still think my point remains, that if your a good coach you can find a way to squak your system to your current player base. Even if you plan of changing in the roster for the future.
    As valid as it is switching from a 3-4 to a 4-3 is not rocket science. We ourselves switched to a 3-4 sparingly at the end of the season. Most schemes have that capability. If you are a steadfast 3-4 team chances are your scheme has a 4-3 built in. It's an easy change to make a no brainer, and we made the change as well.

    What I am talking about is changing your entire scheme for personel reasons. Adjustments as you mentioned are common and not absent from this years Minnesota Vikings team.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Vikings front office: Four on the floor
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 01-25-2008, 11:06 AM
  2. CC: Vikings Front Office
    By MindFreak in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 01-11-2008, 04:04 PM
  3. With Vikings front office in flux, Wilf remains focused
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-14-2006, 08:56 PM
  4. Vikings looking at front office candidates
    By Prophet in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-29-2005, 09:35 AM
  5. Front office moves!!!
    By Vikes in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 11-24-2004, 10:27 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
  •