PDA

View Full Version : Play Calling Myth (through 10 games).



Prophet
11-21-2006, 08:35 AM
Seriously, this is a first year coach and coaching staff and schemes.
The people that are panicking and calling out the coach need a reality check.
There are plenty of threads around looking at some of the historical first years of HCs and their subsequent records.
At this point it is too early to call for Childress' head and it is too early to call him a hero.


If you are going to make claims as to what they should do at least back up your claims instead of pulling stuff out of your ass.
Is predictable play calling one of the huge problems?
I say no.
Why?
Well, here's a simplistic summary just looking at the passing/rushing by downs.
Obviously, this does not include the specific plays, the boneheaded penalties, the execution of the plays, etc.
But, as far as I can tell there is no indication that the play calling is simplistic and predictable.

2006 Regular season
*A few bits of information for the play calling is the problem crowd follow.
The abbreviations are P=Pass, R=Run, Pu=Punt, FG=Field Goal.
*taken from nfl.com

GAME 1: Vikings @ Redskins 19-16

The first game of the season results in a win in Redskin country.
Vikings fans are thrilled with the resurgence of the running game and a rare road win against a team predicted to make the playoffs.

Play calling by down:

1st
P,P,R,P,R,R,R,R,P,R,R,R,R,R,P,P,R,R,R,R,R,R,R,R,R (24% passes, 76% runs)
2nd R,R,P,R,R,R,P,R,P,R,P,R,P,R,P,R.R,R,R,R (30% passes, 70% runs)
3rd P, P, R,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,R (90% passes, 10% runs)
4th Pu, Pu, Pu, Pu, FG, Pu,FG

The running game dominated, but the third downs still resulted in 90% passing.

GAME 2: Panthers @ Vikings 16-13 OT

The standout play in this game was the boneheaded cross field pass by Gamble, that Fox took credit for, giving the Vikings a win.
The purple-shaded faithful began to get excited about the new look Vikings.
The offense was beginning to worry people, but the defense was refreshing.

Play calling by down:

1st
P,R,R,P,P,R,P,R,R,R,R,P,P,R,R,R,R,P,R,R,P,P,P,P,P,P,R,R,R (45% passes, 55% runs)
2nd R,R,P,P,R,P,R,P,P,R,R,P,P,P,P,R,R,P,R,R (50% passes, 50% runs)
3rd R,P,P,R,P,R,R,P,P,P,P,P,P,P, FG (71% passes, 29% runs)
4th R, FG, Pu, Pu, Pu, FG, R, Pu, P, Pu, Pu

The most evenly split run/passing game of the year.
The third downs still resulted in a heavy passing percentage.

GAME 3: Bears @ Vikings 19-16

This game was won in the trenches, and the Vikings gave it away in a turnover late in the game.

Play calling by down:

1st
P,R,P,P,R,R,R,P,P,P,R,R,P,P,R,R,P,R,P,R,R,R,P (48% pass, 52% run)
2nd R,R,R,P,P,R,R,P,R,P,P,P,P,R,P,P,R,P,P (58% pass, 42% run)
3rd P,P,P,P,P,P,P,R,R,P,P,P,P,P,R,R (75% pass, 25% run)
4th FG, Pu, Pu, FG, Pu, Pu, FG, P

Another evenly distributed game in the rushing and passing game.

GAME 4: Vikings @ Bills 12-17

Pathetic showing, gave up on the run.

Play calling by down:

1st
R,P,P,R,R,P,R,R,P,P,P,R,P,P,R,R,P,P,P,P,P,P (64% pass, 36% run)
2nd R,R,P,P,R,P,P,P,P,R,P,P,R,P,P,R,P,P,P (68% pass, 32% run)
3rd P.P,P,R,P,P,P, FG, P,P,P,P,P (92% pass, 8% run)
4th FG, Pu, Pu, Pu, Pu, Pu, Pu, P,P

The first game where passing statistics were considerably higher than the rushing statistics by down, even though the game was within reach.

GAME 5: Lions @ Vikings 26-17

Vikings came alive in the fourth quarter scoring 24 pts against the hapless Lions.

Play calling by down:

1st
P,R,P,R,R,R,P,R,R,P,R,P,R,P,R,P,R,P,P,P,R,P,R,R,R,P,R (44% passes, 54% runs)
2nd R,R,P,R,P,R,P,P,P,P,P,P,R,R,P,R,R,R,P,R,P,P,R,R (50% passes, 50% runs)
3rd P,P,P,R,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,R (86% pass, 14% run)
4th FG, Pu, Pu, Pu, Pu, FG,

Another evenly split game with rushin/passing in the first and second downs, the Viking squeaked out a win by coming alive in the fourth.

GAME 6: Vikings @ Seattle 31-13
The Vikings appeared to come alive this game with Chester Taylor having a career day.
All was well in Viking land.

Play calling by down:

1st
P,R,R,P,R,R,R,R,R,R,P,P,R,P,R,R,R,R,R,R,R (24% pass, 76% run)
2nd R,P,P,R,P,P,R,P,R,P,R,P,R,R,R (47% pass, 53% run)
3rd R,P,P,R,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,R (77% pass, 23% run)
4th FG, Pu, Pu, P, FG, Pu, Pu, Pu

In this game there was an inverse relationship between the first and third downs regarding rushing/passing.
The second downs were evenly split with the rushing and passing attack.

GAME 7: Patriots @ Vikings 7-31

Vikings were owned.

Play calling by down:

1st P,P,R,P,P,R,P,P,R,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,R,P,P,R,P,P,P,P (80% passes, 20% runs)
2nd P,R,R,R,R,P,P,P,R,P,P,P,P,P,R,P (63% pass, 37% run)
3rd P,P,R,P,P,P,R,P,P,P,P,P,P (84% pass, 16% run)
4th Pu, Pu, Pu, P, Pu, Pu, P

The play calling in this game was similar to the Bills game, however, the Vikings were getting destroyed in this game.
I still don’t understand why they didn’t pound the ball more in the Bills game.

GAME 8: Vikings @ 9ers 3-9

Vikings has a pathetic offensive showing, the defense kept them in the game, again.

Play calling by down:

1st P,R,R,R,R,P,R,R,P,P,R,R,P,P,P,R,R,P,R,R,R,R,P,P,P,P,P,R,P (48% passes, 52% run)
2nd R,R,P,R,R,R,R,R,P,P,P,R,P,R,R,R,R,R,R,R,R (24% passes, 76% run)
3rd R,R,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P (86% pass, 14% run)
4th FG, Pu, Pu, Pu, Pu, Pu, Pu, P

A nice split statistically, the offense was dead again for reasons we have discussed ad nauseum.

GAME 9: Packers @ Vikings 17-23

Vikings has a pathetic offensive showing, the defense kept them in the game, again.

Play calling by down:

1st R,R,R,P,R,P,P,R,R,R,R,R,R,R,R,P,R,R,P,P,P (33% passes, 67% run)
2nd P,P,R,R,R,P,R,R,P,R,P,R,P,R,P,P,P (53% passes, 47% run)
3rd P,P,P,P,P,P,P,R,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P (94% passes, 6% run)
4th Pu, R, Pu, Pu, Pu, Pu, Pu, Pu, FG

The distribution looks reasonable for the rushing/passing game.
Some key penalties and lackluster play resulted in another loss.

GAME 10: Vikings @ Dolphins 20-24

Vikings lose the game in the 4th qtr, J. Taylor takes over the game.

Play calling by down:

1st R,R,R,P,P,R,R,R,R,R,R,R,R,P,P,R,R,R,R,R,R,P,R,R,P,R,P,P,P,P,P,P,P,P (41% passes, 59% run)
2nd P,P.R,P,P,P,P,R,R,R,P,R,P,P,P,P,P,R,P,P,P,P,P,P,R (72% passes, 28% run)
3rd R,P,P,R,P,P,P,P,P,R,P,R,P,P,P (73% passes, 27% run)
4th Pu,Pu,R,R,Pu,FG,Pu,FG,Pu,R,P


Season Summary:

1st down: 45% pass, 55% run
2nd down: 51% pass, 49% run
3rd down: 83% pass, 17% run

Of the total plays run so far this season:

43% were 1st downs
33% were 2nd downs
24% were 3rd downs

So, in 76% of the plays this season (1st & 2nd downs) 48% were passes and 52% were runs.
If that is predictable, you do not have a good grasp on the simplest level of statistics.

The Vikings have been in every game this year with the exception of the Patriots game.
The folks that think it is Childress and play calling are pulling it out of their ass, if not, explain to me how this is true.
I'm listening.

Del Rio
11-21-2006, 08:38 AM
Very well done, but what are the odds any of those people actually read that. If they do what are the odds of them accepting that?

I would say on a good day your odds of that happening are about 1-5%

cogitans
11-21-2006, 08:42 AM
I'm not unhappy with the playcalling. I haven't been since the NE game (and the Buffalo game).

What we need is execution, and no more turnovers and penalties.

Prophet
11-21-2006, 08:45 AM
"Del" wrote:


Very well done, but what are the odds any of those people actually read that. If they do what are the odds of them accepting that?

I would say on a good day your odds of that happening are about 1-5%




Agree.
There will still be the intellectual 'bring back Tice', 'Childress is a wash', 'Start Tarvaris', and 'the play calling is predictable' threads permeating the site even though they have all been logically debunked.
Thank God the coaches ignore the fans when it comes to coaching.

I agree cogitans.
If execution, turnovers, and penalties were under control the Vikings would be sitting a lot better.
The team is not as bad as some would like to believe.
In fact, it is closer to being a real team than it was during any of the Meathead years.

OchoCinco
11-21-2006, 08:46 AM
Great post....but it only proves one thing to me....you guys really get off on telling people they are wrong. ;D

cogitans
11-21-2006, 08:49 AM
"Acumen" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


Very well done, but what are the odds any of those people actually read that. If they do what are the odds of them accepting that?

I would say on a good day your odds of that happening are about 1-5%




Agree.
There will still be the intellectual 'bring back Tice', 'Childress is a wash', 'Start Tarvaris', and 'the play calling is predictable' threads permeating the site even though they have all been logically debunked.
Thank God the coaches ignore the fans when it comes to coaching.

I agree cogitans.
If execution, turnovers, and penalties were under control the Vikings would be sitting a lot better.
The team is not as bad as some would like to believe.
In fact, it is closer to being a real team than it was during any of the Meathead years.


I agree. I've got the feeling too that we are just a little bit away of getting it all to click.

The last to games has really hit me hard in the stomach. I seriously can't believe that we have lost 4 in a row now.

I never know what to post in here, I feel like 'we should have won, I have no idea what went wrong again'

Prophet
11-21-2006, 08:51 AM
"gdavikes84" wrote:


Great post....but it only proves one thing to me....you guys really get off on telling people they are wrong. ;D


It's not so much that, it just gets old when people make stuff up and try to pass it off as fact.
We all do it sometimes, just expect to get called on it occasionally.
That is the fun of this fanatical commitment.

mnvikes61
11-21-2006, 08:55 AM
I would say that show that we run/pass the ball very evenly. I still say it is predictable since we run on 1st and 2nd down and then pass short on 3rd down a majority of the time. I am not sure but we have to be close to dead last in 3rd down conversions.

Freya
11-21-2006, 09:01 AM
Excellent post, Acumen. Very interesting.

Zeus
11-21-2006, 09:03 AM
"Acumen" wrote:


*snip*


I didn't bother to read that, but I'm sure it just shows once again how predictable the Vikings offense has been.
And I'm POSITIVE that it shows how much better off the Vikings would be with Tarvaris Jackson at the helm.

Right?

=Z=

COJOMAY
11-21-2006, 09:03 AM
Great post Acuman! You did a lot of work to come up with some good statistics. I have to agree that the run/pass ratio is where it should be and that it's mistakes like turnovers and penalties that are killing us this year -- not necessarily play calling. And speaking of being "vanilla" when did Tice ever have the kicker pass the ball for a TD.
But what drives me nuts is that on 3rd and long it seems we always throw that "flat" pass for about 3-4 yards less than what we need for the first down and try and run it for the balance of the yardage. Maybe it's because brad doesn't have enough time to throw downfield futher because of our "less than steller" offensive line blocking. But it seems to me that by the time you reach the pro football level you should know where the sticks are and be past them for the reception.

Zeus
11-21-2006, 09:04 AM
"Acumen" wrote:


"gdavikes84" wrote:


Great post....but it only proves one thing to me....you guys really get off on telling people they are wrong. ;D


It's not so much that, it just gets old when people make stuff up and try to pass it off as fact.
We all do it sometimes, just expect to get called on it occasionally.
That is the fun of this fanatical commitment.


Everything I write is pure genius - even if it is made up.

=Z=

Prophet
11-21-2006, 09:04 AM
"AWZeus" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


*snip*


I didn't bother to read that, but I'm sure it just shows once again how predictable the Vikings offense has been.
And I'm POSITIVE that it shows how much better off the Vikings would be with Tarvaris Jackson at the helm.

Right?

=Z=


;D, don't worry, I sent you the Tarvaris jock strap via fed ex last night.
You will have a pleasant weekend.

OchoCinco
11-21-2006, 09:05 AM
"AWZeus" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


*snip*


I didn't bother to read that, but I'm sure it just shows once again how predictable the Vikings offense has been.
And I'm POSITIVE that it shows how much better off the Vikings would be with Tarvaris Jackson at the helm.

Right?

=Z=



Excactly........ you hit on the nail on the head and summed up the article.... ;)

josdin00
11-21-2006, 09:24 AM
"COJOMAY" wrote:


Great post Acuman! You did a lot of work to come up with some good statistics. I have to agree that the run/pass ratio is where it should be and that it's mistakes like turnovers and penalties that are killing us this year -- not necessarily play calling. And speaking of being "vanilla" when did Tice ever have the kicker pass the ball for a TD.
But what drives me nuts is that on 3rd and long it seems we always throw that "flat" pass for about 3-4 yards less than what we need for the first down and try and run it for the balance of the yardage. Maybe it's because brad doesn't have enough time to throw downfield futher because of our "less than steller" offensive line blocking. But it seems to me that by the time you reach the pro football level you should know where the sticks are and be past them for the reception.


I know what you mean. We didn't get the Dolphins game this weekend in Chicago, but they did switch to it after the bears finished beating New York. I got to see the Vikings last drive, when they needed two scores, but decided to manage the clock like they were ahead (but that's a topic for another thread). On one of the plays near the end, the Vikes had the ball on the 11, with about 30-40 seconds to go. They needed two scores. I believe it was shotgun formation. Brad took the snap, dropped back a couple more yards, so he has to be at about the 18 yardline, and fires a pass straight sideways to the running back. Maybe this play has been discussed in other threads, but I know I was screaming at the TV when I saw that. You have 30 seconds to play. Don't make your running back run 18 yards, and try to evade at least 7 members of the opposing D to get the touchdown when your starting from the 11. It looked to me, and I could be wrong, that this was the designed play call, and that this wasn't just a dump-off. I didn't see Brad look down-field.

I don't think the play calling is predictable. I think that at least once a game, in a key situation, Childress makes a bone-headed call. That should change with experience*, but right now it's driving me nuts.







*I'm of the opinion that any new coach gets three years to make his case. You need that time to get used to the job, to learn what works and what doesn't, and to have all that information ingrained in your mind so that it's instinctive, and you don't start over-thinking decisions. Ater three years, you judge where he started, where he is, and where it looks like he's going. If you don't like that picture, you call in Ned's boot.

Del Rio
11-21-2006, 09:29 AM
"mnvikes61" wrote:


I would say that show that we run/pass the ball very evenly. I still say it is predictable since we run on 1st and 2nd down and then pass short on 3rd down a majority of the time. I am not sure but we have to be close to dead last in 3rd down conversions.


We pass on first down more then any other down. Which is pretty crazy.

NodakPaul
11-21-2006, 09:33 AM
Interesting stats Acumen.
I agree, we are very balanced in the run vs pass.


One thing that I also took away from this is that the vast majority of third down plays are pass plays.
I believe that this is because we are constantly finding ourselves in a third and long situation.


I have also noticed that even though we split the run an pass up rather well, the variety of our run and pass plays is lacking IMO.
I can't tell you how many times I have seen the play action - bootleg right - short pass type of play.
I think this type of repetitive plays may contribute to people's opinion that the play calling is predictable.

All in all, I like Coach Childress and his coaching staff.
I definitely think there is room for improvement, but I would expect that out of any coaching staff.
It is, without a doubt, a much better team than we ever had with Tice.

Prophet
11-21-2006, 09:50 AM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


Interesting stats Acumen.
I agree, we are very balanced in the run vs pass.


One thing that I also took away from this is that the vast majority of third down plays are pass plays.
I believe that this is because we are constantly finding ourselves in a third and long situation.


I have also noticed that even though we split the run an pass up rather well, the variety of our run and pass plays is lacking IMO.
I can't tell you how many times I have seen the play action - bootleg right - short pass type of play.
I think this type of repetitive plays may contribute to people's opinion that the play calling is predictable.

All in all, I like Coach Childress and his coaching staff.
I definitely think there is room for improvement, but I would expect that out of any coaching staff.
It is, without a doubt, a much better team than we ever had with Tice.


It would be fun to do a more indepth analysis of the passing/run plays and where the specific plays fell and in what situations....why don't you do that!
If you look at the percentage of first/second downs compared to 3rd downs for the overall # of plays during the year it implies that the Vikings racked up plenty of first downs on the 1st and 2nd downs and weren't put into as many relateive 3rd down situations...although I didn't look at that.

There are plenty of times where the Vikings were moving down the field and they were called back at key times for an illegal motion penalty or some other boneheaded penalty.
They will start to shore up those faults, we hope.

Josdin, I was also yelling at the TV regarding the clock mngt in the last drive against the Dolphins.
When there is minimal deep threats and there is no Cris Carter making those famous catches with his toes in bounds 1" beyond the 1st down marker times are tougher.


I'm as frustrated with the Vikings as most of us are, I just try to look at the crux of the problem to the best of my ability, which isn't that great.
I've been enjoying the last four games from the perspective of trying to break them apart and see what went wrong.
It's sad when you try to break down game film and it's just for the hell of it and nobody cares.
I just wish there were a few journalists that attempted to put more into their articles rather than just spouting off whatever the favorite flavor of the day is.

Del Rio
11-21-2006, 10:00 AM
"Acumen" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


Interesting stats Acumen.
I agree, we are very balanced in the run vs pass.


One thing that I also took away from this is that the vast majority of third down plays are pass plays.
I believe that this is because we are constantly finding ourselves in a third and long situation.


I have also noticed that even though we split the run an pass up rather well, the variety of our run and pass plays is lacking IMO.
I can't tell you how many times I have seen the play action - bootleg right - short pass type of play.
I think this type of repetitive plays may contribute to people's opinion that the play calling is predictable.

All in all, I like Coach Childress and his coaching staff.
I definitely think there is room for improvement, but I would expect that out of any coaching staff.
It is, without a doubt, a much better team than we ever had with Tice.


It would be fun to do a more indepth analysis of the passing/run plays and where the specific plays fell and in what situations....why don't you do that!
If you look at the percentage of first/second downs compared to 3rd downs for the overall # of plays during the year it implies that the Vikings racked up plenty of first downs on the 1st and 2nd downs and weren't put into as many relateive 3rd down situations...although I didn't look at that.

There are plenty of times where the Vikings were moving down the field and they were called back at key times for an illegal motion penalty or some other boneheaded penalty.
They will start to shore up those faults, we hope.

Josdin, I was also yelling at the TV regarding the clock mngt in the last drive against the Dolphins.
When there is minimal deep threats and there is no Cris Carter making those famous catches with his toes in bounds 1" beyond the 1st down marker times are tougher.


I'm as frustrated with the Vikings as most of us are, I just try to look at the crux of the problem to the best of my ability, which isn't that great.
I've been enjoying the last four games from the perspective of trying to break them apart and see what went wrong.
It's sad when you try to break down game film and it's just for the hell of it and nobody cares.
I just wish there were a few journalists that attempted to put more into their articles rather than just spouting off whatever the favorite flavor of the day is.


It is much easier to dump in your hand and fling it at the screen then it is to think.

cyviking
11-21-2006, 10:03 AM
the only play calling issue i have is calling a fade/timing rout on 4th down with the game on the line.

I dont think we have completed a one of those all year. Other than that play calling is fine its execution and player ability/mistakes holing us back.

CCthebest
11-21-2006, 10:41 AM
You can list all the stats you want, but in clutch times, the play calling isnt working. On third downs they dump the ball more then any team ive ever seen. What is our 3rd down ratio in the NFL? Id bet we are close to last in 3rd down conversions.

Red Zone. Again I bet we are almost dead last in red zone points. The plays called for this suck. We aernt getting it done so a change needs to take place. Have to mix it up. Maybe throwing the ball once to Marcus Rob might help. or 3 times in a to Wiggins. Anything to mix it up.

I still cant believe, expesially last game, that we pass as much as we run on first downs. Where do you guy guys find the numbers for this? Childress seems to be perfectly content to put up 3 points instead of 7. He has to see that the plays he is calling are NOT getting us 7 points. Make excuses for it all you want, turnovers, penalties, etc, but the play calling isnt getting it done and needs to be adjusted. It may look good on paper but its not putting points on the board. I bet everyone watching the game sunday when Winfield picked that pass off, and brought it to the 3 yard line, knew the offense wouldnt get the ball into the endzone. Thats in part due to the bad play calling in the red zone.

Del Rio
11-21-2006, 10:57 AM
"CCthebest" wrote:


You can list all the stats you want, but in clutch times, the play calling isnt working. On third downs they dump the ball more then any team ive ever seen. What is our 3rd down ratio in the NFL? Id bet we are close to last in 3rd down conversions.

Red Zone. Again I bet we are almost dead last in red zone points. The plays called for this suck. We aernt getting it done so a change needs to take place. Have to mix it up. Maybe throwing the ball once to Marcus Rob might help. or 3 times in a to Wiggins. Anything to mix it up.

I still cant believe, expesially last game, that we pass as much as we run on first downs. Where do you guy guys find the numbers for this? Childress seems to be perfectly content to put up 3 points instead of 7. He has to see that the plays he is calling are NOT getting us 7 points. Make excuses for it all you want, turnovers, penalties, etc, but the play calling isnt getting it done and needs to be adjusted. It may look good on paper but its not putting points on the board. I bet everyone watching the game sunday when Winfield picked that pass off, and brought it to the 3 yard line, knew the offense wouldnt get the ball into the endzone. Thats in part due to the bad play calling in the red zone.


NFL.com is where you can find the stats that show we throw more on first down then any other down. Go to Brad Johnson and click situational stats and you can see everything you want.

Sorry but being on the goal line with one yard to go, trying to run the ball is not a bad call. It is on the players to get 1 yard. It is on Chestor and it is on the line. Same goes for third and longs, third and shorts, it is on the players to get the job done.

I think it's safe to say the only person here making excuses is you. Turnovers penalties and mistakes are what lose games. All professionals know that preach that, most fans abide by that, and it is prooven every single week at every single level of the sport.

The truth of the matter is you have an agenda.

tastywaves
11-21-2006, 11:00 AM
I think the biggest problem this offense has is the lack of playmakers.
The playcalling may be as mundane as it is because of the options Childress has (largely by his choice) to work with on offense.
It may be balanced between run and pass, but everything is played in a very short box (how many of Brad's passes go for over 5yds forward in the air?)

Chester is a solid RB that is holding up well, but doesn't really make big plays (with the exception of the 94 yarder).
Travis Taylor is at the moment our #1 receiver and he is primarily a possession receiver, Marcus Robinson has his days, but seems to get hurt right at the time that he becomes a decent threat.
The best options we have as playmakers on this team right now in my opinion are Troy Williamson and Bethel Johnson.
They can stretch the field, they have the speed to turn a catch into a TD.
Troy unfortunately can't get over his case of the drops, but I don't see how you can leave him out of the game plan when he is one of the few chances you've got at making a big play.
If BJ could heave it over 30yds it would make him and Bethel more effective, but enough said on BJ.
The rest of this offense starts to work if you can get a few successful deep balls in a game.

If you want to talk statistics, I think the thing that is hurting this team the most is all of the designed short yardage plays which require consistent execution to keep the chains moving.
Even if they are higher percentage plays if it takes 3 successively executed plays in a row to make a first down and you need to do it 7 times in a single drive, what are the odds that you'll have success?
You need a few larger yardage plays to consistently march a team to the endzone.

This is the Vikings biggest weakness in my opinion.

Prophet
11-21-2006, 11:03 AM
"CCthebest" wrote:


You can list all the stats you want, but in clutch times, the play calling isnt working. On third downs they dump the ball more then any team ive ever seen. What is our 3rd down ratio in the NFL? Id bet we are close to last in 3rd down conversions.

Red Zone. Again I bet we are almost dead last in red zone points. The plays called for this suck. We aernt getting it done so a change needs to take place. Have to mix it up. Maybe throwing the ball once to Marcus Rob might help. or 3 times in a to Wiggins. Anything to mix it up.

I still cant believe, expesially last game, that we pass as much as we run on first downs. Where do you guy guys find the numbers for this? Childress seems to be perfectly content to put up 3 points instead of 7. He has to see that the plays he is calling are NOT getting us 7 points. Make excuses for it all you want, turnovers, penalties, etc, but the play calling isnt getting it done and needs to be adjusted. It may look good on paper but its not putting points on the board. I bet everyone watching the game sunday when Winfield picked that pass off, and brought it to the 3 yard line, knew the offense wouldnt get the ball into the endzone. Thats in part due to the bad play calling in the red zone.


The difference between what I'm saying and what you're saying is that I'm backing it up.
As stated in the article, if you would have read it, all the statistics are from nfl.com.
There is very little opinion in my first posts, just stating some statistics, guess what, they are not made up.

It comes down to execution, boneheaded penalties at inopportune times and playmakers not making the plays.
It is not playcalling most of the time.
It is one part of the puzzle, but not the whole puzzle, not even a major part of the problem.

if you're talking about the Dolphins game the game was lost in the fourth.
The Dolphins D came to play and they did just that.
J. Taylor damn near won the game singlehandedly.

If you want to make a point than make it with something other than how you 'think' or 'feel' things are happening.
There is plenty of room for more detail in the analysis.
If you just want to throw out garbage without support I won't buy into it.

It's not a matter of believing the statistics or not.
They are just numbers from games that have been played and are there for anyone to look at.
If you think the play calling is predictable you haven't offered any proof to convince me.
My mind is easily changed with subtantive proof, it is not easily changed with speculation and opinion.

Prophet
11-21-2006, 11:11 AM
"Del" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


You can list all the stats you want, but in clutch times, the play calling isnt working. On third downs they dump the ball more then any team ive ever seen. What is our 3rd down ratio in the NFL? Id bet we are close to last in 3rd down conversions.

Red Zone. Again I bet we are almost dead last in red zone points. The plays called for this suck. We aernt getting it done so a change needs to take place. Have to mix it up. Maybe throwing the ball once to Marcus Rob might help. or 3 times in a to Wiggins. Anything to mix it up.

I still cant believe, expesially last game, that we pass as much as we run on first downs. Where do you guy guys find the numbers for this? Childress seems to be perfectly content to put up 3 points instead of 7. He has to see that the plays he is calling are NOT getting us 7 points. Make excuses for it all you want, turnovers, penalties, etc, but the play calling isnt getting it done and needs to be adjusted. It may look good on paper but its not putting points on the board. I bet everyone watching the game sunday when Winfield picked that pass off, and brought it to the 3 yard line, knew the offense wouldnt get the ball into the endzone. Thats in part due to the bad play calling in the red zone.


NFL.com is where you can find the stats that show we throw more on first down then any other down. Go to Brad Johnson and click situational stats and you can see everything you want.

Sorry but being on the goal line with one yard to go, trying to run the ball is not a bad call. It is on the players to get 1 yard. It is on Chestor and it is on the line. Same goes for third and longs, third and shorts, it is on the players to get the job done.

I think it's safe to say the only person here making excuses is you. Turnovers penalties and mistakes are what lose games. All professionals know that preach that, most fans abide by that, and it is prooven every single week at every single level of the sport.

The truth of the matter is you have an agenda.



Like I said before, there is no way you can logically be pro- or anti-Childress at this juncture of his HCing career.
I prefer to be pro- because he is our coach and there is a precedence of many coaches in the league that have done well in the long-term when their first year is questionable.
I don't even put Childress into the questionable layer yet, he is doing fine.

Here's a quote from CCthebest from April 30, 2006.
He has had an anti-Childress angle from the beginning.
His posts since than have been poisoned by his initial madeup impression of the new coach.
He has an agenda and it is not based in reality.
There is no doubt in that.



I admit im not pro Childres. And im certainly not pro Brad Johnson. And I dont like the big changes that have been taking place. BUT even a non Vikings fan would think our draft was lackluster. Especially with a supposed "brain" for head coach. Has no vision whatsoever.

snowinapril
11-21-2006, 11:21 AM
"Acumen" wrote:


Seriously, this is a first year coach and coaching staff and schemes.
The people that are panicking and calling out the coach need a reality check.
There are plenty of threads around looking at some of the historical first years of HCs and their subsequent records.
At this point it is too early to call for Childress' head and it is too early to call him a hero.


If you are going to make claims as to what they should do at least back up your claims instead of pulling stuff out of your jiggly butt.
Is predictable play calling one of the huge problems?
I say no.
Why?
Well, here's a simplistic summary just looking at the passing/rushing by downs.
Obviously, this does not include the specific plays, the boneheaded penalties, the execution of the plays, etc.
But, as far as I can tell there is no indication that the play calling is simplistic and predictable.

"Loads of Stats - gone!"

So, in 76% of the plays this season (1st & 2nd downs) 48% were passes and 52% were runs.
If that is predictable, you do not have a good grasp on the simplest level of statistics.

The Vikings have been in every game this year with the exception of the Patriots game.
The folks that think it is Childress and play calling are pulling it out of their jiggly butt, if not, explain to me how this is true.
I'm listening.


What I heard you say was this; it isn't the coach, it is the players.

This is what I see.
We have a bunch of fans with a Corona (or 2) in their hands wanting to call our lemon a lime to make their beer taste better.
Nobody wants a lemon in their Corona.
We are average at best, like a Corona, now if you had a Hefewiezen you could put that lemon to use.


It is what it is; we are just not that good of a team, as a whole.
That includes players and coaches.
Right now I do have to agree, that it is more the players than the coaches. IMHO, I am going to give Chilly the thumbs up on knowing that he has a QB with very limited ability in his arm and WRs that aren't worth a pooh.
He is coaching with what he has, not what he is wishing he had.
I think that Chilly may have thought that he had a Hefewiezen when he really had Corona.
Maybe Chilly just decided to screw the beer, and just make lemonade.
As the saying goes, when life gives you lemons (TWill, BJ, TT, Marcus Johnson, Hicks, and penalties) you make lemonade.

Good news, players and coaches can improve, just might be too much to ask at this stage of the season at 4-6.
We could always win out.
::)

CCthebest
11-21-2006, 11:21 AM
Del, what agenda do you think I have? That I despise Childress? I hated Tice too when cheap as Red made him our HC. 3 years of Tice sucked. There should have been a standard IQ test to be a HC. I think after 3 years oh Childress we will be in the same situation as we were with tice. Do I have stats to prove this? No. But no one has stats to be optomistic either. Only time will tell.

Other teams have penalties and turnovers too. They manage to overcome them. If the play calling looks good on paper but they aernt putting up points, they change the plays. They may even throw a ball a few times more then 2 yards in the air.

OchoCinco
11-21-2006, 11:25 AM
"snowinapril" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


Seriously, this is a first year coach and coaching staff and schemes.
The people that are panicking and calling out the coach need a reality check.
There are plenty of threads around looking at some of the historical first years of HCs and their subsequent records.
At this point it is too early to call for Childress' head and it is too early to call him a hero.


If you are going to make claims as to what they should do at least back up your claims instead of pulling stuff out of your jiggly butt.
Is predictable play calling one of the huge problems?
I say no.
Why?
Well, here's a simplistic summary just looking at the passing/rushing by downs.
Obviously, this does not include the specific plays, the boneheaded penalties, the execution of the plays, etc.
But, as far as I can tell there is no indication that the play calling is simplistic and predictable.

"Loads of Stats - gone!"

So, in 76% of the plays this season (1st & 2nd downs) 48% were passes and 52% were runs.
If that is predictable, you do not have a good grasp on the simplest level of statistics.

The Vikings have been in every game this year with the exception of the Patriots game.
The folks that think it is Childress and play calling are pulling it out of their jiggly butt, if not, explain to me how this is true.
I'm listening.


What I heard you say was this; it isn't the coach, it is the players.

This is what I see.
We have a bunch of fans with a Corona (or 2) in their hands wanting to call our lemon a lime to make their beer taste better.
Nobody wants a lemon in their Corona.
We are average at best, like a Corona, now if you had a Hefewiezen you could put that lemon to use.


It is what it is; we are just not that good of a team, as a whole.
That includes players and coaches.
Right now I do have to agree, that it is more the players than the coaches. IMHO, I am going to give Chilly the thumbs up on knowing that he has a QB with very limited ability in his arm and WRs that aren't worth a pooh.
He is coaching with what he has, not what he is wishing he had.
I think that Chilly may have thought that he had a Hefewiezen when he really had Corona.
Maybe Chilly just decided to screw the beer, and just make lemonade.
As the saying goes, when life gives you lemons (TWill, BJ, TT, Marcus Johnson, Hicks, and penalties) you make lemonade.

Good news, players and coaches can improve, just might be too much to ask at this stage of the season at 4-6.
We could always win out.

::)



MMMMMMMM..CORONA......anyhoo.......nice post hits the nail on the head.....I totally agree......Corana is better with Lime.
Just kidding....I still agree.. :)

snowinapril
11-21-2006, 11:28 AM
Also, I think the play calling summed up into the run vs pass is pretty generic.
Also, with all the dumps to the RB out of the backfield, we don't know much about the intent of the pass play called.
It is a mystery!

12 yd and under passes get pretty predicatable.

Chilly has eluded to the fact that they haven't implemented his offense yet.
That was about 3 weeks ago.
Why?
Well, it is the personel.
IMO, it is apparent the player weren't picking it up.

Del Rio
11-21-2006, 11:30 AM
Yes that would be the agenda.

It's called Bias. You had a pre concieved notion of how Childress would do even before game one was played. We started running the ball, we started winning and you stopped talking.

Then you came back and want Childress to shoulder the blame. You take every opportunity you get to slander Childress in multiple threads. Some of which do not even pertain to Childress.

At some point you will just have to assume everyone knows where you stand on the subject and actually take part in a conversation.

Prophet
11-21-2006, 11:31 AM
"snowinapril" wrote:


Also, I think the play calling summed up into the run vs pass is pretty generic.
Also, with all the dumps to the RB out of the backfield, we don't know much about the intent of the pass play called.
It is a mystery!

12 yd and under passes get pretty predicatable.

Chilly has eluded to the fact that they haven't implemented his offense yet.
That was about 3 weeks ago.
Why?
Well, it is the personel.
IMO, it is apparent the player weren't picking it up.


There is no doubt that it's generic.
I said that in the beginning of the first post:


...Well, here's a simplistic summary just looking at the passing/rushing by downs.
Obviously, this does not include the specific plays, the boneheaded penalties, the execution of the plays, etc...

The lack of a deep threat is one of the problems, makes it easier for the opposing defense, no doubt.

I think I'll have a glass of spiked lemonade.

Prophet
11-21-2006, 11:34 AM
"Del" wrote:


Yes that would be the agenda.

It's called Bias. You had a pre concieved notion of how Childress would do even before game one was played. We started running the ball, we started winning and you stopped talking.

Then you came back and want Childress to shoulder the blame. You take every opportunity you get to slander Childress in multiple threads. Some of which do not even pertain to Childress.

At some point you will just have to assume everyone knows where you stand on the subject and actually take part in a conversation.


That is it in a nutshell.
At the end of Post #24 in this thread it shows his comments on April 30.
I think you may have some content to offer, but the 'I hate Childress and his offspring' slant with no content gets old fast and your credibility is lost if that's the only thing that is said repeatedly in every thread.

snowinapril
11-21-2006, 11:36 AM
"Acumen" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


Also, I think the play calling summed up into the run vs pass is pretty generic.
Also, with all the dumps to the RB out of the backfield, we don't know much about the intent of the pass play called.
It is a mystery!

12 yd and under passes get pretty predicatable.

Chilly has eluded to the fact that they haven't implemented his offense yet.
That was about 3 weeks ago.
Why?
Well, it is the personel.
IMO, it is apparent the player weren't picking it up.


There is no doubt that it's generic.
I said that in the beginning of the first post:


...Well, here's a simplistic summary just looking at the passing/rushing by downs.
Obviously, this does not include the specific plays, the boneheaded penalties, the execution of the plays, etc...

The lack of a deep threat is one of the problems, makes it easier for the opposing defense, no doubt.

I think I'll have a glass of spiked lemonade.


I know that you knew that I knew that you knew that I know that you know that I know that you knew what we were both talking about.

Bring on the Vodka!

olson_10
11-21-2006, 11:48 AM
no matter how you look at it, its obvious that he didnt have much of a role in philadelphia other than grooming mcnabb..that better be what hes doing with jackson

CCthebest
11-21-2006, 11:57 AM
Ok heres an undisputed fact about Childress. He sticks with his game plan. Since day 1 he hasnt changed anything with the offense. They cant score TD's, they cant make 3rd downs. But nothing changes. Marcus Johnson sucks. He has the whole year. Its Childress's plan to keep himin there no matter what. He thinks he will one day be able to play tackle. Sometimes you have to change things up, shake the pot a little. If you cant throw long balls cause no one can throw them, or catch them, get people in that can. At least attempt to.

Del Rio
11-21-2006, 12:00 PM
"CCthebest" wrote:


Ok heres an undisputed fact about Childress. He sticks with his game plan. Since day 1 he hasnt changed anything with the offense. They cant score TD's, they cant make 3rd downs. But nothing changes. Marcus Johnson sucks. He has the whole year. Its Childress's plan to keep himin there no matter what. He thinks he will one day be able to play tackle. Sometimes you have to change things up, shake the pot a little. If you cant throw long balls cause no one can throw them, or catch them, get people in that can. At least attempt to.


Out of curiosity CCTHEBEST, do you have access to watch every Vikings game?

bleedpurple
11-21-2006, 12:19 PM
I have watched every vikings game and consider myself a HUGE Vikings fan.


And personally, I'm saying I don't like Childress, but it's one thing to stay the course, but it's another to be blinded by our production and say we don't need to change anything.
I think a lot of fans would be happier to say the least if we mixed it up a little or changed something to get a spark on offense.

Vikings offense, well, those stats in the first page were good, but when people say predictable, we don't necessarily mean run to pass ratio, we mean, run for 2 yds, run for -1 yd.
pass on third down. or run, pass incomplete, then pass for 9 yd's when we need 10.
punt.

We are sooo boring to watch on offense.
We have some burners on offense, why don't we atleast throw it long once in every few series...

Or when we run c-taylor all day long.. .he's obviously wearing down. Put Mewelde in there every few series to mix it up, he makes good plays and breaks more tackles than taylor.
Plus, he gives us some of that explosion
that we're lacking on offense.
Additionally, he can catch and he has some speed... i.e. punt returns... so give him a shot.

Now, I'm not neglecting the fact we need to catch passes and stop some of those penalties, but, even if we did correct those things, the ridiculous playcalling in the redzone and coupled with
all of the above, warrants a change....

It's not necessarily about staying the course, i don't think we need drastic changes, just some creativity on offense and maybe a few personnel package changes to give us some spark... that's all..

I think people are tired of, even when we were winning of the lack of offensive production and the reluctance of BC each week to do anything noticeable about it...

CCthebest
11-21-2006, 12:22 PM
Yes ive watched every game. When I go out to watch the game, I buy my friends a round every time we score a TD. Been easy on my wallet this year. Whats your point?

And when Winfield returned the int to the 3rd down line, why didnt we try a fade to marcus rob? Is it because thats a Tice play and not an original childress?

Del Rio
11-21-2006, 12:31 PM
"CCthebest" wrote:


Yes ive watched every game. When I go out to watch the game, I buy my friends a round every time we score a TD. Been easy on my wallet this year. Whats your point?

And when Winfield returned the int to the 3rd down line, why didnt we try a fade to marcus rob? Is it because thats a Tice play and not an original childress?


My point is you keep saying things like we dont even attempt to go deep and every game this year we have taken multiple shots deep down the field. Yet every week you make the same argument.

So I was wondering if you were drunk, not watching the game, didn't have access to the game or what.

And this is the problem. You will say something like at least take the shots down the field. Someone can go to NFL.com, pull up the stats that proove we have gone downfield sometimes even successfuly every single game. If not a completion at least a shot. Maybe even on 3rd and short which is when you would expect it to work, which is not predictable. So they could give you hard facts, they could post video and next week you'd be saying the same pooh even though it isn't true.

I'm sorry but if you can't run the ball in from 1 yard out that's on your team not on you.

bleedpurple
11-21-2006, 12:48 PM
My point is you keep saying things like we dont even attempt to go deep and every game this year we have taken multiple shots deep down the field. Yet every week you make the same argument.

So I was wondering if you were drunk, not watching the game, didn't have access to the game or what.

And this is the problem. You will say something like at least take the shots down the field. Someone can go to NFL.com, pull up the stats that proove we have gone downfield sometimes even successfuly every single game. If not a completion at least a shot. Maybe even on 3rd and short which is when you would expect it to work, which is not predictable. So they could give you hard facts, they could post video and next week you'd be saying the same pooh even though it isn't true.

I'm sorry but if you can't run the ball in from 1 yard out that's on your team not on you.



So are you saying your just fine with the way we're playing with the exception of the penalties and turnovers?

In my opinion either way you break it down, our redzone offense is suspect. and you can see the stats to prove it.


2. Defenses are not afraid of our offense... and given our lack of production they shouldn't be.
I mean c'mon, we have 11 td's in 10 games... something is wrong.

3. And we may throw it down field atleast once every game, although, i don't remember us throwing it down field everygame.. maybe i was sleeping or flipping games, but beside the point, even if we do, we don't throw long enough routes.. on a consistent basis... Not necessarily deep patterns, but some 10 - 15 yard patterns.

How about moving the pocket.. and getitng a throw.. or some more play action when the team expects us to run.
esp., since there are 8-9 in the box..

some set-up patterns... the crossing routes seemed to work when we did them... and when we get in the red-zone let's take a shot or two in the endzone...

I feel this is the perfect time to open it up a little since everybody is sitting on the underneath stuff... pumpfake and go long, or run some double moves, or something... everybody knows we're gonna run more often than not, that's why the playaction would be so much more effective... plus, let's see if more can be more explosive behind that offensive line...

Iknow he's had some negative plays, but he gets next to NO carries... but on third down he's been pretty good..

Del Rio
11-21-2006, 12:57 PM
"bleedpurple" wrote:




My point is you keep saying things like we dont even attempt to go deep and every game this year we have taken multiple shots deep down the field. Yet every week you make the same argument.

So I was wondering if you were drunk, not watching the game, didn't have access to the game or what.

And this is the problem. You will say something like at least take the shots down the field. Someone can go to NFL.com, pull up the stats that proove we have gone downfield sometimes even successfuly every single game. If not a completion at least a shot. Maybe even on 3rd and short which is when you would expect it to work, which is not predictable. So they could give you hard facts, they could post video and next week you'd be saying the same pooh even though it isn't true.

I'm sorry but if you can't run the ball in from 1 yard out that's on your team not on you.



So are you saying your just fine with the way we're playing with the exception of the penalties and turnovers?

In my opinion either way you break it down, our redzone offense is suspect. and you can see the stats to prove it.


2. Defenses are not afraid of our offense... and given our lack of production they shouldn't be.
I mean c'mon, we have 11 td's in 10 games... something is wrong.

3. And we may throw it down field atleast once every game, although, i don't remember us throwing it down field everygame.. maybe i was sleeping or flipping games, but beside the point, even if we do, we don't throw long enough routes.. on a consistent basis... Not necessarily deep patterns, but some 10 - 15 yard patterns.

How about moving the pocket.. and getitng a throw.. or some more play action when the team expects us to run.
esp., since there are 8-9 in the box..

some set-up patterns... the crossing routes seemed to work when we did them... and when we get in the red-zone let's take a shot or two in the endzone...

I feel this is the perfect time to open it up a little since everybody is sitting on the underneath stuff... pumpfake and go long, or run some double moves, or something... everybody knows we're gonna run more often than not, that's why the playaction would be so much more effective... plus, let's see if more can be more explosive behind that offensive line...

Iknow he's had some negative plays, but he gets next to NO carries... but on third down he's been pretty good..


Yeah I really am, because the fact of the matter is we have been in every single game that we have played and the margin of loss is so small in most of our games that one big mistake can attribute to it.

That in itself would be enough for me, but the truth of the matter is it is not one mistake it has been 3,4,5,6 mistakes. Huge penalties changing 3rd and 2's into 3rd and 12's huge turnovers.....Brad Johnson taking a sack 10 yards behind the LOS.

There are no plays that will make it easy. The principles are the same, what magical play calling is going to eliminate all these bone headed mistakes.

I am like you I think it is a little bit of everything if I wanted to bag on Childress there is plenty I could choose from.

1) Mismanaging the game
2) Abandoning the run (Pats Bills)

But if you come here every day and blame everything we do on Childress and you have done so since you started posting then you are nothing more then a troll plain and simple. And when i say you I do not mean you specifically.

CCthebest
11-21-2006, 01:17 PM
When teams are doing bad, the head coach is the first place people look. Thats why coaches get fired so often. Maybe they are the scapegoat, maybe not.

In the case of Childress, I didnt think he was qualified. I didnt like where he came from, nor did i think he did much in Philly. I hope im wrong, and he takes the Vikings to new heights, or at least a playoff. If that happens I will call my friends in Philly and thanks them for our HC, like i did when we picked up Cris Carter.

I still think, just because the plays being called look good on paper, if they aernt scoring us TDs, change is needed. Either in the plays called or the personal. Nope, I dont have the stats to prove it. Iy just seems logical to me. If for nothing else, to stir things up.
Take or move Marcus Johnson and maybe Hicks from the line. Give Brooks a chance this week. Something like that.

And I really believe if a team is having the problems we are, with turnovers, dropped balls, penalties, etc, that the HC is in part responsible. Lack of discipline, lack of coaching, whatever.

Im not syaing Childress should be fired. Just that sometimes HC's dont work out, and they eventually get fired because of their teams performance.

olson_10
11-21-2006, 01:33 PM
"Del" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


Yes ive watched every game. When I go out to watch the game, I buy my friends a round every time we score a TD. Been easy on my wallet this year. Whats your point?

And when Winfield returned the int to the 3rd down line, why didnt we try a fade to marcus rob? Is it because thats a Tice play and not an original childress?


My point is you keep saying things like we dont even attempt to go deep and every game this year we have taken multiple shots deep down the field. Yet every week you make the same argument.

So I was wondering if you were drunk, not watching the game, didn't have access to the game or what.

And this is the problem. You will say something like at least take the shots down the field. Someone can go to NFL.com, pull up the stats that proove we have gone downfield sometimes even successfuly every single game. If not a completion at least a shot. Maybe even on 3rd and short which is when you would expect it to work, which is not predictable. So they could give you hard facts, they could post video and next week you'd be saying the same pooh even though it isn't true.

I'm sorry but if you can't run the ball in from 1 yard out that's on your team not on you.

yah its pretty much pathetic if you cant run the ball into the endzone from the 1 with birk, hutch, mckinnie, kleinsasser on the football field..thats just plain sad

Del Rio
11-21-2006, 01:51 PM
"CCthebest" wrote:


When teams are doing bad, the head coach is the first place people look. Thats why coaches get fired so often. Maybe they are the scapegoat, maybe not.

In the case of Childress, I didnt think he was qualified. I didnt like where he came from, nor did i think he did much in Philly. I hope im wrong, and he takes the Vikings to new heights, or at least a playoff. If that happens I will call my friends in Philly and thanks them for our HC, like i did when we picked up Cris Carter.

I still think, just because the plays being called look good on paper, if they aernt scoring us TDs, change is needed. Either in the plays called or the personal. Nope, I dont have the stats to prove it. Iy just seems logical to me. If for nothing else, to stir things up.
Take or move Marcus Johnson and maybe Hicks from the line. Give Brooks a chance this week. Something like that.

And I really believe if a team is having the problems we are, with turnovers, dropped balls, penalties, etc, that the HC is in part responsible. Lack of discipline, lack of coaching, whatever.

Im not syaing Childress should be fired. Just that sometimes HC's dont work out, and they eventually get fired because of their teams performance.


I agree childress has to accept some of the blame no doubt. So far as far as records and performances go at the end of the day I guess you can say your gut was right about Childress. He defiantely isn't helping us who are trying to be patient.

Prophet
11-21-2006, 02:03 PM
Game 1 Vikings @ Redskins 19-16
Game 2 Panthers @ Vikings 16-13
Game 3 Bears @ Vikings 16-19
Game 4 Vikings @ Bills 12-17
Game 5 Lions @ Vikings 26-17
Game 6 Vikings @ Seattle 31-13
Game 7 Patriots @ Vikings 7-31
Game 8 Vikings @ 49ers 3-9
Game 9 Packers @ Vikings 17-23
Game 10 Vikings @ Dolphins 20-24

For the folks that have problems with simple math, with the exception of the Patriots game, the Vikings have lost by an average of 4.8 pts in the other five games.
For the intellectually challenged, that is less than a TD.
That means the Vikings were a play away from winning any of those games.
Take away turnovers, bad execution, penalties, dropped balls, bad reads, etc. and any of those games could have been Ws.


The nonexistent long-ball accusations:

Vikings @ Redskins

There were 11 'long balls' thrown in the first game of the season.
That is greater than 0.

3-7-MIN48 (11:25) B.Johnson pass deep right to T.Williamson pushed ob at WAS 6 for 46 yards (M.Rumph).
3-18-MIN28 (13:13) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep middle to M.Robinson (C.Rogers).
1-10-WAS34 (:36) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep right to M.Robinson (M.Rumph) [C.Griffin].
2-10-WAS34 (:30) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep right to T.Williamson.
3-7-MIN47 (12:41) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep left to T.Williamson [V.Fox].
PENALTY on WAS-K.Wright, Defensive Holding, 5 yards, enforced at MIN 47 - No Play.
2-9-WAS47 (11:57) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep middle to T.Williamson (C.Rogers).
3-9-WAS47 (11:47) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass deep middle to B.McMullen to WAS 25 for 22 yards (A.Archuleta).
3-5-WAS20 (9:45) B.Johnson pass deep left to M.Robinson for 20 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
2-5-MIN8 (11:05) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep left to M.Robinson (C.Rogers) [M.Washington].
PENALTY on WAS-S.Taylor, Unnecessary Roughness, 15 yards, enforced at MIN 8 - No Play.
3-9-MIN24 (9:39) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass deep middle to T.Taylor to MIN 48 for 24 yards (S.Taylor, L.Marshall).
3-2-WAS44 (7:51) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep right to J.Kleinsasser.

Panthers @ Vikings

There were 5 'long balls' thrown in the second game of the season.
That is greater than 0.

1-10-CAR43 (10:47) B.Johnson pass deep right to T.Taylor to CAR 7 for 36 yards (C.Gamble).
3-5-CAR33 (7:54) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass deep right to T.Taylor to CAR 10 for 23 yards (C.Gamble).
2-5-MIN33 (12:15) B.Johnson pass deep right to T.Williamson to CAR 44 for 23 yards (S.Williams).
2-10-MIN24 (3:43) B.Johnson pass deep right to T.Williamson to 50 for 26 yards (C.Gamble).
1-10-50
(2:57) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep left to T.Williamson. Play Challenged by MIN and Upheld. (Timeout #3 by MIN.)


Bears @ Vikings

There were 2 'long balls' thrown in the third game of the season.
That is greater than 0.

3-4-MIN44 (12:51) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass deep right to T.Taylor to CHI 20 for 36 yards (D.Manning, C.Tillman).
2-3-MIN26 (10:04) B.Johnson pass deep left to T.Williamson to CHI 38 for 36 yards.
PENALTY on MIN-T.Williamson, Offensive Pass Interference, 10 yards, enforced at MIN 26 - No Play.

Vikings @ Bills

There were 8 'long balls' thrown in the fourth game of the season.
That is greater than 0.

3-6-BUF47 (5:30) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep right to T.Williamson (R.Denney). Pass batted at line.
2-4-MIN41 (13:23) B.Johnson pass deep left to T.Williamson to BUF 43 for 16 yards (N.Clements). Caught near sideline at BUF 43.
3-2-BUF49 (7:55) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep left to T.Williamson (N.Clements) [A.Schobel]. Receiver and coverage along sideline at BUF 20.
4-10-MIN45 (3:56) B.Johnson pass deep middle to M.Robinson to BUF 32 for 23 yards (D.Whitner).
1-10-BUF29 (3:14) B.Johnson pass deep right to M.Robinson for 29 yards, TOUCHDOWN. Caught at goal line, near sideline.
(Pass formation)
PENALTY on MIN-M.Johnson, False Start, 5 yards, enforced at BUF 2 - No Play.
3-3-MIN39 (1:00) (No Huddle, Shotgun) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep right to M.Robinson. Dropped, receiver along sideline at BUF 15.
4-3-MIN39 (:52) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass deep middle to J.Wiggins to BUF 40 for 21 yards (K.Simpson). Caught at BUF 45.
2-10-BUF25 (:19) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep left to M.Robinson. Overthrown, receiver along sideline at BUF 9.

Lions @ Vikings

There were 4 'long balls' thrown in the fifth game of the season.
That is greater than 0.

3-13-MIN33 (4:32) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass deep right intended for T.Taylor INTERCEPTED by J.Fletcher [J.Hall] at DET 43. J.Fletcher to MIN 28 for 29 yards (T.Williamson).
1-10-MIN22 (:14) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep middle to T.Williamson.
3-1-DET34 (9:52) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep middle to T.Taylor [M.Bell].
2-5-MIN42 (7:31) B.Johnson pass deep right to T.Taylor pushed ob at DET 37 for 21 yards (J.McGraw).

Vikings @ Seattle

There were 5 'long balls' thrown in the sixth game of the season.
That is greater than 0.

2-6-MIN48 (8:36) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep left to T.Williamson (K.Hamlin). MIN-T.Williamson was injured during the play. His return is Questionable.
2-6-MIN20 (13:31) B.Johnson pass deep right to T.Taylor to MIN 36 for 16 yards (K.Hamlin).
3-17-SEA40 (8:03) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass deep right to M.Robinson for 40 yards, TOUCHDOWN.
2-5-MIN47 (:13) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep left to M.Robinson (M.Trufant).
1-10-MIN46 (12:12) B.Johnson pass deep right to M.Robinson to SEA 26 for 28 yards (K.Herndon).

Patriots @ Vikings

There were 7 'long balls' thrown in the seventh game of the season.
That is greater than 0.

1-10-NE35 (5:35) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep middle to Be.Johnson (A.Samuel).
3-7-MIN35 (9:55) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass deep middle intended for T.Williamson INTERCEPTED by C.Scott at NE 29. C.Scott to NE 29 for no gain (T.Williamson).
1-10-NE49 (12:33) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep right to Be.Johnson.
2-10-NE49 (12:27) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep right to T.Taylor [J.Seau].
3-5-NE44 (11:54) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep left to T.Williamson.
1-10-MIN23 (8:57) B.Johnson pass deep middle to T.Taylor to MIN 45 for 22 yards (E.Hobbs).
2-8-MIN16 (2:19) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep left to T.Williamson

Vikings @ 49ers

There were 3 'long balls' thrown in the eighth game of the season.
That is greater than 0.

2-10-MIN41 (13:11) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep right to Be.Johnson.
1-10-MIN35 (:50) B.Johnson pass to C.Taylor for 65 yards, TOUCHDOWN NULLIFIED by Penalty. PENALTY on MIN-T.Taylor, Illegal Block Above the Waist, 10 yards, enforced at MIN 46. Taylor credited with 11 yard reception after TD is negated by penalty.
4-7-SF27 (1:10) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep right to Be.Johnson (M.Roman).

Packers @ Vikings

There were 5 'long balls' thrown in the ninth game of the season.
That is greater than 0.

3-6-MIN41 (13:49) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep left to Be.Johnson.
1-10-MIN36 (11:20) B.Johnson pass deep right to Be.Johnson pushed ob at GB 29 for 35 yards (P.Dendy).
3-10-MIN15 (4:03) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass deep right to Be.Johnson pushed ob at GB 45 for 40 yards (N.Collins). Penalty on GB-A.Harris, Defensive Holding, declined.
1-10-MIN23 (11:54) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep right to J.Wiggins.
PENALTY on GB, Illegal Contact, 5 yards, enforced at MIN 23 - No Play.
2-1-MIN29 (7:54) B.Johnson pass deep right intended for Be.Johnson INTERCEPTED by P.Dendy at GB 23. P.Dendy ran ob at GB 23 for no gain.

Vikings @ Dolphins

There were 6 'long balls' thrown in the tenth game of the season.
That is greater than 0.

2-4-MIN11 (1:05) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep right to Be.Johnson.
3-9-MIA17 (6:20) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep right to J.Wiggins.
1-10-MIN40 (10:29) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep left to J.Wiggins.
2-7-MIN33 (8:45) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep left to M.Robinson.
1-10-MIN24 (3:20) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass deep middle to J.Wiggins to MIN 45 for 21 yards (Y.Bell; J.Allen).
2-7-MIA30 (1:23) (Shotgun) B.Johnson pass incomplete deep middle to B.McMullen (R.Hill).


In summary, there have been long balls thrown in every single game this year.

tastywaves
11-21-2006, 03:46 PM
Interesting Acumen.
So 56 long passes (however they are being defined) in 10 games.
25 in the 4 wins and 31 in the 6 losses (pretty even 6 per win, 5 per loss).


Of those 56 passes, 26 were completions.
In the wins we went 15/25 (60%), the losses 11/31 (35%).
That does not account for penalties that nullified some and gave us gains in others (too lazy, but I think it pretty much equalizes).
3 Interceptions, 2 TD"s.

Washington: 7/11 (W)
Carolina: 4/5 (W)
Chicago: 2/2 (L)
Buffalo: 4/8 (L)
Detroit: 4/8 (W)
Seattle: 3/5 (W)
New England: 1/7
(L)
San Francisco: 1/3
(L)
Green Bay: 2/5
(L)
Miami: 1/6
(L)

T. Will went 5/16, M. Rob went 5/11, T. Taylor 6/8 and Bethel 2/7.

But what does it all mean Basil?

Just stats.
Overall we completed 46% of the "deep" passes.
Travis was the only consistent receiver in catching balls thrown to him (were they 7yds. vs. 15+ for the other guys?).
Completion ratio on deep passes is getting worse, the last 4 games we hit 5/21 (24%).

Maybe the right characterization is not that they don't attempt long passes (although very minimal), but they are ineffective with long passes and getting worse.
Either way you look at it, MN does not scare people with the long ball which gives the opponent a big advantage when lining up against us.

Prophet
11-21-2006, 03:50 PM
"tastywaves" wrote:


Interesting Acumen.
So 56 long passes (however they are being defined) in 10 games.
25 in the 4 wins and 31 in the 6 losses (pretty even 6 per win, 5 per loss).


Of those 56 passes, 26 were completions.
In the wins we went 15/25 (60%), the losses 11/31 (35%).
That does not account for penalties that nullified some and gave us gains in others (too lazy, but I think it pretty much equalizes).
3 Interceptions, 2 TD"s.

Washington: 7/11 (W)
Carolina: 4/5 (W)
Chicago: 2/2 (L)
Buffalo: 4/8 (L)
Detroit: 4/8 (W)
Seattle: 3/5 (W)
New England: 1/7
(L)
San Francisco: 1/3
(L)
Green Bay: 2/5
(L)
Miami: 1/6
(L)

T. Will went 5/16, M. Rob went 5/11, T. Taylor 6/8 and Bethel 2/7.

But what does it all mean Basil?

Just stats.
Overall we completed 46% of the "deep" passes.

Travis was the only consistent receiver in catching balls thrown to him (were they 7yds. vs. 15+ for the other guys?).

Completion ratio on deep passes is getting worse, the last 4 games we hit 5/21 (24%).

Maybe the right characterization is not that they don't attempt long passes (although very minimal), but they are ineffective with long passes and getting worse.
Either way you look at it, MN does not scare people with the long ball which gives the opponent a big advantage when lining up against us.






Good summary.
It would be interesting to look at the #s for some of the 'long ball' teams and compare.
That's too much work though.
In the end the Vikings still need to improve in many facets of their O if they want to improve.
Elimination of mistake at key times of the game would be a good start.

bleedpurple
11-21-2006, 04:11 PM
WHOA!!! Someone has an insane amount of time on their hands but thats good.
Thanks..

about the simple math... I don't care if we loose by an average of 7 or .5 points a game... It's because of our great defense that we loose by soo little... THAT HOWEVER, does not excuse our offense from anything.


We may loose by a few points here and there, but when you consistently get in the redzone and kick fieldgoals and after the first drive of every game go 3 and out like half the time (I think we lead the league in 3 and out's, whatever!!) it's completely unacceptable.

Then on top of that to change absolutely nothing from week to week is ridiculous!

ItalianStallion
11-21-2006, 04:28 PM
I know that people on this site are more knowledgable than to believe "predictability" on offense is mostly due to your pass/run ratio on various downs.

Predictability comes from running the same plays with the same formations so that a defense that has actually watched film has a good idea of what the play will be before the ball is even snapped based on the personnel on the field and the situation.

Just because your passing on first down doesn't make it "unpredicatable", especially when players can read your offense, react to a screen pass and take it to the house...
It's not so much WHEN you call a type of play, but HOW, and WHAT play it actually is.

Prophet
11-21-2006, 04:36 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


I know that people on this site are more knowledgable than to believe "predictability" on offense is mostly due to your pass/run ratio on various downs.

Predictability comes from running the same plays with the same formations so that a defense that has actually watched film has a good idea of what the play will be before the ball is even snapped based on the personnel on the field and the situation.

Just because your passing on first down doesn't make it "unpredicatable", especially when players can read your offense, react to a screen pass and take it to the house...
It's not so much WHEN you call a type of play, but HOW, and WHAT play it actually is.


...and I suppose you thought of that and the boys at Winter Park have never considered that.
8)
Assumptions, that is correct, but of course that is considered.
I have yet to see tha predictablity that some say is there.
I watch the game for those sorts of things too.
Either way, the interactions of the offensive woes are deep, but if you look at the number of times the team has beaten itself up on penalties and turnovers that would have been enough to win the games we lost by an average margin of 4.8 pts (with the exceptioin of the Patsies).

CCthebest
11-21-2006, 04:39 PM
A:) How long is a 'long ball'?
B:) How many of the long balls were really just yards after the catch?
C:) How many of the long balls were last minute attempts to win the game?

A long ball is good to use early and ofter to stretch the defense.

Prophet
11-21-2006, 04:45 PM
"CCthebest" wrote:


A:) How long is a 'long ball'?
B:) How many of the long balls were really just yards after the catch?
C:) How many of the long balls were last minute attempts to win the game?

A long ball is good to use early and ofter to stretch the defense.


Look it up yourself, I included the information.
I have no agenda, just looked at the stats on NFL.com.
They define the pass, the YAC is tacked on too....they defined it as short, med. long or something like that.
It's all there.

The point is that you spout off stuff as if it were fact and it is wrong.
I too have watched all the games and there have been long balls every single game.
Some passes were shitty and some passes were on the mark and dropped.
The finger pointing can go in many directions.

There weren't many of the overall total that were last minute attempts to win the game.
It's all there if you look at it, I copied and pasted the info. with the time.

tastywaves
11-21-2006, 04:51 PM
"Acumen" wrote:


"CCthebest" wrote:


A:) How long is a 'long ball'?
B:) How many of the long balls were really just yards after the catch?
C:) How many of the long balls were last minute attempts to win the game?

A long ball is good to use early and ofter to stretch the defense.


Look it up yourself, I included the information.
I have no agenda, just looked at the stats on NFL.com.
They define the pass, the YAC is tacked on too....they defined it as short, med. long or something like that.
It's all there.

The point is that you spout off stuff as if it were fact and it is wrong.
I too have watched all the games and there have been long balls every single game.
Some passes were poohie and some passes were on the mark and dropped.
The finger pointing can go in many directions.

There weren't many of the overall total that were last minute attempts to win the game.
It's all there if you look at it, I copied and pasted the info. with the time.


Sigh, too true, too sad.
:'(

ItalianStallion
11-21-2006, 04:55 PM
"Acumen" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


I know that people on this site are more knowledgable than to believe "predictability" on offense is mostly due to your pass/run ratio on various downs.

Predictability comes from running the same plays with the same formations so that a defense that has actually watched film has a good idea of what the play will be before the ball is even snapped based on the personnel on the field and the situation.

Just because your passing on first down doesn't make it "unpredicatable", especially when players can read your offense, react to a screen pass and take it to the house...
It's not so much WHEN you call a type of play, but HOW, and WHAT play it actually is.


...and I suppose you thought of that and the boys at Winter Park have never considered that.
8)
Assumptions, that is correct, but of course that is considered.
I have yet to see tha predictablity that some say is there.
I watch the game for those sorts of things too.
Either way, the interactions of the offensive woes are deep, but if you look at the number of times the team has beaten itself up on penalties and turnovers that would have been enough to win the games we lost by an average margin of 4.8 pts (with the exceptioin of the Patsies).


Well, you seem to be among the contigent of members on here that enjoys deferring to the all-knowing coaches' expertise.
Yet seemingly our own players describe our offense as predictible, and they are the ones seeing it on the field (not in retrospect, on film, where there is more time and perspective to predict playcalling).
So even though you seem to think it isn't predictable, and the coaches agree with you (what a surprise, their the ones calling the plays), objective participants/observers do, so maybe I'll defer to their expertise if you don't mind.

If we had only an average defense instead of a very good one, we would be lucky to have one win all season.

Everyone is to blame, and yet nothing is being done.
THAT is a problem.

651Vikes
11-21-2006, 04:57 PM
"bleedpurple" wrote:


WHOA!!! Someone has an insane amount of time on their hands but thats good.
Thanks..

about the simple math... I don't care if we loose by an average of 7 or .5 points a game... It's because of our great defense that we loose by soo little... THAT HOWEVER, does not excuse our offense from anything.


We may loose by a few points here and there, but when you consistently get in the redzone and kick fieldgoals and after the first drive of every game go 3 and out like half the time (I think we lead the league in 3 and out's, whatever!!) it's completely unacceptable.

Then on top of that to change absolutely nothing from week to week is ridiculous!





I got curious and looked it up.

Stats from NFL.com :
3rd down ATT -- 147 (3rd in NFL)
3rd down % -- 33.3 (25th in NFL)
Time of Possession -- 31:41 (5th in NFL)

Got to admit, that is pretty aweful. They do get alot of chances.

Prophet
11-21-2006, 05:00 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


I know that people on this site are more knowledgable than to believe "predictability" on offense is mostly due to your pass/run ratio on various downs.

Predictability comes from running the same plays with the same formations so that a defense that has actually watched film has a good idea of what the play will be before the ball is even snapped based on the personnel on the field and the situation.

Just because your passing on first down doesn't make it "unpredicatable", especially when players can read your offense, react to a screen pass and take it to the house...
It's not so much WHEN you call a type of play, but HOW, and WHAT play it actually is.


...and I suppose you thought of that and the boys at Winter Park have never considered that.
8)
Assumptions, that is correct, but of course that is considered.
I have yet to see tha predictablity that some say is there.
I watch the game for those sorts of things too.
Either way, the interactions of the offensive woes are deep, but if you look at the number of times the team has beaten itself up on penalties and turnovers that would have been enough to win the games we lost by an average margin of 4.8 pts (with the exceptioin of the Patsies).


Well, you seem to be among the contigent of members on here that enjoys deferring to the all-knowing coaches' expertise.
Yet seemingly our own players describe our offense as predictible, and they are the ones seeing it on the field (not in retrospect, on film, where there is more time and perspective to predict playcalling).
So even though you seem to think it isn't predictable, and the coaches agree with you (what a surprise, their the ones calling the plays), objective participants/observers do, so maybe I'll defer to their expertise if you don't mind.

If we had only an average defense instead of a very good one, we would be lucky to have one win all season.

Everyone is to blame, and yet nothing is being done.
THAT is a problem.


Where do you see players calling it predictable?
Winfield went off on a tirade, that's all I've seen.
Show me some proof that the offense is predictable.
I've shown you plenty of proof that it is not.
I will believe the coaching staff before I believe a 20 yr old fan 100% of the time.
Why?
Any member of the coaching staff has been alive and coaching football longer than you have been alive.
That is enough of a reason for me.
When is the last time you spent 80 hrs/week analyzying film and coaching?

651Vikes
11-21-2006, 05:21 PM
"651Vikes" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


WHOA!!! Someone has an insane amount of time on their hands but thats good.
Thanks..

about the simple math... I don't care if we loose by an average of 7 or .5 points a game... It's because of our great defense that we loose by soo little... THAT HOWEVER, does not excuse our offense from anything.


We may loose by a few points here and there, but when you consistently get in the redzone and kick fieldgoals and after the first drive of every game go 3 and out like half the time (I think we lead the league in 3 and out's, whatever!!) it's completely unacceptable.

Then on top of that to change absolutely nothing from week to week is ridiculous!





I got curious and looked it up.

Stats from NFL.com :
3rd down ATT -- 147 (3rd in NFL)
3rd down % -- 33.3 (25th in NFL)
Time of Possession -- 31:41 (5th in NFL)

Got to admit, that is pretty aweful. They do get alot of chances.


Oops, wrong stats. 3 and outs...

Gift
11-21-2006, 05:38 PM
The plays (as they have been run) are a joke.

That may be on the players, that may be on the coaches or maybe both.

tastywaves
11-21-2006, 05:41 PM
"651Vikes" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


WHOA!!! Someone has an insane amount of time on their hands but thats good.
Thanks..

about the simple math... I don't care if we loose by an average of 7 or .5 points a game... It's because of our great defense that we loose by soo little... THAT HOWEVER, does not excuse our offense from anything.


We may loose by a few points here and there, but when you consistently get in the redzone and kick fieldgoals and after the first drive of every game go 3 and out like half the time (I think we lead the league in 3 and out's, whatever!!) it's completely unacceptable.

Then on top of that to change absolutely nothing from week to week is ridiculous!





I got curious and looked it up.

Stats from NFL.com :
3rd down ATT -- 147 (3rd in NFL)
3rd down % -- 33.3 (25th in NFL)
Time of Possession -- 31:41 (5th in NFL)

Got to admit, that is pretty aweful. They do get alot of chances.


Now that is an ugly stat.
No wonder the offense is lulling me to death.
How many 1st and 2nd down attempts lead to 1st downs (must be pretty damned low)?

In order to get that many 3rd down attempts with such a poor 3rd down % tells me that every series their on is almost a given that they won't pick up a 1st down on a 1st or 2nd down play.

Prophet
11-21-2006, 05:50 PM
"tastywaves" wrote:


"651Vikes" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


WHOA!!! Someone has an insane amount of time on their hands but thats good.
Thanks..

about the simple math... I don't care if we loose by an average of 7 or .5 points a game... It's because of our great defense that we loose by soo little... THAT HOWEVER, does not excuse our offense from anything.


We may loose by a few points here and there, but when you consistently get in the redzone and kick fieldgoals and after the first drive of every game go 3 and out like half the time (I think we lead the league in 3 and out's, whatever!!) it's completely unacceptable.

Then on top of that to change absolutely nothing from week to week is ridiculous!





I got curious and looked it up.

Stats from NFL.com :
3rd down ATT -- 147 (3rd in NFL)
3rd down % -- 33.3 (25th in NFL)
Time of Possession -- 31:41 (5th in NFL)

Got to admit, that is pretty aweful. They do get alot of chances.


Now that is an ugly stat.
No wonder the offense is lulling me to death.
How many 1st and 2nd down attempts lead to 1st downs (must be pretty damned low)?

In order to get that many 3rd down attempts with such a poor 3rd down % tells me that every series their on is almost a given that they won't pick up a 1st down on a 1st or 2nd down play.


This is from the first post in the thread:


Season Summary:

1st down: 45% pass, 55% run
2nd down: 51% pass, 49% run
3rd down: 83% pass, 17% run

Of the total plays run so far this season:

43% were 1st downs
33% were 2nd downs
24% were 3rd downs

The percentages were calculated only using the 1st-3rd downs, meaning that of all the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd downs so far this season 43% were first downs, 33% were 2nd downs and 24% were third downs.
There were a bunch of times that we got first downs on the first or second down do the 3rd down number was lower.
I didn't look specifically at that.
There were also a bunch of times that penalties killed the drive.
It's all there if someone is bored enough to put it together.

Rambro
11-21-2006, 06:21 PM
Great info Acumen, but I'd also like to ask if you could find the amount of balls passed Williamson's way, and how many he has dropped.

I'd really like to see more plays called to him just to buoy his confidence, but Childress has already said that is not going to happen. I really think we need a go to guy, Marcus Robinson fills that role decently, but the man we drafted to replace Randy Moss needs to step up, and if callin' his number until he finally catches a ball is what it takes then I'm all for it.

And if you don't wanna find the Williamson info, can you post up the link to the place you got that info from?
Maybe I go find it myself?

Prophet
11-21-2006, 06:27 PM
"Rambro" wrote:


Great info Acumen, but I'd also like to ask if you could find the amount of balls passed Williamson's way, and how many he has dropped.

I'd really like to see more plays called to him just to buoy his confidence, but Childress has already said that is not going to happen. I really think we need a go to guy, Marcus Robinson fills that role decently, but the man we drafted to replace Randy Moss needs to step up, and if callin' his number until he finally catches a ball is what it takes then I'm all for it.

And if you don't wanna find the Williamson info, can you post up the link to the place you got that info from?
Maybe I go find it myself?


There's nothing magical about the stats I posted.
Like I said in the first post, they're from nfl.com.
Just click on scores, the game you're interested in and then the 'play by play' and it's all there.
I'm not sure exactly where the dropped ball information is, I'm sure someone on the site does.
Williamson is toward the top of the league last time I saw that posting.
Let me know the link when you find that.
My guess is that a good starting place would be nfl.com/stats.

Gift
11-21-2006, 06:30 PM
"Acumen" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"651Vikes" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


WHOA!!! Someone has an insane amount of time on their hands but thats good.
Thanks..

about the simple math... I don't care if we loose by an average of 7 or .5 points a game... It's because of our great defense that we loose by soo little... THAT HOWEVER, does not excuse our offense from anything.


We may loose by a few points here and there, but when you consistently get in the redzone and kick fieldgoals and after the first drive of every game go 3 and out like half the time (I think we lead the league in 3 and out's, whatever!!) it's completely unacceptable.

Then on top of that to change absolutely nothing from week to week is ridiculous!





I got curious and looked it up.

Stats from NFL.com :
3rd down ATT -- 147 (3rd in NFL)
3rd down % -- 33.3 (25th in NFL)
Time of Possession -- 31:41 (5th in NFL)

Got to admit, that is pretty aweful. They do get alot of chances.


Now that is an ugly stat.
No wonder the offense is lulling me to death.
How many 1st and 2nd down attempts lead to 1st downs (must be pretty damned low)?

In order to get that many 3rd down attempts with such a poor 3rd down % tells me that every series their on is almost a given that they won't pick up a 1st down on a 1st or 2nd down play.


This is from the first post in the thread:


Season Summary:

1st down: 45% pass, 55% run
2nd down: 51% pass, 49% run
3rd down: 83% pass, 17% run

Of the total plays run so far this season:

43% were 1st downs
33% were 2nd downs
24% were 3rd downs

The percentages were calculated only using the 1st-3rd downs, meaning that of all the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd downs so far this season 43% were first downs, 33% were 2nd downs and 24% were third downs.
There were a bunch of times that we got first downs on the first or second down do the 3rd down number was lower.
I didn't look specifically at that.
There were also a bunch of times that penalties killed the drive.
It's all there if someone is bored enough to put it together.

These stats don't factor the game situation therefor they don't really prove anything.
If we have a 50/50 split on second downs total, but always run on 2nd & 2 & always pass on 2 & 6 we are predictable.
Not saying thats the case but these stats don't don't prove anything.

Prophet
11-21-2006, 06:32 PM
"Gift" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"651Vikes" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


WHOA!!! Someone has an insane amount of time on their hands but thats good.
Thanks..

about the simple math... I don't care if we loose by an average of 7 or .5 points a game... It's because of our great defense that we loose by soo little... THAT HOWEVER, does not excuse our offense from anything.


We may loose by a few points here and there, but when you consistently get in the redzone and kick fieldgoals and after the first drive of every game go 3 and out like half the time (I think we lead the league in 3 and out's, whatever!!) it's completely unacceptable.

Then on top of that to change absolutely nothing from week to week is ridiculous!





I got curious and looked it up.

Stats from NFL.com :
3rd down ATT -- 147 (3rd in NFL)
3rd down % -- 33.3 (25th in NFL)
Time of Possession -- 31:41 (5th in NFL)

Got to admit, that is pretty aweful. They do get alot of chances.


Now that is an ugly stat.
No wonder the offense is lulling me to death.
How many 1st and 2nd down attempts lead to 1st downs (must be pretty damned low)?

In order to get that many 3rd down attempts with such a poor 3rd down % tells me that every series their on is almost a given that they won't pick up a 1st down on a 1st or 2nd down play.


This is from the first post in the thread:


Season Summary:

1st down: 45% pass, 55% run
2nd down: 51% pass, 49% run
3rd down: 83% pass, 17% run

Of the total plays run so far this season:

43% were 1st downs
33% were 2nd downs
24% were 3rd downs

The percentages were calculated only using the 1st-3rd downs, meaning that of all the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd downs so far this season 43% were first downs, 33% were 2nd downs and 24% were third downs.
There were a bunch of times that we got first downs on the first or second down do the 3rd down number was lower.
I didn't look specifically at that.
There were also a bunch of times that penalties killed the drive.
It's all there if someone is bored enough to put it together.

These stats don't factor the game situation therefor they don't really prove anything.
If we have a 50/50 split on second downs total, but always run on 2nd & 2 & always pass on 2 & 6 we are predictable.
Not saying thats the case but these stats don't don't prove anything.


No stats prove anything.
The bottom-line is that some homers on this site were saying that the Vikings always ran on first down...etc.
If you look at the first 10 games it is evenly split in first and second down between passes and rushes.
The one thing that it does show is that the playcalling is not as predictable as some geniuses say it is.
If you want to 'prove' me wrong give me something other than an opinion.

Desertvikingfan
11-21-2006, 06:33 PM
"651Vikes" wrote:


"bleedpurple" wrote:


WHOA!!! Someone has an insane amount of time on their hands but thats good.
Thanks..

about the simple math... I don't care if we loose by an average of 7 or .5 points a game... It's because of our great defense that we loose by soo little... THAT HOWEVER, does not excuse our offense from anything.


We may loose by a few points here and there, but when you consistently get in the redzone and kick fieldgoals and after the first drive of every game go 3 and out like half the time (I think we lead the league in 3 and out's, whatever!!) it's completely unacceptable.

Then on top of that to change absolutely nothing from week to week is ridiculous!





I got curious and looked it up.

Stats from NFL.com :
3rd down ATT -- 147 (3rd in NFL)
3rd down % -- 33.3 (25th in NFL)
Time of Possession -- 31:41 (5th in NFL)

Got to admit, that is pretty aweful. They do get alot of chances.

Couldn't resist taking a look at this. Through the first ten games the Vikes have thirty 3 and outs. FOr comparison (without going through every teams drive charts) Carolina has thirty 3 and outs also.
It is the Minnesoata D that has the most 3 and outs.

Gift
11-21-2006, 06:35 PM
"Acumen" wrote:


"Gift" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:


"651Vikes" wrote:




WHOA!!! Someone has an insane amount of time on their hands but thats good.
Thanks..

about the simple math... I don't care if we loose by an average of 7 or .5 points a game... It's because of our great defense that we loose by soo little... THAT HOWEVER, does not excuse our offense from anything.


We may loose by a few points here and there, but when you consistently get in the redzone and kick fieldgoals and after the first drive of every game go 3 and out like half the time (I think we lead the league in 3 and out's, whatever!!) it's completely unacceptable.

Then on top of that to change absolutely nothing from week to week is ridiculous!





I got curious and looked it up.

Stats from NFL.com :
3rd down ATT -- 147 (3rd in NFL)
3rd down % -- 33.3 (25th in NFL)
Time of Possession -- 31:41 (5th in NFL)

Got to admit, that is pretty aweful. They do get alot of chances.


Now that is an ugly stat.
No wonder the offense is lulling me to death.
How many 1st and 2nd down attempts lead to 1st downs (must be pretty damned low)?

In order to get that many 3rd down attempts with such a poor 3rd down % tells me that every series their on is almost a given that they won't pick up a 1st down on a 1st or 2nd down play.


This is from the first post in the thread:


Season Summary:

1st down: 45% pass, 55% run
2nd down: 51% pass, 49% run
3rd down: 83% pass, 17% run

Of the total plays run so far this season:

43% were 1st downs
33% were 2nd downs
24% were 3rd downs

The percentages were calculated only using the 1st-3rd downs, meaning that of all the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd downs so far this season 43% were first downs, 33% were 2nd downs and 24% were third downs.
There were a bunch of times that we got first downs on the first or second down do the 3rd down number was lower.
I didn't look specifically at that.
There were also a bunch of times that penalties killed the drive.
It's all there if someone is bored enough to put it together.

These stats don't factor the game situation therefor they don't really prove anything.
If we have a 50/50 split on second downs total, but always run on 2nd & 2 & always pass on 2 & 6 we are predictable.
Not saying thats the case but these stats don't don't prove anything.


No stats prove anything.
The bottom-line is that some homers on this site were saying that the Vikings always ran on first down...etc.
If you look at the first 10 games it is evenly split in first and second down between passes and rushes.
The one thing that it does show is that the playcalling is not as predictable as some geniuses say it is.
If you want to 'prove' me wrong give me something other than an opinion.
I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong, I just voicing my opinion.
I don't know if it's the play calling or the execution of the plays, all I know is something is broke & we need to get fixing it.

Prophet
11-21-2006, 06:38 PM
"Gift" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


"Gift" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:






WHOA!!! Someone has an insane amount of time on their hands but thats good.
Thanks..

about the simple math... I don't care if we loose by an average of 7 or .5 points a game... It's because of our great defense that we loose by soo little... THAT HOWEVER, does not excuse our offense from anything.


We may loose by a few points here and there, but when you consistently get in the redzone and kick fieldgoals and after the first drive of every game go 3 and out like half the time (I think we lead the league in 3 and out's, whatever!!) it's completely unacceptable.

Then on top of that to change absolutely nothing from week to week is ridiculous!





I got curious and looked it up.

Stats from NFL.com :
3rd down ATT -- 147 (3rd in NFL)
3rd down % -- 33.3 (25th in NFL)
Time of Possession -- 31:41 (5th in NFL)

Got to admit, that is pretty aweful. They do get alot of chances.


Now that is an ugly stat.
No wonder the offense is lulling me to death.
How many 1st and 2nd down attempts lead to 1st downs (must be pretty damned low)?

In order to get that many 3rd down attempts with such a poor 3rd down % tells me that every series their on is almost a given that they won't pick up a 1st down on a 1st or 2nd down play.


This is from the first post in the thread:


Season Summary:

1st down: 45% pass, 55% run
2nd down: 51% pass, 49% run
3rd down: 83% pass, 17% run

Of the total plays run so far this season:

43% were 1st downs
33% were 2nd downs
24% were 3rd downs

The percentages were calculated only using the 1st-3rd downs, meaning that of all the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd downs so far this season 43% were first downs, 33% were 2nd downs and 24% were third downs.
There were a bunch of times that we got first downs on the first or second down do the 3rd down number was lower.
I didn't look specifically at that.
There were also a bunch of times that penalties killed the drive.
It's all there if someone is bored enough to put it together.

These stats don't factor the game situation therefor they don't really prove anything.
If we have a 50/50 split on second downs total, but always run on 2nd & 2 & always pass on 2 & 6 we are predictable.
Not saying thats the case but these stats don't don't prove anything.


No stats prove anything.
The bottom-line is that some homers on this site were saying that the Vikings always ran on first down...etc.
If you look at the first 10 games it is evenly split in first and second down between passes and rushes.
The one thing that it does show is that the playcalling is not as predictable as some geniuses say it is.
If you want to 'prove' me wrong give me something other than an opinion.
I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong, I just voicing my opinion.
I don't know if it's the play calling or the execution of the plays, all I know is something is broke & we need to get fixing it.


There is no doubt that our offense is offensive.
Since 5 of the 6 losses were by an average margin of 4.8 pts. all they need to do is take care of penalties and turnovers and that would be enough to change the Ls to Ws.
They are developing as a unit, the time will come.

ItalianStallion
11-22-2006, 01:40 AM
"Acumen" wrote:


Where do you see players calling it predictable?
Winfield went off on a tirade, that's all I've seen.
Show me some proof that the offense is predictable.
I've shown you plenty of proof that it is not.
I will believe the coaching staff before I believe a 20 yr old fan 100% of the time.
Why?
Any member of the coaching staff has been alive and coaching football longer than you have been alive.
That is enough of a reason for me.
When is the last time you spent 80 hrs/week analyzying film and coaching?



A tirade?
Please.
The proof that our offense is predictable is that some of the worst defenses have successfully gameplanned against us.
All you've shown is stats that show 1/10th of the picture and even you have said "No stats prove anything" (yet you seem to think you've proved something).
I will believe an honest player desperate for change over a biased coach who's abilities are being put into question.

So, apparently Tomlin has been coaching since he was 13, or Childress since his early 20s, ok, that statement makes sense.
You can continue to unquestioningly believe the coaching staff, I'll believe what I've seen on TV, and the other coaches we've played who had demonstrated no difficulties in predicting and stopping our offense.

midgensa
11-22-2006, 02:26 AM
While I lack the stats ... it is not a fair representative of whether or not there is "predictable" playcalling. If you keep running the same pass routes and similar running routes it is predictable ... if every time you have third and one you like to run a a play action is it predictable ... and if quite often your play actions result in a long look down field to ONE WR before dumping to the TE or RB ... it is predictable.
I don't think we are as predictable as some would say we are, but we definitely are not blowing anyones minds out there. I will say throwing the ball only five yards on 3 and 12 is definitely highly unpredictable

runtheball
11-22-2006, 03:25 AM
For everyone here that thinks our offense is too predictable, i would like to issue a challenge. Next game try to predict each play "Run" or "Pass" and figure your percentage at the end of the game. Do it for the opposing team also and compare. I think you will be surprised at how poorly you will do. I tried it and was surprised how poorly I did.

Del Rio
11-22-2006, 07:01 AM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


Where do you see players calling it predictable?
Winfield went off on a tirade, that's all I've seen.
Show me some proof that the offense is predictable.
I've shown you plenty of proof that it is not.
I will believe the coaching staff before I believe a 20 yr old fan 100% of the time.
Why?
Any member of the coaching staff has been alive and coaching football longer than you have been alive.
That is enough of a reason for me.
When is the last time you spent 80 hrs/week analyzying film and coaching?



A tirade?
Please.
The proof that our offense is predictable is that some of the worst defenses have successfully gameplanned against us.
All you've shown is stats that show 1/10th of the picture and even you have said "No stats prove anything" (yet you seem to think you've proved something).
I will believe an honest player desperate for change over a biased coach who's abilities are being put into question.

So, apparently Tomlin has been coaching since he was 13, or Childress since his early 20s, ok, that statement makes sense.
You can continue to unquestioningly believe the coaching staff, I'll believe what I've seen on TV, and the other coaches we've played who had demonstrated no difficulties in predicting and stopping our offense.


That's not proof. Anything could contribute to that especially poor execution.

Marrdro
11-22-2006, 07:49 AM
"snowinapril" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


Seriously, this is a first year coach and coaching staff and schemes.
The people that are panicking and calling out the coach need a reality check.
There are plenty of threads around looking at some of the historical first years of HCs and their subsequent records.
At this point it is too early to call for Childress' head and it is too early to call him a hero.


If you are going to make claims as to what they should do at least back up your claims instead of pulling stuff out of your jiggly butt.
Is predictable play calling one of the huge problems?
I say no.
Why?
Well, here's a simplistic summary just looking at the passing/rushing by downs.
Obviously, this does not include the specific plays, the boneheaded penalties, the execution of the plays, etc.
But, as far as I can tell there is no indication that the play calling is simplistic and predictable.

"Loads of Stats - gone!"

So, in 76% of the plays this season (1st & 2nd downs) 48% were passes and 52% were runs.
If that is predictable, you do not have a good grasp on the simplest level of statistics.

The Vikings have been in every game this year with the exception of the Patriots game.
The folks that think it is Childress and play calling are pulling it out of their jiggly butt, if not, explain to me how this is true.
I'm listening.


What I heard you say was this; it isn't the coach, it is the players.

This is what I see.
We have a bunch of fans with a Corona (or 2) in their hands wanting to call our lemon a lime to make their beer taste better.
Nobody wants a lemon in their Corona.
We are average at best, like a Corona, now if you had a Hefewiezen you could put that lemon to use.


It is what it is; we are just not that good of a team, as a whole.
That includes players and coaches.
Right now I do have to agree, that it is more the players than the coaches. IMHO, I am going to give Chilly the thumbs up on knowing that he has a QB with very limited ability in his arm and WRs that aren't worth a pooh.
He is coaching with what he has, not what he is wishing he had.
I think that Chilly may have thought that he had a Hefewiezen when he really had Corona.
Maybe Chilly just decided to screw the beer, and just make lemonade.
As the saying goes, when life gives you lemons (TWill, BJ, TT, Marcus Johnson, Hicks, and penalties) you make lemonade.

Good news, players and coaches can improve, just might be too much to ask at this stage of the season at 4-6.
We could always win out.

::)



;D MAN LAW ;D

Marrdro
11-22-2006, 07:59 AM
"Gift" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


"Gift" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


"tastywaves" wrote:






WHOA!!! Someone has an insane amount of time on their hands but thats good.
Thanks..

about the simple math... I don't care if we loose by an average of 7 or .5 points a game... It's because of our great defense that we loose by soo little... THAT HOWEVER, does not excuse our offense from anything.


We may loose by a few points here and there, but when you consistently get in the redzone and kick fieldgoals and after the first drive of every game go 3 and out like half the time (I think we lead the league in 3 and out's, whatever!!) it's completely unacceptable.

Then on top of that to change absolutely nothing from week to week is ridiculous!





I got curious and looked it up.

Stats from NFL.com :
3rd down ATT -- 147 (3rd in NFL)
3rd down % -- 33.3 (25th in NFL)
Time of Possession -- 31:41 (5th in NFL)

Got to admit, that is pretty aweful. They do get alot of chances.


Now that is an ugly stat.
No wonder the offense is lulling me to death.
How many 1st and 2nd down attempts lead to 1st downs (must be pretty damned low)?

In order to get that many 3rd down attempts with such a poor 3rd down % tells me that every series their on is almost a given that they won't pick up a 1st down on a 1st or 2nd down play.


This is from the first post in the thread:


Season Summary:

1st down: 45% pass, 55% run
2nd down: 51% pass, 49% run
3rd down: 83% pass, 17% run

Of the total plays run so far this season:

43% were 1st downs
33% were 2nd downs
24% were 3rd downs

The percentages were calculated only using the 1st-3rd downs, meaning that of all the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd downs so far this season 43% were first downs, 33% were 2nd downs and 24% were third downs.
There were a bunch of times that we got first downs on the first or second down do the 3rd down number was lower.
I didn't look specifically at that.
There were also a bunch of times that penalties killed the drive.
It's all there if someone is bored enough to put it together.

These stats don't factor the game situation therefor they don't really prove anything.
If we have a 50/50 split on second downs total, but always run on 2nd & 2 & always pass on 2 & 6 we are predictable.
Not saying thats the case but these stats don't don't prove anything.


No stats prove anything.
The bottom-line is that some homers on this site were saying that the Vikings always ran on first down...etc.
If you look at the first 10 games it is evenly split in first and second down between passes and rushes.
The one thing that it does show is that the playcalling is not as predictable as some geniuses say it is.
If you want to 'prove' me wrong give me something other than an opinion.
I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong, I just voicing my opinion.
I don't know if it's the play calling or the execution of the plays, all I know is something is broke & we need to get fixing it.


The fix started the day our teams owner hired a whole new staff to include Childress who then gutted our team of players (for the good of course) who weren't on the same page as him.

These changes will continue next year also.
Sure wish I had all the time to capture some of you so called fans posts so that I can quote them next year.


Patience my fellow fans of the purple.
Times are getting better.

Prophet
11-22-2006, 08:37 AM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


Where do you see players calling it predictable?
Winfield went off on a tirade, that's all I've seen.
Show me some proof that the offense is predictable.
I've shown you plenty of proof that it is not.
I will believe the coaching staff before I believe a 20 yr old fan 100% of the time.
Why?
Any member of the coaching staff has been alive and coaching football longer than you have been alive.
That is enough of a reason for me.
When is the last time you spent 80 hrs/week analyzying film and coaching?



A tirade?
Please.
The proof that our offense is predictable is that some of the worst defenses have successfully gameplanned against us.
All you've shown is stats that show 1/10th of the picture and even you have said "No stats prove anything" (yet you seem to think you've proved something).
I will believe an honest player desperate for change over a biased coach who's abilities are being put into question.

So, apparently Tomlin has been coaching since he was 13, or Childress since his early 20s, ok, that statement makes sense.
You can continue to unquestioningly believe the coaching staff, I'll believe what I've seen on TV, and the other coaches we've played who had demonstrated no difficulties in predicting and stopping our offense.


Statistics have never proven anything.
Ever.
They can, however, be used as a form of objective data to look at something rather than saying something like, "I once heard a player say something about the team not performing well...." with no links...nothing.
Wow, you really convinced me there.

You have a point about the game plannning, but you are missing a piece of the puzzle.
Look at the execution of the plays, dropped passes, boneheaded penalties.
Is it difficult to understand that the average margin of loss was 4.8 points in all games but the Patsies?
Is it difficult to understand that 4.8<6 pt or one score?
That is a small margin for losses no matter how you slice it.

Apparently your reading comprehension is a little behind the curve too.
Brad Childress (http://www.vikings.com/coach_detail_objectname_Brad_Childress.html) has been coaching football for a while.
This is his 29th year coaching and his 9th year on the NFL sidelines.
Without even going to Tomlin or any of the other coaching staff he has COACHED football longer than you have been alive.
When you were breast feeding and crapping your pants he was coaching football.
100% of the time I will listen to the coaching staff that has devoted their professional career over a fan that played ball for a few years and won the SB in a video game.

Big C
11-22-2006, 09:34 AM
I watched the Miami game again yesterday and I honestly think the playcalling was a step up from previously. The fact that we ran a lot of crossing routes with success in the second half means Childress is starting to adjust to the game. Most of the offensive drives that day stalled because of poor execution on frickin 3rd down (penalities, sacks, dropped passes). Two fumbles and an interception in the 4th quarter didn't help either ;D.

On a side note, the defense is absolutely LOADED with talent. Whether it's veteran players or rookies they are absolutely loaded talent-wise which makes Tomlin's job a little easier (I'm not taking anything away from Tomlin!). The offense is struggling because of lack of "top-notch" talent at two key positions. QB and WR. I love BJ but he needs AT LEAST ONE reliable WR to make some plays. So quite literally, our WRs are pulling the offense down. Troy has been a dissapointment with catching the ball (all the other stuff seems to be cleaned up). Bethel Johnson has been such an awesome addition. WR better be on our free agent shopping list next year (BRING BURLESON BACK).

ItalianStallion
11-22-2006, 10:12 AM
"Acumen" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


Where do you see players calling it predictable?
Winfield went off on a tirade, that's all I've seen.
Show me some proof that the offense is predictable.
I've shown you plenty of proof that it is not.
I will believe the coaching staff before I believe a 20 yr old fan 100% of the time.
Why?
Any member of the coaching staff has been alive and coaching football longer than you have been alive.
That is enough of a reason for me.
When is the last time you spent 80 hrs/week analyzying film and coaching?



A tirade?
Please.
The proof that our offense is predictable is that some of the worst defenses have successfully gameplanned against us.
All you've shown is stats that show 1/10th of the picture and even you have said "No stats prove anything" (yet you seem to think you've proved something).
I will believe an honest player desperate for change over a biased coach who's abilities are being put into question.

So, apparently Tomlin has been coaching since he was 13, or Childress since his early 20s, ok, that statement makes sense.
You can continue to unquestioningly believe the coaching staff, I'll believe what I've seen on TV, and the other coaches we've played who had demonstrated no difficulties in predicting and stopping our offense.


Statistics have never proven anything.
Ever.
They can, however, be used as a form of objective data to look at something rather than saying something like, "I once heard a player say something about the team not performing well...." with no links...nothing.
Wow, you really convinced me there.

You have a point about the game plannning, but you are missing a piece of the puzzle.
Look at the execution of the plays, dropped passes, boneheaded penalties.
Is it difficult to understand that the average margin of loss was 4.8 points in all games but the Patsies?
Is it difficult to understand that 4.8<6 pt or one score?
That is a small margin for losses no matter how you slice it.

Apparently your reading comprehension is a little behind the curve too.
Brad Childress (http://www.vikings.com/coach_detail_objectname_Brad_Childress.html) has been coaching football for a while.
This is his 29th year coaching and his 9th year on the NFL sidelines.
Without even going to Tomlin or any of the other coaching staff he has COACHED football longer than you have been alive.
When you were breast feeding and crapping your pants he was coaching football.
100% of the time I will listen to the coaching staff that has devoted their professional career over a fan that played ball for a few years and won the SB in a video game.




The reason the margin of loss is so low has nothing at all to do with our offense doing it's job in any regard.
Half of our points this season have come in garbage time, and if it weren't for our defense we'd get blown out every game.
I never said that predictability is the only source of our offensive problems, but neither is execution as many people seem to think.
It's not like Brad constantly checks down, or throws a short pass on third down because he is worried about not excecuting.
You can say all you want that WRs not getting open, Chester running into a wall of defenders etc. is because of poor execution, but the defenders are in the right spot at the right time for a reason. Brad is taking what the defense gives us, which is usually not what we want at all because the defense knows exactly what we plan on doing.


As for the Winfield quote, I thought it was common knowledge he said that, but here is an article on it. http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-frustratedvikings&prov=ap&type=lgns

I've never said I was an expert.
I just find it's funny how you'd believe a couple people's biased points of view over results that kick you in the face.
We can argue causation all day, but if I was a coach and "execution" was the only problem, you'd think you'd try to fix that after 11 weeks either by calling plays that your player CAN execute or putting in players that CAN execute.

Prophet
11-22-2006, 10:47 AM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


"ItalianStallion" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


Where do you see players calling it predictable?
Winfield went off on a tirade, that's all I've seen.
Show me some proof that the offense is predictable.
I've shown you plenty of proof that it is not.
I will believe the coaching staff before I believe a 20 yr old fan 100% of the time.
Why?
Any member of the coaching staff has been alive and coaching football longer than you have been alive.
That is enough of a reason for me.
When is the last time you spent 80 hrs/week analyzying film and coaching?



A tirade?
Please.
The proof that our offense is predictable is that some of the worst defenses have successfully gameplanned against us.
All you've shown is stats that show 1/10th of the picture and even you have said "No stats prove anything" (yet you seem to think you've proved something).
I will believe an honest player desperate for change over a biased coach who's abilities are being put into question.

So, apparently Tomlin has been coaching since he was 13, or Childress since his early 20s, ok, that statement makes sense.
You can continue to unquestioningly believe the coaching staff, I'll believe what I've seen on TV, and the other coaches we've played who had demonstrated no difficulties in predicting and stopping our offense.


Statistics have never proven anything.
Ever.
They can, however, be used as a form of objective data to look at something rather than saying something like, "I once heard a player say something about the team not performing well...." with no links...nothing.
Wow, you really convinced me there.

You have a point about the game plannning, but you are missing a piece of the puzzle.
Look at the execution of the plays, dropped passes, boneheaded penalties.
Is it difficult to understand that the average margin of loss was 4.8 points in all games but the Patsies?
Is it difficult to understand that 4.8<6 pt or one score?
That is a small margin for losses no matter how you slice it.

Apparently your reading comprehension is a little behind the curve too.
Brad Childress (http://www.vikings.com/coach_detail_objectname_Brad_Childress.html) has been coaching football for a while.
This is his 29th year coaching and his 9th year on the NFL sidelines.
Without even going to Tomlin or any of the other coaching staff he has COACHED football longer than you have been alive.
When you were breast feeding and crapping your pants he was coaching football.
100% of the time I will listen to the coaching staff that has devoted their professional career over a fan that played ball for a few years and won the SB in a video game.




The reason the margin of loss is so low has nothing at all to do with our offense doing it's job in any regard.
Half of our points this season have come in garbage time, and if it weren't for our defense we'd get blown out every game.
I never said that predictability is the only source of our offensive problems, but neither is execution as many people seem to think.
It's not like Brad constantly checks down, or throws a short pass on third down because he is worried about not excecuting.
You can say all you want that WRs not getting open, Chester running into a wall of defenders etc. is because of poor execution, but the defenders are in the right spot at the right time for a reason. Brad is taking what the defense gives us, which is usually not what we want at all because the defense knows exactly what we plan on doing.


As for the Winfield quote, I thought it was common knowledge he said that, but here is an article on it. http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-frustratedvikings&prov=ap&type=lgns

I've never said I was an expert.
I just find it's funny how you'd believe a couple people's biased points of view over results that kick you in the face.
We can argue causation all day, but if I was a coach and "execution" was the only problem, you'd think you'd try to fix that after 11 weeks either by calling plays that your player CAN execute or putting in players that CAN execute.


Yes, the offense has been underperforming.
No, most thinking people do not think it is only in execution.
The brilliant folks point to one source and convince themselves that is the problem.
Your remark about half the pts coming in garbage time is yet another stat that you pulled out of your ass.
Is there garbage time when the average margin of loss is 4.8 pts in 5 of the 6 losses?
Again, simple math will tell you no.

Regarding the Winfield quote, yes that is common knowledge.
It is also common knowledge that Winfield met with Childress after the comments and the team addressed those issues in-house, as a team.
Just in case you haven't picked up on it yet, Childress will not be giving away his gameplans to the press and fans like Meathead did.
The press is sour about this and so are some fans.
Within the same article that you referred to here is a quote:


Childress insisted the blame should be widespread, including himself, but declined to point to drastic alterations in the play calling or the lineup as possible solutions.

They are working on solutions and are they are not far off.
While you're contemplating whether or not to supersize your next meal they are watching film and game planning.
Another quote from that article:


Winfield's teammates and coaches could hardly fault him for expressing frustration. The defense, after all, is first in the NFL against the run and second in the NFC behind the Bears in points allowed. The San Francisco game was another example of the wide inequality of the two units.

There was no indication of a rift between the two, but it's clear that the pressure is on the offense to perform in the second half of the season.

The fans are not the only people aware of the deficiencies.
Wow, that's a big surprise.


I've never said I was an expert.
I just find it's funny how you'd believe a couple people's biased points of view over results that kick you in the face.
We can argue causation all day, but if I was a coach and "execution" was the only problem, you'd think you'd try to fix that after 11 weeks either by calling plays that your player CAN execute or putting in players that CAN execute.

Nor am I.
I believe a couple of people's biased views?
You rest your nads on an 'unbiased' account from a player on the team?
I rest my nads on a 'biased' view of the coaching staff?
Guess what, a player knows their role and has a familiarity to some degree of the rest of their unit and does not have the understanding of the coaching staff regarding the overall plan for the team in the detail that the coaching staff has.
Winfield was also crapping his pants and suckling while Childress was coaching football.
His experience outweighs the thoughts of an individual player.
That is reality.

What results kick me in the face?
The offense is underperforming?
Blame a single aspect of the game or a single player?
In this case no.
There are so many facets to the offensive woes that it is tough to isolate it.
On the same token many are very correctable.
If you're losing by a margin of 4.8 pts correcting any of the numerous problems could result in a W.

Again, I do have confidence that they are working out the problems on the field.
They are very manageable.
Just look at a simplistic view of the Phins game and the offensive drives:

Offense:

The first drive was sustained with a nice mix of passes and rushing resulting in a TD.
The second drive was killed by a sack for -8 yds.
The third drive was killed by an M. Johnson false start.
The fourth drive was killed by a Whittle false start.
The 5th drive was killed by a sack.
The sixth drive resulted in a FG.
The seventh drive was killed by yet another Williamson drop.
The eighth drive resulted in a FG (INT, should have been run in for a TD).
The ninth drive resulted in Jason Taylor stripping the ball out of C. Taylor's grasp.
The tenth drive resulted in another fumble by C. Taylor.
The eleventh drive was a three and out.
The twelth drive was a Jason Taylor INT on a screen play.
The thirteenth drive was sustained (too gol 'darnit much time) for a C. Taylor TD.

In summary:
1: TD
2: sack
3. penalty
4. penalty
5. sack
6. FG
7. Drop (Williamson)
8. FG (should have been TD)
9. Fumble (good move by J. Taylor)
10. Fumble (bad move by C. Taylor)
11. Phins D shut 'em down
12. INT
13. TD

Correctable?
Items 3,4,7,8,10,12.
That is, if any of those events, all easily correctable, didn't happen the Vikings would have left with a W.

Sure, the offense sucks right now.
It's just not as far off as some doom and gloomers like to believe.
Last I checked they were ranked #16 overall. (http://nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/OFF-TOTAL/2006/regular?sort_col_1=4)

The main problem is many fans live in one time-scale.
Today.
Now.
Yesterday.
This team is currently better than any team Tice put on the field and they will move forward soon.
Within the next few years the Childress haters will be eating crow the whole season long (yes, you can bookmark that statement and serve it up to me if I'm wrong).
Odds are, I will be eating ribeyes.

CCthebest
11-22-2006, 11:39 AM
How is the team better then any Tice had? I know Tice was a meathead but he at least had some .500 teams or better. Right now we will be lucky to end up at 7-9. I wish i was as optomistic as some that thinks next year will be better.

I think our offense is more set up if we have the lead or can make a few 3rd downs. All year long we havent been good in the redzone or with 3rd downs. All of us hold our breath on 3rd and 3 or more, cause we know it will be a dump pass, draw, or run. Maybe a poorly set up screen. Childress is happy to punt or FG and let our D come in. Sometimes thats a good idea, but not every frigging time.

We have no deep balls, or hardly any. YAC doesnt count as long balls. All that means is BJ threw his usual 5-10 yard pass and Travis or someone ran for some yards after they caught it. Which is great. But it doesnt open the D up, or make the safties play honest. I think that should change. Throw the ball deep to bethal a few times in the first quarter.

Doe anyone know how many time we have throw to Marcus Rob on a fade in the red zone this year? Have we even done it once?

Isnt a team that makes as many mistakes as ours does, with penalties, turnovers, dropped passes, etc, poorly coached? If so many are doing it Id would think thats bad coaching in general. Maybe its time Childress brings in the players that continually make mistakes into his office and bitches them out royally. Tells them its not acceptable or something. Maybe he has.

vikes2456
11-22-2006, 11:43 AM
"Acumen" wrote:



The main problem is many fans live in one time-scale.
Today.
Now.
Yesterday.
This team is currently better than any team Tice put on the field and they will move forward soon.
Within the next few years the Childress haters will be eating crow the whole season long (yes, you can bookmark that statement and serve it up to me if I'm wrong).
Odds are, I will be eating ribeyes.




As of now, I think it is only on par with the teams Tice put on the field. While the defense is better, the offense is flat out terrible. I do think however, we have more hope and a better chance to do better with Childress.
The main problem is not that fans live on a time-scale. If the team is playing terrible, the fans have a right to be pissed and call for the heads if they please, the problem is that both sides refuse to change the argument in any way. Face it, it is not the hardest thing in the world to predict our play calling, I've done it myself many times. But, that is not the only factor, the players need to execute is also a large factor. Although, one can argue that if the players execute, every play should work...

But ya, I'm getting pretty sick of how hard people cling on to their arguments, this is almost like watching a hardcore democrat and a hardcore republican have a political discussion. Each side makes meaningful points, but the truth is always somewhere in the middle

Del Rio
11-22-2006, 11:45 AM
"CCthebest" wrote:


How is the team better then any Tice had? I know Tice was a meathead but he at least had some .500 teams or better. Right now we will be lucky to end up at 7-9. I wish i was as optomistic as some that thinks next year will be better.

I think our offense is more set up if we have the lead or can make a few 3rd downs. All year long we havent been good in the redzone or with 3rd downs. All of us hold our breath on 3rd and 3 or more, cause we know it will be a dump pass, draw, or run. Maybe a poorly set up screen. Childress is happy to punt or FG and let our D come in. Sometimes thats a good idea, but not every frigging time.

We have no deep balls, or hardly any. YAC doesnt count as long balls. All that means is BJ threw his usual 5-10 yard pass and Travis or someone ran for some yards after they caught it. Which is great. But it doesnt open the D up, or make the safties play honest. I think that should change. Throw the ball deep to bethal a few times in the first quarter.

Doe anyone know how many time we have throw to Marcus Rob on a fade in the red zone this year? Have we even done it once?

Isnt a team that makes as many mistakes as ours does, with penalties, turnovers, dropped passes, etc, poorly coached? If so many are doing it Id would think thats bad coaching in general. Maybe its time Childress brings in the players that continually make mistakes into his office and bitches them out royally. Tells them its not acceptable or something. Maybe he has.


When NFL.com says B. Johnson pass DEEP RIGHT................ that isn't talking about YAC.
No a team making mistakes does not mean it is being poorly coached.

What can Childress do to keep Brad from taking a big sack, from making M. Johnson stop holding, for making them stop jumping offsides. You have a few days before your next game in the NFL much of that is most likely spent on game planning. If you have to plan extra time to help your lineman do what they have been doing since 6th grade then you need new players.

Prophet
11-22-2006, 11:54 AM
"CCthebest" wrote:


How is the team better then any Tice had? I know Tice was a meathead but he at least had some .500 teams or better. Right now we will be lucky to end up at 7-9. I wish i was as optomistic as some that thinks next year will be better.

That is speculation, I admit.
Childress is a first year coach with damn near every aspect of the game and team different.
He is building the team and new schemes.
The defense has improved dramatically this year and the offense needs some minor tweaks to rise from the #16 slot and to capitalize and win the games that they are in....for the gazillionth time, the losses have been by an aveage of 4.8 pts in all but the Patsies.
Childress is supposedly the man at picking and developing QBs, people are sniffing Tarvaris' jock strap and getting a buzz.
Childress is developing him and he is suppose to be the future.
He never ever said BJ was the future.
The team will come into rhythm.
they are not far off.


I think our offense is more set up if we have the lead or can make a few 3rd downs. All year long we havent been good in the redzone or with 3rd downs. All of us hold our breath on 3rd and 3 or more, cause we know it will be a dump pass, draw, or run. Maybe a poorly set up screen. Childress is happy to punt or FG and let our D come in. Sometimes thats a good idea, but not every frigging time.

Again, pulling stuff out of your ass.
Every frigging time?
That is laughable.
Look at the games and see the reasons behind the pathetic red zone production.
They range from execution, to penalties, to dropped balls, to turnovers, to poor reads, to play calling, to people not doing what they're getting paid to do.
Again, they are a mistake or two away from pulling it together.


We have no deep balls, or hardly any. YAC doesnt count as long balls. All that means is BJ threw his usual 5-10 yard pass and Travis or someone ran for some yards after they caught it. Which is great. But it doesnt open the D up, or make the safties play honest. I think that should change. Throw the ball deep to bethal a few times in the first quarter.

That is insane.
There is a post in this thread that completely proves you wrong.
There was not even one game, count 'em, not even one game where the deep ball was not tried multiple times.
How many times have you seen Williamson or other WRs drop a perfectly thrown or catchable ball on a long route?
How many times has the ball been catchable and the receiver didn't catch it?
How many times was it a shitty pass?
They are all factors.
The WR corps has been pathetic and BJ has made some uncharacteristic boneheaded moves and the O-line has been getting torched by subpar teams and the D-line has even been handled by the likes of a marginal O-line like the Packers have.
All fixable.
BTW, YAC does count, look at the long balls in my previous post and look at the stats on NFL.com for yourself....the long balls are not all YAC.
Also, if you want to continue in your excuse marathon trying to justify your hate for Childress use something with substance.
Hell, even one of the best WRs to ever play for MN, Moss, had a lot of long balls that were primarily YAC.
That's part of the game.


Doe anyone know how many time we have throw to Marcus Rob on a fade in the red zone this year? Have we even done it once?

Do you know how many games he didn't even play in?
Does a fade to Marcus Robinson make the coaching staff a hero while the plethora of other plays doesn't.
Your logic is beyond my understanding.


Isnt a team that makes as many mistakes as ours does, with penalties, turnovers, dropped passes, etc, poorly coached? If so many are doing it Id would think thats bad coaching in general. Maybe its time Childress brings in the players that continually make mistakes into his office and bitches them out royally. Tells them its not acceptable or something. Maybe he has.

I would be more surprised if he hasn't.
Do you really think that they watch the game film and don't recognize what us fans recognize?
Do you really think that they don't recognize things levels deeper than you or I do?
Do you really think there is a thought on PP.O that hasn't been discussed in greater detail by the coaching staff and addressed at multiple levels?
I don't.

Changes were made on the O-line last week.
Dugan did a helluva job coming in for Richardson because of the injury.
The coaching staff puts the team on the field that they think has the best chance of winning.
They have a helluva lot more riding on the W than you or I do.

Prophet
11-22-2006, 12:17 PM
"vikes2456" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:



The main problem is many fans live in one time-scale.
Today.
Now.
Yesterday.
This team is currently better than any team Tice put on the field and they will move forward soon.
Within the next few years the Childress haters will be eating crow the whole season long (yes, you can bookmark that statement and serve it up to me if I'm wrong).
Odds are, I will be eating ribeyes.




As of now, I think it is only on par with the teams Tice put on the field. While the defense is better, the offense is flat out terrible. I do think however, we have more hope and a better chance to do better with Childress.
The main problem is not that fans live on a time-scale. If the team is playing terrible, the fans have a right to be pissed and call for the heads if they please, the problem is that both sides refuse to change the argument in any way. Face it, it is not the hardest thing in the world to predict our play calling, I've done it myself many times. But, that is not the only factor, the players need to execute is also a large factor. Although, one can argue that if the players execute, every play should work...

But ya, I'm getting pretty sick of how hard people cling on to their arguments, this is almost like watching a hardcore democrat and a hardcore republican have a political discussion. Each side makes meaningful points, but the truth is always somewhere in the middle


Partially true.
There is a difference between using what happened on the field and pulling stuff out of your ass.
Therein lies the difference between some posters and others.

CCthebest
11-22-2006, 12:35 PM
How is saying throw a few fades to Marcus Robinson in the red zone illogical? Even Tice got it to work. Childress cant or doesnt want to? I know it wont fix all the problems we have, but maybe, just maybe, it can win us a game. MRob is awesome with the fade. Hes been hurt alot as usual, but he has been in a few games, including the Miami one.

When a team as a whole plays bad, a little bit of that is coaching. A HC has got to fix it, or put new people in to try and fix it. If Marcus Johnson sucks at tackle, which he does, dont stick with it every game. Move him or bench him. Take him aside, have him watch film, whatever.

And yeah i know the coaches see what we see. But they havent been able to fix it yet.
Poor coaching or poor players, it doesnt really matter. Eventually youd like to see it fixed.

Del Rio
11-22-2006, 12:40 PM
"CCthebest" wrote:


How is saying throw a few fades to Marcus Robinson in the red zone illogical? Even Tice got it to work. Childress cant or doesnt want to? I know it wont fix all the problems we have, but maybe, just maybe, it can win us a game. MRob is awesome with the fade. Hes been hurt alot as usual, but he has been in a few games, including the Miami one.

When a team as a whole plays bad, a little bit of that is coaching. A HC has got to fix it, or put new people in to try and fix it. If Marcus Johnson sucks at tackle, which he does, dont stick with it every game. Move him or bench him. Take him aside, have him watch film, whatever.

And yeah i know the coaches see what we see. But they havent been able to fix it yet.
Poor coaching or poor players, it doesnt really matter. Eventually youd like to see it fixed.


Do you know he hasn't taken him aside? Do you know he hasn't had him watch film? It is illogical because he has played in very few games and when he was in and healthy he was targeted plenty.

ItalianStallion
11-22-2006, 05:12 PM
I don't think Childress will be a bad coach, I think in a year or two we will have a much better team, and maybe the players who CAN execute in this offense will be starting.


I have a problem with inflexible coaches who won't make the required changes to win football games.
The problem signs have been there since Childress took over as coach, yet certain issues (especially pertaining to a lack of personnel) were never addressed.


If years coaching was proportional to coaching ability why didn't we hire someone older as our head coach, someone who as you put it so eloquently, was coaching when Childress "was crapping his pants and suckling", and why is Tomlin doing such a good job despite being 33?
The fact that Winfield and Childress had a "meeting" afterwards doesn't make what he said any less true.
I would wager that an NFL veteran like Winfield has a good enough understanding of the game that Childress' knowledge doesn't dwarf his as you seem to imply.
I may be mistaken but I believe that this is the first time Childress has called plays at an NFL level, and it shows.
In fact, the experience our coaching staff has at play calling is rather laughable.

Yard/game don't win games, points do.
So even though you seem to think we're ok at 16, were 27th in scoring and would be worse without defensive and special team's scores.
These "manageable problems" that you seem to think are "are not far off" (with nothing to back that statement up..) are not being resolved on Sundays, and frankly, they seem to be getting worse.

The fact is, a qb sack or 5 yard penalty should not be unrecoverable problem on offense.
Unfortunately for us, right now for this offense, it seems like it is.
It seems like the only time our offense is actually effective is when we open it up at the beginning of the game or at the end.

Prophet
11-22-2006, 05:21 PM
"ItalianStallion" wrote:


I don't think Childress will be a bad coach, I think in a year or two we will have a much better team, and maybe the players who CAN execute in this offense will be starting.


I have a problem with inflexible coaches who won't make the required changes to win football games.
The problem signs have been there since Childress took over as coach, yet certain issues (especially pertaining to a lack of personnel) were never addressed.


If years coaching was proportional to coaching ability why didn't we hire someone older as our head coach, someone who as you put it so eloquently, was coaching when Childress "was crapping his pants and suckling", and why is Tomlin doing such a good job despite being 33?
The fact that Winfield and Childress had a "meeting" afterwards doesn't make what he said any less true.
I would wager that an NFL veteran like Winfield has a good enough understanding of the game that Childress' knowledge doesn't dwarf his as you seem to imply.
I may be mistaken but I believe that this is the first time Childress has called plays at an NFL level, and it shows.
In fact, the experience our coaching staff has at play calling is rather laughable.

Yard/game don't win games, points do.
So even though you seem to think we're ok at 16, were 27th in scoring and would be worse without defensive and special team's scores.
These "manageable problems" that you seem to think are "are not far off" (with nothing to back that statement up..) are not being resolved on Sundays, and frankly, they seem to be getting worse.

The fact is, a qb sack or 5 yard penalty should not be unrecoverable problem on offense.
Unfortunately for us, right now for this offense, it seems like it is.
It seems like the only time our offense is actually effective is when we open it up at the beginning of the game or at the end.


I would say with confidence that Childress' understanding of the game dwarfs Winfields.
Winfield has played the game, he has never coached.
There is a huge difference.
Childress has been coaching for over 29 yrs, longer than Winfield has been alive.
If you can't understand that then there's nothing I can do for you.

I'm not satisfied with the #16 slot.
You keep ignoring the fact that we have lost by an average of 4.8 pts in five of the losses.
Tomlin is part of the team.
It is made up of an O, D, and special teams.
Childress is the HC, that means he oversees all.
It's not that tough.
Childress was on OC in Philly and has worked his way up through the ranks if you look at his bio (unlike Meathead who played some ball and did some line/TE coaching without ever sniffing the OC or DC job).

Another thing that you conveniently leave out is that Childress made the move in the second round of the draft to grab Tarvaris.
Most on the site panicked and called him an idiot.
Some are now dedicated crotch sniffers of Tarvaris.
Childress is the supposed developer of QBs.
Tarvaris is the future.
The O and D lines are a priority.
The offense will come around and it's not that far off.
One score away from winning 5 of the 6 ls.
If you think that is enough of a reason to panic I would hate to see your reaction to a legitimate panic situation.

NodakPaul
11-22-2006, 06:02 PM
"Acumen" wrote:


Another thing that you conveniently leave out is that Childress made the move in the second round of the draft to grab Tarvaris.
Most on the site panicked and called him an idiot.
Some are now dedicated crotch sniffers of Tarvaris.

No Kidding!
Many people were irate at Childress for picking up TJ when he did, and now a lot of those same people are beging for Childress to put him in at starting QB. LOL.

I liked the TJ pick.
But I don't like the idea of him going in until he earns the spot in training camp next season.

ItalianStallion
11-22-2006, 08:34 PM
"Acumen" wrote:



I would say with confidence that Childress' understanding of the game dwarfs Winfields.
Winfield has played the game, he has never coached.
There is a huge difference.
Childress has been coaching for over 29 yrs, longer than Winfield has been alive.
If you can't understand that then there's nothing I can do for you.

Actually, Winfield was born in 1977, and Childress started coaching in 1978, so you are incorrect with that statement.
To me, the fact that Winfield has actually played in the NFL is the reason that Winfield has the advantage.
Obviously you have a better overall understanding of the game, having experienced it first hand.
Childress has no idea what it is like in the NFL from a players perspective, or what it is like on the field.
In fact he barely knows what it was like as a college player (which from what I understand, he had a "brief" career as a QB and WR).
Sure, you can say Winfield has never coached, and I never implied that Winfield would be a good coach, but Winfield has been very successful in the league, in multiple defensive systems for years, and that takes just as much understanding as does studying film (which I'm sure winfield does plenty of as well).
We have players older than Tomlin on staff...does that mean they would be a better coach?
Of course not, there is more to being a coach than experience (of which Childress has very little as a NFL HC and playcaller).
And if you can't understand that then there is nothing I can do for you.



I'm not satisfied with the #16 slot.
You keep ignoring the fact that we have lost by an average of 4.8 pts in five of the losses.
Tomlin is part of the team.
It is made up of an O, D, and special teams.
Childress is the HC, that means he oversees all.
It's not that tough.
Childress was on OC in Philly and has worked his way up through the ranks if you look at his bio (unlike Meathead who played some ball and did some line/TE coaching without ever sniffing the OC or DC job).


Well if you are not satisfied with our offense, then forgive the people who are also unsatisfied and voice opinions on it, rather than just accept things are on the way to being better for some apparent reason...
I wonder how much Childress "oversees" when it comes to the defense, that remains unknown.
Also I am not saying Tice is a good coach or that Childress will be a bad coach.
I am simply unsatisfied with the job he is doing, but he is a rookie HC, so that is understandable.



Another thing that you conveniently leave out is that Childress made the move in the second round of the draft to grab Tarvaris.
Most on the site panicked and called him an idiot.
Some are now dedicated crotch sniffers of Tarvaris.
Childress is the supposed developer of QBs.
Tarvaris is the future.
The O and D lines are a priority.
The offense will come around and it's not that far off.
One score away from winning 5 of the 6 ls.
If you think that is enough of a reason to panic I would hate to see your reaction to a legitimate panic situation.


Most people are Tarvaris crotch sniffers because the believe he is the best quartback on the roster, not because they neccesarily believe he was the best qb in the draft or that Childress is a draft guru for giving up so much for a player projected to go much later.
Especially when we could have given up a little more (if that) to grab Cutler or maybe Leinart.
If the Oline has been a priority, it has not been addressed very well, because aside from signing Hutchinson, overpaying McKinnie (for some reason...), and trading for Hicks has not paid off.

Again I don't care that we are losing close games, I care that we are losing games period.
Combine that with the fact that we are losing to teams with inferior talent, and you'll understand my consternation.
I am not panicking anymore because barring a 5-1 run, we are all but toasted this season.
I'm still cheering for the Vikings on Sunday and hoping to have the best season possible.
I just don't think the coaching staff is doing the best job at acheiving that.
But then again, that's just one fans opinion.