Vikings postgame thread

markshark84 · Post by **markshark84** » Mon Oct 15, 2012 12:18 pm

I don't even want to know where we would be without RGIII....... I have been telling people that this team reminds me of the SCLSU Mud Dogs team from the Adam Sandler movie "the waterboy" with RGIII being similar to the "Waterboy" player in that without him we can't win.

I agree with the poster that said Brandon Banks needs to go. I personally think we should put Moss in his "triple option" spot. Banks is literally incapable of breaking a tackle and has done absolutely nothing on punt returns. He is also extremely fumble-prone.

I think the defense played pretty well. My test for whether a defense has played well is typically 22 points (there are other factors such as field position and offensive output that come in to play, but these didn't occur in this game). If the D gives up more, they didn't do well; if they gave up less, they did what they needed to do to win the game. MIN scored 26, BUT the D also scored 7; so I see this as a 19 point effort. They also set up another 7 from a TO. All in all a solid defensive game.

44diesel · Post by **44diesel** » Mon Oct 15, 2012 12:48 pm

Kilmer72 wrote:
44diesel wrote:
Look how excited Kirk seems to be in that picture.

Actually I find everyone's body language in this picture quite expressive. There are a lot of emotions captured in this one instant.

Cousins is a competitor, it's one of the things that makes a great quarterback and there was a strong chance that he was going to get the start this week if RGIII was not getting cleared to play. I'm sure he's happy for RGIII and for the team but I can understand it must not be easy to watch the guy ahead of you light up the stage repeatedly.

riggofan · Post by **riggofan** » Mon Oct 15, 2012 2:06 pm

44diesel wrote:Cousins is a competitor, it's one of the things that makes a great quarterback and there was a strong chance that he was going to get the start this week if RGIII was not getting cleared to play. I'm sure he's happy for RGIII and for the team but I can understand it must not be easy to watch the guy ahead of you light up the stage repeatedly.

He just seems like a reserved guy. I noticed when Madieu Williams came off after his big play, everyone was high five-ing him. Cousins just gave him a little nod. hah.

I think Cousins is in a great position this year. Getting the second string QB spot from Shanahan was a big vote of confidence and allows him to do a lot of learning this season. He also has a realistic chance of playing every week given the way our QB runs. Like you said, I'm sure he'd rather be the starting QB. But I gotta think the position he is in now is waaaay better than being like the rookie starting QB for the Browns or something.

44diesel · Post by **44diesel** » Mon Oct 15, 2012 2:29 pm

riggofan wrote: But I gotta think the position he is in now is waaaay better than being like the rookie starting QB for the Browns or something.

Indeed!

44diesel · Post by **44diesel** » Mon Oct 15, 2012 2:38 pm

I found one more video of Griffin's TD that I had to share. Especially for anyone, like me, who wishes they could've been there to be a part of it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7cE_ImWctY

This team is bringing a swagger back to D.C. and and RGIII is leading the way! HAIL!!!

riggofan · Post by **riggofan** » Mon Oct 15, 2012 4:48 pm

Man I was really happy that Briscoe made the team this year. He had a good year with TB and has a lot of potential. But that drop yesterday was a HOWLER.

Red_One43 · Post by **Red_One43** » Mon Oct 15, 2012 7:24 pm

grampi wrote:
Red_One43 wrote:The Defense made key plays and stops, but this is not the type of D performance that gets us to the play-offs. Too many yards and offensive plays given up.

Check out how many times we got burn't in the flat - receiver wide open. I still don't fault our players even if they are making mistakes in this scheme. To me the scheme is too complicated for the talent level on the D.

The D did play well enough to win, so for last night, that is good enough.
Whatever happened to defenses that forced 3 and outs, or at least forced punts? I was watching the Dallas/Baltimore game earlier and Dallas (who has one of the lowest ranked offenses in the league) never punted once in the entire game. They went up and down the field the entire game on a D that's supposed to be one of the best in the league...so it's not just our D that's not playing all that well....

I guess the Pats and the Pack proved last year that you don't need a three and out D to make the play-offs just hold them to FGs and and make a few plays and of course an O that scores points helps.

Ok, when you look at it that way, what we got out of our D with our O is a type of formula for success. Throw in a kicker that can kick FGs ----- maybe we can start winning consistenly if RGIII gets to call his own plays and Haz backs off the zero blitz more.

DarthMonk · Post by **DarthMonk** » Mon Oct 15, 2012 7:27 pm

44diesel wrote:I loved hearing Robert breakdown this play in the postgame. The awareness and confidence that he has as a rookie is amazing.

Robert Griffin III wrote:We kinda felt that they were gonna pressure us in that situation. So, Kyle called a good play. I saw the double A gap blitz and I was thinking I'm either going to throw hot or if they miss this blitz, and don't hit it the right way then I'm going to run for the first. I saw that they missed it. I took off running and got to the sideline. I thought about running out of bounds (cause everyone's been telling me that lately ) and then you just know in certain situations and I feel like I had the guy outflanked and I just took off running. The rest is history.

I like the guy next to Kyle playing air guitar!

Red_One43 · Post by **Red_One43** » Mon Oct 15, 2012 7:34 pm

KazooSkinsFan wrote:
Deadskins wrote:I think our D played a great game. Not only did they score, but they gave RGIII the ball deep in Vikings territory, despite once again not getting any of the blatant holds right in front of the refs. Not to mention a couple of really bad interference calls, which could have easily gone the other way.
I agree with you on the positives. They kept us in the game, they scored. But giving up three straight drives when we had a three score lead which resulted in two TD's and almost a third removes the "great" from the performance.

I have to agree with Kaz - having a 19 point lead in the 4th qtr and the game turning into a nail biter definitely removes the "great." After reading a few posts, I can definitely see the postive side of the performance of the D, better today, than I did last night at the game.

Red_One43 · Post by **Red_One43** » Mon Oct 15, 2012 7:37 pm

DarthMonk wrote:
44diesel wrote:I loved hearing Robert breakdown this play in the postgame. The awareness and confidence that he has as a rookie is amazing.

Robert Griffin III wrote:We kinda felt that they were gonna pressure us in that situation. So, Kyle called a good play. I saw the double A gap blitz and I was thinking I'm either going to throw hot or if they miss this blitz, and don't hit it the right way then I'm going to run for the first. I saw that they missed it. I took off running and got to the sideline. I thought about running out of bounds (cause everyone's been telling me that lately ) and then you just know in certain situations and I feel like I had the guy outflanked and I just took off running. The rest is history.

I like the guy next to Kyle playing air guitar!

Kyle blew the call on the pitch on 3rd and 1 on the previous series. Keep the ball in RGIIIs hands! The odds are much better with RGIII than a pitchout against that D. I will give credit to Kyle making the call to put the ball in RGIII's hand on that last 3rd down call.

ACW · Post by **ACW** » Mon Oct 15, 2012 7:41 pm

GREAT run, but should we be worried RGIII ran so much?

DaveD1420 · Post by **DaveD1420** » Mon Oct 15, 2012 8:08 pm

ACW wrote:GREAT run, but should we be worried RGIII ran so much?

I say no. Run him while we can get away with it (assuming we can prevent him from getting hurt again). Once teams figure him out, we blast them with his rocket arm. Then they plan for that, and we run him more again.

ACW · Post by **ACW** » Mon Oct 15, 2012 8:11 pm

DaveD1420 wrote:
ACW wrote:GREAT run, but should we be worried RGIII ran so much?
I say no. Run him while we can get away with it (assuming we can prevent him from getting hurt again).

That there is my concern.

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Mon Oct 15, 2012 10:35 pm

I think that both RG3 and Kyle had a HUGE wake up call last Sunday

there is no way this kid can play scared but ...
at the same time both he and Kyle can and will play 'smart'

I believe that we will see a game plan that takes advantage of all that RG3 offers but at the same time does not take the risks that were a part of what we were doing in the first 5 games

this kid will be allowed to learn and grow into one of the most exciting QBs to ever play the game

it's amazing the difference a 'leader' can make in this game

it's even more important when that leadership comes from the QB position

HTTR

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Tue Oct 16, 2012 11:12 am

I missed this last week, but Gregg Easterbrook's TMQ column on ESPN on 10/9 started with a long description of how the Vikings running a simple offense and winning is proof that the NFL has gotten too complex. I haven't rewatched the game yet, but I have to say I didn't think their offense was particularly vanilla. What did you guys think?

http://espn.go.com/espn/playbook/story/ ... licity-win

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Tue Oct 16, 2012 11:40 am

C'ville - I think you have to factor in that the vikings have had a very good run defense for a while

AND

they have AP and Harvin = we did not play good defense but it 'worked'

'simple' might work against many teams ...

ALSO - our guys were really up for this game - even with Morris not getting a lot of yards

cowboykillerzRGiii · Post by **cowboykillerzRGiii** » Tue Oct 16, 2012 12:49 pm

I agree SJ..

Morris did enough tho, and opened it up for rgiii-almost 140 yards plus his = killin it

SkinsJock · Post by **SkinsJock** » Tue Oct 16, 2012 2:36 pm

no question - Morris did not get a lot of yards but his presence (and what he had done this year) must have helped the other facets of our offense

emoses14 · Post by **emoses14** » Tue Oct 16, 2012 7:19 pm

cvillehog wrote:I missed this last week, but Gregg Easterbrook's TMQ column on ESPN on 10/9 started with a long description of how the Vikings running a simple offense and winning is proof that the NFL has gotten too complex. I haven't rewatched the game yet, but I have to say I didn't think their offense was particularly vanilla. What did you guys think?

http://espn.go.com/espn/playbook/story/ ... licity-win

I think Greggggg Easterbrook is a pompous windbag, so I generally disagree with everything the man says. No, I didn't think their offense was vanilla.

Red_One43 · Post by **Red_One43** » Tue Oct 16, 2012 9:08 pm

cvillehog wrote:I missed this last week, but Gregg Easterbrook's TMQ column on ESPN on 10/9 started with a long description of how the Vikings running a simple offense and winning is proof that the NFL has gotten too complex. I haven't rewatched the game yet, but I have to say I didn't think their offense was particularly vanilla. What did you guys think?

http://espn.go.com/espn/playbook/story/ ... licity-win

I don't know if I would call it vanilla, but Ponder threw a lot of short passes against the Skins and methodically marched the ball down the field. With a guy like Harvin, dumping the ball off to him can easily turn into a big gain. With a running back like Peterson to compliment the short passing game, it is a formula that has to work. The D is not too Shabby as well. When the Skins were conventional, the completely shut down the Skins - that helps a simple offense as well. Speaking of simple the D also looks like a simple Cover 2 with everyone being where they are supposed to be.

Here's some evidence that the Vikings are keeping it simple. Last year Ponder comp pct was 54.3%. This year it is 68.6%. How did his pct rise so dramatically in one year? Has he become RGIIIish with his accuracy in one year? No! The shorter passes are helping him big time.

I do agree with the article - simple just might be better. Vikes are 4-2. Not a bad start for one of the worst teams last year and they have beaten some good teams like the Niners and Lions.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Tue Oct 16, 2012 10:57 pm

Red_One43 wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:
Deadskins wrote:I think our D played a great game. Not only did they score, but they gave RGIII the ball deep in Vikings territory, despite once again not getting any of the blatant holds right in front of the refs. Not to mention a couple of really bad interference calls, which could have easily gone the other way.
I agree with you on the positives. They kept us in the game, they scored. But giving up three straight drives when we had a three score lead which resulted in two TD's and almost a third removes the "great" from the performance.
I have to agree with Kaz - having a 19 point lead in the 4th qtr and the game turning into a nail biter definitely removes the "great." After reading a few posts, I can definitely see the postive side of the performance of the D, better today, than I did last night at the game.

And I'd have to disagree with you both. I just watched the game again, and I still say the D played great. They gave us 14 points, and while they did give up two TDs in the 4th quarter, they were both very time consuming drives, where they were purposely giving up the middle, short routes to run time off the clock. And the second drive was ref-aided by an interference call in the end-zone that should have gone against the Vikings.

ACW · Post by **ACW** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 5:15 am

Red_One43 wrote:
cvillehog wrote:I missed this last week, but Gregg Easterbrook's TMQ column on ESPN on 10/9 started with a long description of how the Vikings running a simple offense and winning is proof that the NFL has gotten too complex. I haven't rewatched the game yet, but I have to say I didn't think their offense was particularly vanilla. What did you guys think?

http://espn.go.com/espn/playbook/story/ ... licity-win
I don't know if I would call it vanilla, but Ponder threw a lot of short passes against the Skins and methodically marched the ball down the field. With a guy like Harvin, dumping the ball off to him can easily turn into a big gain. With a running back like Peterson to compliment the short passing game, it is a formula that has to work. The D is not too Shabby as well. When the Skins were conventional, the completely shut down the Skins - that helps a simple offense as well. Speaking of simple the D also looks like a simple Cover 2 with everyone being where they are supposed to be.

Here's some evidence that the Vikings are keeping it simple. Last year Ponder comp pct was 54.3%. This year it is 68.6%. How did his pct rise so dramatically in one year? Has he become RGIIIish with his accuracy in one year? No! The shorter passes are helping him big time.

I do agree with the article - simple just might be better. Vikes are 4-2. Not a bad start for one of the worst teams last year and they have beaten some good teams like the Niners and Lions.

Niners sure, but Lions are odd this year.

Red_One43 · Post by **Red_One43** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 5:47 am

Deadskins wrote:
Red_One43 wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote: I agree with you on the positives. They kept us in the game, they scored. But giving up three straight drives when we had a three score lead which resulted in two TD's and almost a third removes the "great" from the performance.
I have to agree with Kaz - having a 19 point lead in the 4th qtr and the game turning into a nail biter definitely removes the "great." After reading a few posts, I can definitely see the postive side of the performance of the D, better today, than I did last night at the game.
And I'd have to disagree with you both. I just watched the game again, and I still say the D played great. They gave us 14 points, and while they did give up two TDs in the 4th quarter, they were both very time consuming drives, where they were purposely giving up the middle, short routes to run time off the clock. And the second drive was ref-aided by an interference call in the end-zone that should have gone against the Vikings.

That's a loose def of the word "great. Usually "great" is reserved for the performances like the Raven's, Bear's and other defenses of the past that destroy offenses. I agree that it was a good performance as compared to what the rest of the league's D's are doing, but great? I define great as a dominating performance.

There was no reason to call that ineffective blitz (was it a zero blitz? - loooked like it.) on that play when the object was to keep the ball in front of you and eat time. I have said that our D is better than our stats and that Haz is putting them in situations that do not fit their talent. I think that we can find common ground that our D is better than its stats. If you see the game again, would you count the number of times Haz called his zero blitz and if it was ever effective? Thanks.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 4:59 pm

Oh please! I'll stick with great, while you can look for a once in a decade-like performance.

BTW, London Fletcher said they played great, too. I'll take his opinion over yours.

Red_One43 · Post by **Red_One43** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 6:35 pm

Deadskins wrote:Oh please! I'll stick with great, while you can look for a once in a decade-like performance.

BTW, London Fletcher said they played great, too. I'll take his opinion over yours.

I'll take Fletch's opinion over mine as well, but check it out, on any thread, I have always said that the players played great especially on D.

I will agree with you that the defensive players played great. They aren't the most talented D line evidenced by their lack of a pass rush. They aren't the most D talented players in the the league. We know about the secondary weeaknesses, so yes, the D players played great in this game as well as in others. These are high motor guys that Shanny chose because they give it their all.

But as far as the defensive performance goes - I wouldn't call a "bend, but don't break" performance with over 400 yards of offense given up, a 19 point 4th quarter lead nearly squandered, giving up 26 total points and the same issues with wide open receivers in the flat taking place, great. Keep in mind the Vikings rank as just an average offense (17th in yardage after posting 400+ against the Skins).

As I have said in other threads, these D issues are a case of a coordinator not basing his scheme on the talent of his players. Everytime, we have gotten leads, we have watched teams close on us. Check out the games! Saints, Rams, Bucs, and now Vikings. Why is that? Not the players, they played great to get the lead in the first place. (let's not forget TDs in 4 games). When Haz gets a lead he goes back to his blitzing stuff and we get burned quick. We don't have the personnel for what Haz wants to do. Keep it simple like the Vikings D does and have everybody in the right place. Greg Cosell said on ESPN980 that has has back down and called more conservative game plans lately and we have seen better results. Cosell noticed less all out blitzes, but keeping the traditional blitzes. Less man coverage. Haz needs to stay with this approach even when we get a double digit lead.

This Skins' win was not a win with great defense, it was a win because both sides of the ball came together and made the plays that they had to make and get the win which was great (along with the individual performance of RGIII).