Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28
  1. #21
    Billy Boy is offline Hall of Famer
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,426

    Re: Offseason update: Minnesota Vikings

    "Zeus" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    On one hand, we should have the best running attack in the league.
    Ummm....say what?

    To catch up to Atlanta, the Vikings will need to improve by 1100 yards.
    Hell, just to catch up to SD in 2nd place they need to improve by 700 yards.
    That's a pretty damn large jump.
    Let's say CT gets 1200 yards and then AD gets 1200 yards.
    First, that would be fairly remarkable, it's not often that teams have 2 1000-yard rushers.
    And second, that still wouldn't be good enough to lead the league.

    =Z=
    Yeah #1 rushing offense is a tid bit of a stretch.
    #1 overall offense makes more sense.
    ;D


    All the kids my age pee their pants, it's the coolest.

  2. #22
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: Offseason update: Minnesota Vikings

    "UffDaVikes" wrote:

    In an interview that I watched with Bill Walsh, the one thing he said that stands out is that they would design plays around their players.
    Which is what Childress was supposed to do. I recall him saying that he would adjust the schemes to fit to the players strengths. Other than with C-Tay, I don't believe he did enough of that last year. Not using Wiggins to his potential is just one good example of that.

    Hopefully he realizes Rice's strong point is catching the ball out of the slot & he adjusts the scheme to include those types of plays. If he tries to use Rice in a different facet & it fails, we could be in for a long season.

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

  3. #23
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,928

    Re: Offseason update: Minnesota Vikings

    "UffDaVikes" wrote:

    we probably aren't that far off, but when you say they had players that fit there scheme instead of schemes that fit their players, then how do you explain the transition from Montana to Young? Not only were their styles and talents different, but they even threw with different arms, which meant responsibilities in blocking assignments were completely reversed when they went to Young. The transition from the duo of Freddie Solomon and Dwight Clark to Rice and Taylor also had differences in what they brought to the field. While they all had talent unique to themselves, they certainly didn't fit some cookie cutter definition of a certain skill set for their position. For RB's you went from the likes of Earl Cooper and Lenvil Elliot to the later
    tandem of Tom Rathmann and Roger Craig.

    In an interview that I watched with Bill Walsh, the one thing he said that stands out is that they would design plays around their players. He talked about how Montana had too many int's one year so his QB coach at the time (Mike Holmgren) looked back on the plays where Joe threw int's the year before and threw those plays out of the playbook. He also talked about how, when they got Roger Craig up to speed, that due to his ability to catch the ball out of the backfield, they were able to call more short screen passes and involve him in the passing game more than their backs had in the past.To me things like that are indicative of the coaching staff adjusting the scheme instead of vice versa.

    If you are talking about fitting the scheme being more about the players mental rather than their physical abilities, then I certainly can agree with it because that is the one thing that is necessary no matter what your physical gifts are.

    One thing that was mentioned by jargomcfargo that is certainly the case is that as the O-line goes,so does the season. We can win games and improve from last year if the line does it's job. If the line plays like last year we will be no better off.
    I tried to stay away from this with my note on the end but you got my feet to the fire here.
    You are not only wise but crafty as well
    ;D
    Well played sir, well played.

    I am going to go down into the deep deep well of Marrdro vision here to get my feet out of the fire.
    ;D

    Let me just go back to my point that the adjustments you are talking about should be made even before camp.

    With your permission I will stay with the 49'rs scenario......

    In the case of the types of changes that you point out for the 9'rs (i.e. from Montanna to Young), my assumption is that thier staffs made those changes in concept long before Montanna played his last snap as a 9'rs because of how defenses were changing to stop thier version of the WCO.

    The focus was to bring in a more mobile QB rather than the traditional pocket passer which is prevalent in the style of WCO's that are out there.
    Additioinally the rationale/thought processes would have been in place to replace vets on the team that would/could support that type of change in overall concept (OL, TE, RB, WR's ect)

    Again, that kindof change is effected long before the need (while the good guys are still there aging and playing).
    Players (Probably draftees first/FA Vets second) could be assed and backups/eventual replacements could be drafted as far out as 2 or 3 years before they were needed in the 49'rs scenario.

    For the current Vikes roster, drastic whole sale changes are in effect kindof rendering that rationale/thought process a little tough to follow.

    Hopefully over time our current staff will have the luxury of a Joe Montana (TJ
    ;D) that will have guided the team to championships, all the while Scott Studwell and crew are out there trying to find the next guy that will step in and fill the whole once TJ is no longer effective.

    Again, all back to the whole discussion on continuity and building a team that will contend for years to come.

    What we as fans have to get used to is that rationale of thinking as well as the future struggles of when the team lets go of TJ after he wins us 3 superbowls because he can't function in the scheme that we are employing at that time.
    ;D

    By the way, Wildwoman says I am a big sick with respect to my whole "Big Picture" thoughts of the Vikings.
    She just doesn't understand why I can't just worry about the next game.

    ;D Silly Woman
    ;D
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  4. #24
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Offseason update: Minnesota Vikings

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:

    we probably aren't that far off, but when you say they had players that fit there scheme instead of schemes that fit their players, then how do you explain the transition from Montana to Young? Not only were their styles and talents different, but they even threw with different arms, which meant responsibilities in blocking assignments were completely reversed when they went to Young. The transition from the duo of Freddie Solomon and Dwight Clark to Rice and Taylor also had differences in what they brought to the field. While they all had talent unique to themselves, they certainly didn't fit some cookie cutter definition of a certain skill set for their position. For RB's you went from the likes of Earl Cooper and Lenvil Elliot to the later
    tandem of Tom Rathmann and Roger Craig.

    In an interview that I watched with Bill Walsh, the one thing he said that stands out is that they would design plays around their players. He talked about how Montana had too many int's one year so his QB coach at the time (Mike Holmgren) looked back on the plays where Joe threw int's the year before and threw those plays out of the playbook. He also talked about how, when they got Roger Craig up to speed, that due to his ability to catch the ball out of the backfield, they were able to call more short screen passes and involve him in the passing game more than their backs had in the past.To me things like that are indicative of the coaching staff adjusting the scheme instead of vice versa.

    If you are talking about fitting the scheme being more about the players mental rather than their physical abilities, then I certainly can agree with it because that is the one thing that is necessary no matter what your physical gifts are.

    One thing that was mentioned by jargomcfargo that is certainly the case is that as the O-line goes,so does the season. We can win games and improve from last year if the line does it's job. If the line plays like last year we will be no better off.
    I tried to stay away from this with my note on the end but you got my feet to the fire here.
    You are not only wise but crafty as well
    ;D
    Well played sir, well played.

    I am going to go down into the deep deep well of Marrdro vision here to get my feet out of the fire.
    ;D

    Let me just go back to my point that the adjustments you are talking about should be made even before camp.

    With your permission I will stay with the 49'rs scenario......

    In the case of the types of changes that you point out for the 9'rs (i.e. from Montanna to Young), my assumption is that thier staffs made those changes in concept long before Montanna played his last snap as a 9'rs because of how defenses were changing to stop thier version of the WCO.
    The focus was to bring in a more mobile QB rather than the traditional pocket passer which is prevalent in the style of WCO's that are out there.
    Additioinally the rationale/thought processes would have been in place to replace vets on the team that would/could support that type of change in overall concept (OL, TE, RB, WR's ect)

    Again, that kindof change is effected long before the need (while the good guys are still there aging and playing).
    Players (Probably draftees first/FA Vets second) could be assed and backups/eventual replacements could be drafted as far out as 2 or 3 years before they were needed in the 49'rs scenario.

    For the current Vikes roster, drastic whole sale changes are in effect kindof rendering that rationale/thought process a little tough to follow.

    Hopefully over time our current staff will have the luxury of a Joe Montana (TJ
    ;D) that will have guided the team to championships, all the while Scott Studwell and crew are out there trying to find the next guy that will step in and fill the whole once TJ is no longer effective.

    Again, all back to the whole discussion on continuity and building a team that will contend for years to come.

    What we as fans have to get used to is that rationale of thinking as well as the future struggles of when the team lets go of TJ after he wins us 3 superbowls because he can't function in the scheme that we are employing at that time.
    ;D

    By the way, Wildwoman says I am a big sick with respect to my whole "Big Picture" thoughts of the Vikings.
    She just doesn't understand why I can't just worry about the next game.

    ;D Silly Woman
    ;D

    I think you are reaching a bit on that one ;D

    I have to go to my fire training meeting and I'll take another look at it when I get home
    Have a good night ;D

  5. #25
    mountainviking's Avatar
    mountainviking is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,840

    Re: Offseason update: Minnesota Vikings

    Yup, It is all about the OLINE!
    If they improve in their second year in this system, we might just get close to the #1 rushing spot...maybe not this year, but perhaps in the near future.
    Because, I agree, that none of our QBs had much time to throw last year...give him some time, and I think TJack can get it done.
    And, he probably won't ever rush for 1000yds in a season, but I'll bet he gets more than BJ.

    The WRs are our biggest question mark, that is why we drafted 3 and signed half a dozen FAs!
    True, they are young, but they are hungry and competitive.
    And, since teams will likely focus on our rushing attack, they are going to be open.
    I think a couple of them are going to step up and surprise the league!
    Might be all three:
    Wade, Williamson, and Rice...

    One thing I don't think anyone mentioned; The benefit of the ball control offense isn't just tiring out the opposing Defense, but perhaps more importantly, keeping ours off the field!!
    They are so much better when they're fresh and ready to attack!!

    I think you're both right!!
    Har!!

    The team needs to know the system: terminology, blocking assignments etc...When you have continuity on your coaching staff (and mad respect in the 49ers case!) it becomes easier to tweak things to individual strengths.
    All the basic building blocks are already in place.
    Maybe you only have to talk to two players, WR gets a slightly new route, QB needs to know the new read.
    In the 49ers case, one thing I just heard recently on NFLN, is that they switched their favorite play (option right?) to the other side for the left handed Young.
    Same play, everyone already knows how it is supposed to go, just need to practice a bit and get comfortable on the other side.

    And, on the other hand, if something isn't working and you don't try to fix it, you won't last long in today's NFL.
    Giving your players plays that "fit" makes them comfortable, and confident that they can perform as expected, and increases your chance of success.
    MRob's big complaint was that Chilly didn't utilize some of his player's strengths...and, as the struggling continued late, it lent some value to his opinion.


    I'm hoping, almost assuming, that Chilly has learned a little from his rookie mistakes, and having the same system in place should help the whole team perform better!!

    SKOL VIKES!!
    Control the line, control the time, and give your D a chance to shine!!

    "Balance it on end and thats the third side of the coin!!" -wookiefoot

  6. #26
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Re: Offseason update: Minnesota Vikings

    "mountainviking" wrote:

    The team needs to know the system: terminology, blocking assignments etc...When you have continuity on your coaching staff (and mad respect in the 49ers case!] ) it becomes easier to tweak things to individual strengths.
    All the basic building blocks are already in place.
    Maybe you only have to talk to two players, WR gets a slightly new route, QB needs to know the new read.
    In the 49ers case, one thing I just heard recently on NFLN, is that they switched their favorite play (option right?) to the other side for the left handed Young.

    Same play, everyone already knows how it is supposed to go, just need to practice a bit and get comfortable on the other side.
    And exactly how did the 49ers fair the past 4 seasons?


    2006: 7-9-0 Nolan

    2005: 4-12-0 Nolan
    2004: 2-14-0 Erickson

    2003: 7-9-0 Erickson


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

  7. #27
    mountainviking's Avatar
    mountainviking is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,840

    Re: Offseason update: Minnesota Vikings

    I believe the 9ers we're talking about here were coached by Walsh
    Control the line, control the time, and give your D a chance to shine!!

    "Balance it on end and thats the third side of the coin!!" -wookiefoot

  8. #28
    Purple Floyd's Avatar
    Purple Floyd is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    16,646
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Offseason update: Minnesota Vikings

    "singersp" wrote:
    "mountainviking" wrote:

    The team needs to know the system: terminology, blocking assignments etc...When you have continuity on your coaching staff (and mad respect in the 49ers case!] ) it becomes easier to tweak things to individual strengths.
    All the basic building blocks are already in place.
    Maybe you only have to talk to two players, WR gets a slightly new route, QB needs to know the new read.
    In the 49ers case, one thing I just heard recently on NFLN, is that they switched their favorite play (option right?) to the other side for the left handed Young.

    Same play, everyone already knows how it is supposed to go, just need to practice a bit and get comfortable on the other side.
    And exactly how did the 49ers fair the past 4 seasons?


    2006: 7-9-0 Nolan

    2005: 4-12-0 Nolan
    2004: 2-14-0 Erickson

    2003: 7-9-0 Erickson

    They beat us last year

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 03-26-2008, 09:19 AM
  2. Vikings Offseason Update
    By singersp in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-18-2008, 08:14 AM
  3. NFL Offseason Roadmap: Minnesota Vikings
    By Prophet in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-23-2008, 04:15 PM
  4. Offseason Update: Minnesota Vikings
    By Marrdro in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-07-2007, 12:52 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
  •