Thread: State of the Franchise Vikings

"Mr" wrote:

"jkjuggalo" wrote:

"FuadFan" wrote:

http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80f9365e


Not shown on TV today because of Cutler trade and recorded before the completion of trade.


Personal note: Am I alone in being annoyed by Mayock's obsession with us needing to use the Wildcat which was completely ineffective after the first half of the season?

No.
Though I'd like the play-calling to be more imaginative, I don't think drafting Pat White to come in and run the Wildcat for 15 snaps is something that is going to elevate our offense to the next level.
Sure, some trickery every once in a while can be good, but let's not turn us into a gimmicky offense for 15 plays a game.

IMO what's going to really change the quality of this offense is keeping Peterson on the field for 3rd downs. We essentially tell the defense what's coming when we pull him, when Taylor is in the game you'll never see an 8 man front, the second Peterson steps off the sideline they bring someone else into the box. We catch them off guard with a run from Taylor once in a while and it works brilliantly. Imagine what Peterson could do on expected passing downs.

I'd much rather risk a dropped pass or a missed block than have the level of predictability that we currently display.

Combine that with consistent solid receiver play and we'll have a group of 11 that can be on the field every down.

Having a true 11 man offense that can execute everything you need them to will drastically improve what the coaches can do with the playbook, even Childress' playbook.

So Peterson can fumble on third down if he happened not to fumble on the first or second one?

"UffDaVikes" wrote:

"Mr" wrote:

"jkjuggalo" wrote:

"FuadFan" wrote:

http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80f9365e


Not shown on TV today because of Cutler trade and recorded before the completion of trade.


Personal note: Am I alone in being annoyed by Mayock's obsession with us needing to use the Wildcat which was completely ineffective after the first half of the season?

No.
Though I'd like the play-calling to be more imaginative, I don't think drafting Pat White to come in and run the Wildcat for 15 snaps is something that is going to elevate our offense to the next level.
Sure, some trickery every once in a while can be good, but let's not turn us into a gimmicky offense for 15 plays a game.

IMO what's going to really change the quality of this offense is keeping Peterson on the field for 3rd downs. We essentially tell the defense what's coming when we pull him, when Taylor is in the game you'll never see an 8 man front, the second Peterson steps off the sideline they bring someone else into the box. We catch them off guard with a run from Taylor once in a while and it works brilliantly. Imagine what Peterson could do on expected passing downs.

I'd much rather risk a dropped pass or a missed block than have the level of predictability that we currently display.

Combine that with consistent solid receiver play and we'll have a group of 11 that can be on the field every down.

Having a true 11 man offense that can execute everything you need them to will drastically improve what the coaches can do with the playbook, even Childress' playbook.

So Peterson can fumble on third down if he happened not to fumble on the first or second one?

You can never assume a player is going to fumble.

And if you think he's not on the field on third downs because of his fumbling you're totally mistaken.

"ejmat" wrote:

"jargomcfargo" wrote:

"Mr" wrote:

"jkjuggalo" wrote:

"FuadFan" wrote:

http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80f9365e


Not shown on TV today because of Cutler trade and recorded before the completion of trade.


Personal note: Am I alone in being annoyed by Mayock's obsession with us needing to use the Wildcat which was completely ineffective after the first half of the season?

No.
Though I'd like the play-calling to be more imaginative, I don't think drafting Pat White to come in and run the Wildcat for 15 snaps is something that is going to elevate our offense to the next level.
Sure, some trickery every once in a while can be good, but let's not turn us into a gimmicky offense for 15 plays a game.

IMO what's going to really change the quality of this offense is keeping Peterson on the field for 3rd downs. We essentially tell the defense what's coming when we pull him, when Taylor is in the game you'll never see an 8 man front, the second Peterson steps off the sideline they bring someone else into the box. We catch them off guard with a run from Taylor once in a while and it works brilliantly. Imagine what Peterson could do on expected passing downs.

I'd much rather risk a dropped pass or a missed block than have the level of predictability that we currently display.

Combine that with consistent solid receiver play and we'll have a group of 11 that can be on the field every down.

Having a true 11 man offense that can execute everything you need them to will drastically improve what the coaches can do with the playbook, even Childress' playbook.

Third down conversions are the biggest problem the offense has in this scheme. The biggest offensive weapon the team has should not be on the bench.

I agree. If it is the same old plan this year. We will likely see the same result, regardless of who is playing QB.

I am going to comment because a lot of drives were stalled because of penalties, fumbles and INTs.
Yes there were some 3 and outs too.
However, if the players focus such as like they did later in the season (i.e. no penalties and keeping turnovers to a minimum except for the Atlanta game) this team will be better.
Everyone kssp talking about the play calling.
My question is how is play calling predictable when there are complaints about what they do on fourth down?
I.E. passing on 4th and 1.
How is that predicatable?
The Vikings had their fair share of trickory but no one talks about the plays that worked well.


Are there times when you wish they would call something other than what they call?
Yes there are.
Maybe we like it or maybe we hate it.
But if we are thinking about what plays we would like to call and the coaches don't call these plays, how is that being predictable?
To me that is a lot of contradiction and if people want to keep blaming the coaches for players not executing correctly on the field continue to do so.
Personally I know if a player messes up it is on them.
If the coach does nothing to fix that then it is on him.
Therefore if CHildress takes Peterson out because he fumbles or doesn't play well on 3rd downs, I would say that is doing his job effectively.

He may be doing his job in terms of "punishing" Peterson, but doing so hurts the rest of the team. Replacing a player on every obvious passing down creates serious predictability in the offense.

Interesting...pretty much just like I see it.
"An impact player to stretch the defense."
And, possibly some youth at CB or more likely some OL depth/upgrade.
I like that Childress mentions the passing game, and "balance."
Harvin could really be the threat to take some of the pressure off of AP...not only improving his play late in games, but late in the season, and hopefully, extending his career!!

You'd have to hope that Peterson will improve as a blocker and reciever also...more time, more practice, more familiarity.
That and concentrating on keeping the ball protected.
I know people don't want to hear it, but I'll say that we lost as many or more games this season due to his fumbles than what our QBs were throwing down.

I don't think 15 wildcat plays a game is where we're going by any means, but I like the idea of seeing some more creativity...maybe, a little "wildcat," here and there, AP and CT in the backfield with BB and PH outside, and TJack in the slot might be really fun to see.
That
comment sounds like why Mayock is a "draft expert," and not an actual NFL coach, or scout for that matter.
But, I've been pretty impressed with what I've seen of White.
Once again, reminds me of Peterson, just giving it his all and really going for it all the time.
His passes in the senior bowl were very accurate, catchable, and on time.
If we could somehow land a draft that addresses our most obvious weaknesses like;
1.Harvin, 2.Unger, 3.White
I just might mess my pants.

I still think Jackson is likely to start the season, but that by the end we'll see Sage get some shots too.
White would be a huge upgrade over what I've seen of Booty, and could potentially contribute some WR or Wildcat too.
Fat chance he's still there in the 3rd though...I think Dallas covets him in the 2nd.

*edit*
Just wanted to add, that if our offense can "click" just a bit more, taking more time off the clock and giving our defense more rest and just a few more points cushion, that our defense will look even better.
Add in the return of EJ, Udeze, Gordon etc, and this defense could push for a top three spot at season's end.

"Mr" wrote:

And if you think he's not on the field on third downs because of his fumbling you're totally mistaken.

It is blatantly obvious why he isn't in the game on third downs- Because his pass blocking is not good at all and he has not shown the ability to be a consistent pass catcher in the flat when needed. The fumbling comes from thinking too much about what you are supposed to do instead of doing what comes naturally. Now giving him more responsibility and asking him to do more things on third downs is going to increase both the amount he has to think and the likelyhood that will lead to more fumbles.

I dont know about the wildcat but we def need to mix it up a little better.Spread it out and mix things up ALOT more

"UffDaVikes" wrote:

"Mr" wrote:

And if you think he's not on the field on third downs because of his fumbling you're totally mistaken.

It is blatantly obvious why he isn't in the game on third downs- Because his pass blocking is not good at all and he has not shown the ability to be a consistent pass catcher in the flat when needed. The fumbling comes from thinking too much about what you are supposed to do instead of doing what comes naturally. Now giving him more responsibility and asking him to do more things on third downs is going to increase both the amount he has to think and the likelyhood that will lead to more fumbles.

I think that you can learn how to block if you arent in that position.
He nearly gets 0 reps blocking out on the field and thats not how you learn it.
Every time he is in it seems he runs it and defenses know that.
Maybe if the vikes taught AP how to block a little better our offense would be a little better.

"Mr" wrote:

"ejmat" wrote:

"jargomcfargo" wrote:

"Mr" wrote:

"jkjuggalo" wrote:

[quote author=FuadFan link=topic=51309.msg930860#msg930860 date=1238723587]
http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80f9365e


Not shown on TV today because of Cutler trade and recorded before the completion of trade.


Personal note: Am I alone in being annoyed by Mayock's obsession with us needing to use the Wildcat which was completely ineffective after the first half of the season?

No.
Though I'd like the play-calling to be more imaginative, I don't think drafting Pat White to come in and run the Wildcat for 15 snaps is something that is going to elevate our offense to the next level.
Sure, some trickery every once in a while can be good, but let's not turn us into a gimmicky offense for 15 plays a game.

IMO what's going to really change the quality of this offense is keeping Peterson on the field for 3rd downs. We essentially tell the defense what's coming when we pull him, when Taylor is in the game you'll never see an 8 man front, the second Peterson steps off the sideline they bring someone else into the box. We catch them off guard with a run from Taylor once in a while and it works brilliantly. Imagine what Peterson could do on expected passing downs.

I'd much rather risk a dropped pass or a missed block than have the level of predictability that we currently display.

Combine that with consistent solid receiver play and we'll have a group of 11 that can be on the field every down.

Having a true 11 man offense that can execute everything you need them to will drastically improve what the coaches can do with the playbook, even Childress' playbook.

Third down conversions are the biggest problem the offense has in this scheme. The biggest offensive weapon the team has should not be on the bench.

I agree. If it is the same old plan this year. We will likely see the same result, regardless of who is playing QB.

I am going to comment because a lot of drives were stalled because of penalties, fumbles and INTs.
Yes there were some 3 and outs too.
However, if the players focus such as like they did later in the season (i.e. no penalties and keeping turnovers to a minimum except for the Atlanta game) this team will be better.
Everyone kssp talking about the play calling.
My question is how is play calling predictable when there are complaints about what they do on fourth down?
I.E. passing on 4th and 1.
How is that predicatable?
The Vikings had their fair share of trickory but no one talks about the plays that worked well.


Are there times when you wish they would call something other than what they call?
Yes there are.
Maybe we like it or maybe we hate it.
But if we are thinking about what plays we would like to call and the coaches don't call these plays, how is that being predictable?
To me that is a lot of contradiction and if people want to keep blaming the coaches for players not executing correctly on the field continue to do so.
Personally I know if a player messes up it is on them.
If the coach does nothing to fix that then it is on him.
Therefore if CHildress takes Peterson out because he fumbles or doesn't play well on 3rd downs, I would say that is doing his job effectively.

He may be doing his job in terms of "punishing" Peterson, but doing so hurts the rest of the team. Replacing a player on every obvious passing down creates serious predictability in the offense.
[/quote]

So what you are saying is CT can't handle the job???
Sorry I disagree.
He doesn't hurt the team.
AP needs to learn how to hold onto the ball.
If taking him out helps him begin learning that then no he doesn't hurt the rest of the team.

"UffDaVikes" wrote:

"Mr" wrote:

And if you think he's not on the field on third downs because of his fumbling you're totally mistaken.

It is blatantly obvious why he isn't in the game on third downs- Because his pass blocking is not good at all and he has not shown the ability to be a consistent pass catcher in the flat when needed. The fumbling comes from thinking too much about what you are supposed to do instead of doing what comes naturally. Now giving him more responsibility and asking him to do more things on third downs is going to increase both the amount he has to think and the likelyhood that will lead to more fumbles.

I had no idea what you were trying to say in your post I quoted, you made it seem like it was all fumbling, thanks for clarifying.

"ejmat" wrote:

"Mr" wrote:

"ejmat" wrote:

"jargomcfargo" wrote:

"Mr" wrote:

[quote author=jkjuggalo link=topic=51309.msg930868#msg930868 date=1238724616]
[quote author=FuadFan link=topic=51309.msg930860#msg930860 date=1238723587]
http://www.nfl.com/videos?videoId=09000d5d80f9365e


Not shown on TV today because of Cutler trade and recorded before the completion of trade.


Personal note: Am I alone in being annoyed by Mayock's obsession with us needing to use the Wildcat which was completely ineffective after the first half of the season?

No.
Though I'd like the play-calling to be more imaginative, I don't think drafting Pat White to come in and run the Wildcat for 15 snaps is something that is going to elevate our offense to the next level.
Sure, some trickery every once in a while can be good, but let's not turn us into a gimmicky offense for 15 plays a game.

IMO what's going to really change the quality of this offense is keeping Peterson on the field for 3rd downs. We essentially tell the defense what's coming when we pull him, when Taylor is in the game you'll never see an 8 man front, the second Peterson steps off the sideline they bring someone else into the box. We catch them off guard with a run from Taylor once in a while and it works brilliantly. Imagine what Peterson could do on expected passing downs.

I'd much rather risk a dropped pass or a missed block than have the level of predictability that we currently display.

Combine that with consistent solid receiver play and we'll have a group of 11 that can be on the field every down.

Having a true 11 man offense that can execute everything you need them to will drastically improve what the coaches can do with the playbook, even Childress' playbook.

Third down conversions are the biggest problem the offense has in this scheme. The biggest offensive weapon the team has should not be on the bench.

I agree. If it is the same old plan this year. We will likely see the same result, regardless of who is playing QB.

I am going to comment because a lot of drives were stalled because of penalties, fumbles and INTs.
Yes there were some 3 and outs too.
However, if the players focus such as like they did later in the season (i.e. no penalties and keeping turnovers to a minimum except for the Atlanta game) this team will be better.
Everyone kssp talking about the play calling.
My question is how is play calling predictable when there are complaints about what they do on fourth down?
I.E. passing on 4th and 1.
How is that predicatable?
The Vikings had their fair share of trickory but no one talks about the plays that worked well.


Are there times when you wish they would call something other than what they call?
Yes there are.
Maybe we like it or maybe we hate it.
But if we are thinking about what plays we would like to call and the coaches don't call these plays, how is that being predictable?
To me that is a lot of contradiction and if people want to keep blaming the coaches for players not executing correctly on the field continue to do so.
Personally I know if a player messes up it is on them.
If the coach does nothing to fix that then it is on him.
Therefore if CHildress takes Peterson out because he fumbles or doesn't play well on 3rd downs, I would say that is doing his job effectively.

He may be doing his job in terms of "punishing" Peterson, but doing so hurts the rest of the team. Replacing a player on every obvious passing down creates serious predictability in the offense.
[/quote]

So what you are saying is CT can't handle the job???
Sorry I disagree.
He doesn't hurt the team.
AP needs to learn how to hold onto the ball.
If taking him out helps him begin learning that then no he doesn't hurt the rest of the team.
[/quote]
In no way did I say Taylor can't handle the job. All I have said in this thread is that consistently removing Peterson on passing downs creates predictability in the offense and I believe it is worth the risk of a dropped pass or blown block to keep him in and the defense on their heels.

I agree with mayock.
What I hear is that if the Vikings are not going to substantially improve their QB position, they need to find a way to make plays.
A substitute for plays that the QB should be making.
Do I think this is the answer? NO. But what choice do we have?


I agree that all the Vikes are doing is beating up AP and that all the pieces are in place. That is why it is so unbelievable that the
Vikes are not going after a quality QB.
Heck at this point I say go grab Garcia.
With AP and the rest of the Vikes, he has a couple of great years left in him.

THE DOOR IS CLOSING