PDA

View Full Version : Pass defense is not as bad as everyone thinks.



thevikingfan
11-27-2006, 01:11 AM
OK enough is enough.Our pass defense is not terrible so stop saying it over and over and over....The only reason teams rack up the passing yards on us is because they give up running the ball.Thats what you get when you are the top rushing defense in the league!The card ran in only 5 times today!Leinhart threw it FIFTY ONE TIMES! 51! OF COARSE HE IS GONNA GET A LOT OF YARDS!

snowinapril
11-27-2006, 01:18 AM
ONLY?

I can see some of what you are saying, but we still need to get better on Pass D.

The way other teams move the ball down field tells the story about our D.

CyVikeFan
11-27-2006, 01:24 AM
As long as the Rush defense is doing its job and the Pass defense is not, they're going to get ripped on.
Maybe we should consider blitzing more often?
Might work in the Bears game next week, since Grossman doesn't seem to do very well under pressure and throws often off his back foot.
May also cause him to loft a lot of his passes.

Ltrey33
11-27-2006, 01:25 AM
We got carved up by the Pats and the Packers because they threw the ball around on us. Not every team will be the Cards and turn it over 4 times.

alberta_vike
11-27-2006, 01:38 AM
It isn't just that they are throwing a lot of passes and getting a lot of yards.

There is no pressure on the QB. I don't think the DBs are the problem as much as the line is.

Not only that, but they should know by now that teams are going to pass alot, every game. Where are the adjustments? When you know a team is going to pass 90% of the time, it should be a little bit easier to stop.

midgensa
11-27-2006, 02:05 AM
Our pass defense is definitely not as bad as the numbers would indicate ... and our defensive backs are held far too accountable for something that seems to be pressure related. Losing Tank (A solid blitzing safety), Greenway (a fast LB who could provide more coverage/blitz packages) and Erasmus (a very solid pass rusher in the making) hurts us with pressure and is making our secondary work harder than it should.
That said ... we need to get better against the pass if that is all that opponents are going to do against us. Denny Green said all week he did not plan to run the ball in this game ... I was surprised they did it at all the way he was talking. We need to draw up more blitz packages clearly. Our front four is just not getting any pressure. When we do blitz, teams just screen around us and our lineman and LBs don't pick it up ... this all needs to change if we want to win out and be a player in how this NFL season finishes.

digital420
11-27-2006, 03:35 AM
When you are defending against a team that is going to stick to the pass..

and you can't stop it. there are problems.

400+ yards..
ok.. I agree that if you pass 50+ times. your gonna get yards.
at least they didn't beat us with passing TD's. we are still playing to soft behiend the recivers.. I did notice a fe times that we loose track of WR's. as they scramble around and Denny's young QB was moving a lot in the pocket waiting for that 1 person to get open.

it's not just the secondary, nor the midfield zone or man2man.. but the passrush is just not getting it done. M.l had FAR 2 much time to sit back and wait for someone to open up. he also was playing like a well sculpted QB.

give the kid credit, but.. we gotta step it up if we want playoff pictures to emerge.

DiGiTaL

Vikes
11-27-2006, 04:58 AM
The 'D' is fine. We need more pass pressure.

ultravikingfan
11-27-2006, 05:11 AM
Put it this way:

If our Pass D was better...they would have to run!
The know our Pass D is a joke!
Yes our Run D is good but do not skew things with the #1 Run D.
I mean this is the Cards with a rookie QB.
Your gonna let him come to our house and throw it like that?

Yah, I feel better now because our pass D is not that bad.
::)

Only 27th in the NFL coming into yesterdays game.

singersp
11-27-2006, 06:24 AM
"thevikingfan" wrote:


OK enough is enough.Our pass defense is not terrible so stop saying it over and over and over....The only reason teams rack up the passing yards on us is because they give up running the ball.Thats what you get when you are the top rushing defense in the league!The card ran in only 5 times today!Leinhart threw it FIFTY ONE TIMES! 51! OF COARSE HE IS GONNA GET A LOT OF YARDS!


I'll say it again, our pass defense is terrible. We do not get enough pressure on the QB & teams seem to be successfully throwing 10-15 yard passes on us at will.

Whether it's 20 or 50 times a game, they are moving the chains time & time again. I may be mistaken, but I believe the Cardinals never even punted yesterday.

They don't seem to tighten up the coverage until our opponents are in the redzone.

How often this year have we held a team to a 3 & out?

ejmat
11-27-2006, 07:25 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"thevikingfan" wrote:


OK enough is enough.Our pass defense is not terrible so stop saying it over and over and over....The only reason teams rack up the passing yards on us is because they give up running the ball.Thats what you get when you are the top rushing defense in the league!The card ran in only 5 times today!Leinhart threw it FIFTY ONE TIMES! 51! OF COARSE HE IS GONNA GET A LOT OF YARDS!


I'll say it again, our pass defense is terrible. We do not get enough pressure on the QB & teams seem to be successfully throwing 10-15 yard passes on us at will.

Whether it's 20 or 50 times a game, they are moving the chains time & time again. I may be mistaken, but I believe the Cardinals never even punted yesterday.

They don't seem to tighten up the coverage until our opponents are in the redzone.

How often this year have we held a team to a 3 & out?


I agree Singer.
The pass defense is a problem and here's why:

1.
Minimal pressure on the QB.
The QBs have had time to throw the ball.
This may be because the linemen are getting tired chasing the QB EVERY single play.
This also takes Pat Williams out of the game.

2.
The LBs are quick and fast.
This usually means they are not covering LBs.
Hence, the passes in the middle of the field between 7-20 yards.
Not only that but they end up trying to blitz a lot and
that tires them out too.

3.
Smoot just plain stinks.
Yes, I have jumped on the banwagon.
I have tried to stay positive with him and stick up for him but I have now turned the corner.
His cushions are way to big therefore he gives up the 7 yard pass or an even longer pass because because he can't do anything to alter a WRs route.
Plus, his tackling flat out stinks.
I learned in 3rd grade to wrap your arms.
I don't think I've ever seen him do that.
He uses his shoulder on every play to try and tackle tremendous athletes at 220+ lbs.

4.
Sharper has been taken out of his game.
If you notice they don't pass much his way.
Also There's no way he can make up for the lack of coverage skills when other teams throw this much.

I think we have a couple of bright sides.
I think Winfield has had his best season thus far in the NFL but he's another one that gives up a lot of catches in front of him.
He's a good tackler and makes plays but still gives up the catches.
Griffin will be a good player.
IMO, the best cover guy on the team but the fact is he is still a rookie.

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 07:32 AM
Sorry the pass defense is horrible. It has been all year long. Even when teams were still trying to run. The zone is horrible, the pass pressure is in question and any time you can make a team one dimensional then you have absolutely no excuse for getting numbers run up on you.

If they can't run and you know they have to pass that favors you not them.

It needs lots of work.

PurplePumpkin
11-27-2006, 08:30 AM
Someone said this earlier at PPO.
Why not let Tomlin have TWill he could be just what our secondary needs?

Prophet
11-27-2006, 08:35 AM
"Del" wrote:


Sorry the pass defense is horrible. It has been all year long. Even when teams were still trying to run. The zone is horrible, the pass pressure is in question and any time you can make a team one dimensional then you have absolutely no excuse for getting numbers run up on you.

If they can't run and you know they have to pass that favors you not them.

It needs lots of work.


If you were coaching the D, what would you do?
What do you think Tomlin is doing to make things better in the secondary?

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 08:47 AM
"Acumen" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


Sorry the pass defense is horrible. It has been all year long. Even when teams were still trying to run. The zone is horrible, the pass pressure is in question and any time you can make a team one dimensional then you have absolutely no excuse for getting numbers run up on you.

If they can't run and you know they have to pass that favors you not them.

It needs lots of work.


If you were coaching the D, what would you do?
What do you think Tomlin is doing to make things better in the secondary?


From what I have seen he can't do much. In order for it to improve he would need to change his whole system and I don't think he will do that.

Honest to god, I would go into a 3-4 when they started gunning and force them to run.

MediaLoca
11-27-2006, 09:35 AM
[/quote]

From what I have seen he can't do much. In order for it to improve he would need to change his whole system and I don't think he will do that.

Honest to god, I would go into a 3-4 when they started gunning and force them to run.
[/quote]

Heath Farwell anyone.

Ha!

Actually, it doesn't sound like a bad idea.

NodakPaul
11-27-2006, 09:49 AM
"ejmat" wrote:


3.
Smoot just plain stinks.
Yes, I have jumped on the banwagon.
I have tried to stay positive with him and stick up for him but I have now turned the corner.
His cushions are way to big therefore he gives up the 7 yard pass or an even longer pass because because he can't do anything to alter a WRs route.
Plus, his tackling flat out stinks.
I learned in 3rd grade to wrap your arms.
I don't think I've ever seen him do that.
He uses his shoulder on every play to try and tackle tremendous athletes at 220+ lbs.


Yep, knew this was coming.
I saw a thread about pass defense, and thought "Someone is going to complain about Smoot".
Didn't take long. ::) Just curious, did everyone watch the same game I did yesterday's?
With the exception of the pass interference call, Smoot played a good came in the nickel slot.
The only time he played off was when the other CBs played off too.
But I guess that doesn't matter... because it's Smoot.
Maybe we should credit the fumble recovery to Winfield or someone too while we're at it. ;D

Anyway, I noticed we played a lot less zone and a lot more man yesterday than normal, and our defense did a pretty good job over all.
AZ didn't score an offensive touchdown until late in the fourth quarter.
All in all I am happy with yesterday's game.
Now if we can just do it again against Chicago...

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 09:53 AM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


3.
Smoot just plain stinks.
Yes, I have jumped on the banwagon.
I have tried to stay positive with him and stick up for him but I have now turned the corner.
His cushions are way to big therefore he gives up the 7 yard pass or an even longer pass because because he can't do anything to alter a WRs route.
Plus, his tackling flat out stinks.
I learned in 3rd grade to wrap your arms.
I don't think I've ever seen him do that.
He uses his shoulder on every play to try and tackle tremendous athletes at 220+ lbs.


Yep, knew this was coming.
I saw a thread about pass defense, and thought "Someone is going to complain about Smoot".
Didn't take long. ::) Just curious, did everyone watch the same game I did yesterday's?
With the exception of the pass interference call, Smoot played a good came in the nickel slot.
The only time he played off was when the other CBs played off too.
But I guess that doesn't matter... because it's Smoot.
Maybe we should credit the fumble recovery to Winfield or someone too while we're at it. ;D

Anyway, I noticed we played a lot less zone and a lot more man yesterday than normal, and our defense did a pretty good job over all.
AZ didn't score an offensive touchdown until late in the fourth quarter.
All in all I am happy with yesterday's game.
Now if we can just do it again against Chicago...


At this moment if I had to single out a single position it would be the LB position. They are slacking in both coverage and tackles. You don't want your CB leading your team in tackles. That being said Smoot got outplayed and is now a Nickle back. Much like Brian Williams was when we got Smoot so you have to ask yourself was it worth it for a Nickle back? I don't think so.

PurplePumpkin
11-27-2006, 09:57 AM
It is clear that offense has given up on TWill

A WR that cant catch is not going to go anywhere in NFL.

Why not let Tomlin take TWill... with his speed he maybe just what our secondary needs.
Converting a WR into a CB shouldnt be that hard of a transition?
Its possible he could be very good at it...
Maybe I'm grasping at straws here ,
but sitting on the bench aint gonna help either.

snowinapril
11-27-2006, 10:12 AM
"PurplePumpkin" wrote:


It is clear that offense has given up on TWill

A WR that cant catch is not going to go anywhere in NFL.

Why not let Tomlin take TWill... with his speed he maybe just what our secondary needs.
Converting a WR into a CB shouldnt be that hard of a transition?
Its possible he could be very good at it...
Maybe I'm grasping at straws here ,
but sitting on the bench aint gonna help either.


You hear it all the time.
"There is so much talent in the NFL.
At this level you have to do what you do right or you will be replaced."

With that being said, it is hardly worth the time to turn Twill into something he is not.
Someone like Gordon who has been playing both ways and seems to be a natural athlete would be worth the effort. IMO.


To play D, you have to want to hit, you have to love it.
I find it hard to believe that Twill wants to hit anything except the shower.

I wish we had a place for him on the team where he could help.

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 10:16 AM
T-Will will probably get his shots here and there. What he does with those opportunities will decide his future.

vikes2456
11-27-2006, 10:28 AM
Ya our pass D is pretty horid, no way of getting around that. Granted teams pass against us more than any other team, but that does not hide the fact that we are unable to stop the pass, even against a rookie QB. That being said, I think it's not entirely the corners fault, a lot of the time when I watch/listen to a game the QB has all day to pass the ball. giving the receivers a huge advantage. I'm hoping Childress will go all out this free agency, because with a couple more good players this D will be beastly

snowinapril
11-27-2006, 10:34 AM
"vikes2456" wrote:


Ya our pass D is pretty horid, no way of getting around that. Granted teams pass against us more than any other team, but that does not hide the fact that we are unable to stop the pass, even against a rookie QB. That being said, I think it's not entirely the corners fault, a lot of the time when I watch/listen to a game the QB has all day to pass the ball. giving the receivers a huge advantage. I'm hoping Childress will go all out this free agency, because with a couple more good players this D will be beastly


Yes, what has been intact for the past 3 years and stinks like mad, it is our D line.

We had one season where K-Wil blew up and the rest seems well below average.

Johnstone was our leading guy for like 3 years.

Pressure up front would be nice.
Yesterday, we had guys flying past the QB.
The pocket wasn't being blown up at all, putting pressure on our guys down field to defend the pass.

NodakPaul
11-27-2006, 10:43 AM
"Del" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


3.
Smoot just plain stinks.
Yes, I have jumped on the banwagon.
I have tried to stay positive with him and stick up for him but I have now turned the corner.
His cushions are way to big therefore he gives up the 7 yard pass or an even longer pass because because he can't do anything to alter a WRs route.
Plus, his tackling flat out stinks.
I learned in 3rd grade to wrap your arms.
I don't think I've ever seen him do that.
He uses his shoulder on every play to try and tackle tremendous athletes at 220+ lbs.


Yep, knew this was coming.
I saw a thread about pass defense, and thought "Someone is going to complain about Smoot".
Didn't take long. ::) Just curious, did everyone watch the same game I did yesterday's?
With the exception of the pass interference call, Smoot played a good came in the nickel slot.
The only time he played off was when the other CBs played off too.
But I guess that doesn't matter... because it's Smoot.
Maybe we should credit the fumble recovery to Winfield or someone too while we're at it. ;D

Anyway, I noticed we played a lot less zone and a lot more man yesterday than normal, and our defense did a pretty good job over all.
AZ didn't score an offensive touchdown until late in the fourth quarter.
All in all I am happy with yesterday's game.
Now if we can just do it again against Chicago...


At this moment if I had to single out a single position it would be the LB position. They are slacking in both coverage and tackles. You don't want your CB leading your team in tackles. That being said Smoot got outplayed and is now a Nickle back. Much like Brian Williams was when we got Smoot so you have to ask yourself was it worth it for a Nickle back? I don't think so.


I am not arguing that he got outplayed.
He is now the nickel back, and we are paying him too much to be a nickel back.
I was just laughing at the fact that every time someone mentions problems with our team, someone will blame Smoot, regardless of how well he plays.
He had a good game yesterday.
A better game than Griffin.

I agree that Winfield shouldn't be leading the team in tackles.
He had 13 tackles yesterday.
Griffin was the next closest with 6!
:o

UndisputedVike
11-27-2006, 10:46 AM
::) Knew it wouldn't be long before Smoot bashers reared their heads. Once again Smoot was in Nickel, he didn't start the game, Griffin did and if I'm not mistaken Smoot batted down a few balls as well, 1 saving a TD.

Smoot played very well today, I think people now are just bashing Smoot for sport and just to be funny.

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 10:53 AM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


3.
Smoot just plain stinks.
Yes, I have jumped on the banwagon.
I have tried to stay positive with him and stick up for him but I have now turned the corner.
His cushions are way to big therefore he gives up the 7 yard pass or an even longer pass because because he can't do anything to alter a WRs route.
Plus, his tackling flat out stinks.
I learned in 3rd grade to wrap your arms.
I don't think I've ever seen him do that.
He uses his shoulder on every play to try and tackle tremendous athletes at 220+ lbs.


Yep, knew this was coming.
I saw a thread about pass defense, and thought "Someone is going to complain about Smoot".
Didn't take long. ::) Just curious, did everyone watch the same game I did yesterday's?
With the exception of the pass interference call, Smoot played a good came in the nickel slot.
The only time he played off was when the other CBs played off too.
But I guess that doesn't matter... because it's Smoot.
Maybe we should credit the fumble recovery to Winfield or someone too while we're at it. ;D

Anyway, I noticed we played a lot less zone and a lot more man yesterday than normal, and our defense did a pretty good job over all.
AZ didn't score an offensive touchdown until late in the fourth quarter.
All in all I am happy with yesterday's game.
Now if we can just do it again against Chicago...


At this moment if I had to single out a single position it would be the LB position. They are slacking in both coverage and tackles. You don't want your CB leading your team in tackles. That being said Smoot got outplayed and is now a Nickle back. Much like Brian Williams was when we got Smoot so you have to ask yourself was it worth it for a Nickle back? I don't think so.


I am not arguing that he got outplayed.
He is now the nickel back, and we are paying him too much to be a nickel back.
I was just laughing at the fact that every time someone mentions problems with our team, someone will blame Smoot, regardless of how well he plays.
He had a good game yesterday.
A better game than Griffin.

I agree that Winfield shouldn't be leading the team in tackles.
He had 13 tackles yesterday.
Griffin was the next closest with 6!
:o


All I am saying is the guy certainly isn't doing much to help his standing here in Minnesota he is going to have people calling for his head.

UndisputedVike
11-27-2006, 10:55 AM
"Del" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


3.
Smoot just plain stinks.
Yes, I have jumped on the banwagon.
I have tried to stay positive with him and stick up for him but I have now turned the corner.
His cushions are way to big therefore he gives up the 7 yard pass or an even longer pass because because he can't do anything to alter a WRs route.
Plus, his tackling flat out stinks.
I learned in 3rd grade to wrap your arms.
I don't think I've ever seen him do that.
He uses his shoulder on every play to try and tackle tremendous athletes at 220+ lbs.


Yep, knew this was coming.
I saw a thread about pass defense, and thought "Someone is going to complain about Smoot".
Didn't take long. ::) Just curious, did everyone watch the same game I did yesterday's?
With the exception of the pass interference call, Smoot played a good came in the nickel slot.
The only time he played off was when the other CBs played off too.
But I guess that doesn't matter... because it's Smoot.
Maybe we should credit the fumble recovery to Winfield or someone too while we're at it. ;D

Anyway, I noticed we played a lot less zone and a lot more man yesterday than normal, and our defense did a pretty good job over all.
AZ didn't score an offensive touchdown until late in the fourth quarter.
All in all I am happy with yesterday's game.
Now if we can just do it again against Chicago...


At this moment if I had to single out a single position it would be the LB position. They are slacking in both coverage and tackles. You don't want your CB leading your team in tackles. That being said Smoot got outplayed and is now a Nickle back. Much like Brian Williams was when we got Smoot so you have to ask yourself was it worth it for a Nickle back? I don't think so.


I am not arguing that he got outplayed.
He is now the nickel back, and we are paying him too much to be a nickel back.
I was just laughing at the fact that every time someone mentions problems with our team, someone will blame Smoot, regardless of how well he plays.
He had a good game yesterday.
A better game than Griffin.

I agree that Winfield shouldn't be leading the team in tackles.
He had 13 tackles yesterday.
Griffin was the next closest with 6!
:o


All I am saying is the guy certainly isn't doing much to help his standing here in Minnesota he is going to have people calling for his head.


Well no offence but...what the hell do you expect the guy to do...tell Wilf to cancel his contract give all his money back and ride off into the sunset?

I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.

snowinapril
11-27-2006, 11:02 AM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:



I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.


Problem is Smoot has let down a lot of people by not playing up to expectations.
When he gets paid like he did, that mean he is supposed to be good or close to the best.
With big dollars come high expectations.
He was simply a benefactor of the Redskins D apparently.

Crap happens sometimes.

UndisputedVike
11-27-2006, 11:08 AM
"snowinapril" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:



I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.


Problem is Smoot has let down a lot of people by not playing up to expectations.
When he gets paid like he did, that mean he is supposed to be good or close to the best.
With big dollars come high expectations.
He was simply a benefactor of the Redskins D apparently.

Crap happens sometimes.


I understand that, he's really only had 2 bad games. Carolina game last year and Buffalo this year, other than that he has been solid if not a little better. My whole issue is exactly what Nodak said, despite how well he plays there is always a bunch of people bashing Smoot for no reason.

So the next time Smoot allows 2 TD's a bunch of yards like he did against Smith then you can bash him all you want but when he's doing his job and it's not him costing us the game then nobody has any right to bash him.

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 11:10 AM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:




3.
Smoot just plain stinks.
Yes, I have jumped on the banwagon.
I have tried to stay positive with him and stick up for him but I have now turned the corner.
His cushions are way to big therefore he gives up the 7 yard pass or an even longer pass because because he can't do anything to alter a WRs route.
Plus, his tackling flat out stinks.
I learned in 3rd grade to wrap your arms.
I don't think I've ever seen him do that.
He uses his shoulder on every play to try and tackle tremendous athletes at 220+ lbs.


Yep, knew this was coming.
I saw a thread about pass defense, and thought "Someone is going to complain about Smoot".
Didn't take long. ::) Just curious, did everyone watch the same game I did yesterday's?
With the exception of the pass interference call, Smoot played a good came in the nickel slot.
The only time he played off was when the other CBs played off too.
But I guess that doesn't matter... because it's Smoot.
Maybe we should credit the fumble recovery to Winfield or someone too while we're at it. ;D

Anyway, I noticed we played a lot less zone and a lot more man yesterday than normal, and our defense did a pretty good job over all.
AZ didn't score an offensive touchdown until late in the fourth quarter.
All in all I am happy with yesterday's game.
Now if we can just do it again against Chicago...


At this moment if I had to single out a single position it would be the LB position. They are slacking in both coverage and tackles. You don't want your CB leading your team in tackles. That being said Smoot got outplayed and is now a Nickle back. Much like Brian Williams was when we got Smoot so you have to ask yourself was it worth it for a Nickle back? I don't think so.


I am not arguing that he got outplayed.
He is now the nickel back, and we are paying him too much to be a nickel back.
I was just laughing at the fact that every time someone mentions problems with our team, someone will blame Smoot, regardless of how well he plays.
He had a good game yesterday.
A better game than Griffin.

I agree that Winfield shouldn't be leading the team in tackles.
He had 13 tackles yesterday.
Griffin was the next closest with 6!
:o


All I am saying is the guy certainly isn't doing much to help his standing here in Minnesota he is going to have people calling for his head.


Well no offence but...what the hell do you expect the guy to do...tell Wilf to cancel his contract give all his money back and ride off into the sunset?

I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.


No I expect the Vikings to do exactly what they did. Demote him to Nickle back. His play was piss poor. The coaches saw that, moved him down to arguably the easiest DB position in the game.

The thing is the guy is getting shutdown corner money. So yeah BOO fricken HOO, cry all you want but fans have more then enough reasons to dislike the guy. He brought it all on himself. All he can do now is string together some solid games playing in the easiest DB position in the game and try to win some fans back.

It's on him not the fans. Sorry I can't get excited over my team paying a Nickleback that much money. Did he have a good game sure he did. He better have a whole hell of a lot more games like that too playing in that position.

Sorry you don't get demoted to Nickleback because you only had two bad games.

Prophet
11-27-2006, 11:11 AM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:

...So the next time Smoot allows 2 TD's a bunch of yards like he did against Smith then you can bash him all you want but when he's doing his job and it's not him costing us the game then nobody has any right to bash him.


That could be said about most of the players that get singled out and bashed.
The blame game is a cruel sport that doesn't have any rules.

thanatoschristou
11-27-2006, 11:12 AM
Smoot can cover, he just can't tackle.
I hate watching us get passed on all day but we do bear down in the red zone.
Last night it was said we are 1s against the run, 28th against the pass, 7th in points allowed.
They get there but they can't get it in the end zone.
Our ends are over persuing badly.
They need to set back on their heels so they can cut when the QB cuts.

snowinapril
11-27-2006, 11:22 AM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:



I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.


Problem is Smoot has let down a lot of people by not playing up to expectations.
When he gets paid like he did, that mean he is supposed to be good or close to the best.
With big dollars come high expectations.
He was simply a benefactor of the Redskins D apparently.

Crap happens sometimes.


I understand that, he's really only had 2 bad games. Carolina game last year and Buffalo this year, other than that he has been solid if not a little better. My whole issue is exactly what Nodak said, despite how well he plays there is always a bunch of people bashing Smoot for no reason.

So the next time Smoot allows 2 TD's a bunch of yards like he did against Smith then you can bash him all you want but when he's doing his job and it's not him costing us the game then nobody has any right to bash him.


Yes, I understand what you are saying.

UndisputedVike
11-27-2006, 11:23 AM
"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


"Del" wrote:






3.
Smoot just plain stinks.
Yes, I have jumped on the banwagon.
I have tried to stay positive with him and stick up for him but I have now turned the corner.
His cushions are way to big therefore he gives up the 7 yard pass or an even longer pass because because he can't do anything to alter a WRs route.
Plus, his tackling flat out stinks.
I learned in 3rd grade to wrap your arms.
I don't think I've ever seen him do that.
He uses his shoulder on every play to try and tackle tremendous athletes at 220+ lbs.


Yep, knew this was coming.
I saw a thread about pass defense, and thought "Someone is going to complain about Smoot".
Didn't take long. ::) Just curious, did everyone watch the same game I did yesterday's?
With the exception of the pass interference call, Smoot played a good came in the nickel slot.
The only time he played off was when the other CBs played off too.
But I guess that doesn't matter... because it's Smoot.
Maybe we should credit the fumble recovery to Winfield or someone too while we're at it. ;D

Anyway, I noticed we played a lot less zone and a lot more man yesterday than normal, and our defense did a pretty good job over all.
AZ didn't score an offensive touchdown until late in the fourth quarter.
All in all I am happy with yesterday's game.
Now if we can just do it again against Chicago...


At this moment if I had to single out a single position it would be the LB position. They are slacking in both coverage and tackles. You don't want your CB leading your team in tackles. That being said Smoot got outplayed and is now a Nickle back. Much like Brian Williams was when we got Smoot so you have to ask yourself was it worth it for a Nickle back? I don't think so.


I am not arguing that he got outplayed.
He is now the nickel back, and we are paying him too much to be a nickel back.
I was just laughing at the fact that every time someone mentions problems with our team, someone will blame Smoot, regardless of how well he plays.
He had a good game yesterday.
A better game than Griffin.

I agree that Winfield shouldn't be leading the team in tackles.
He had 13 tackles yesterday.
Griffin was the next closest with 6!
:o


All I am saying is the guy certainly isn't doing much to help his standing here in Minnesota he is going to have people calling for his head.


Well no offence but...what the hell do you expect the guy to do...tell Wilf to cancel his contract give all his money back and ride off into the sunset?

I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.


No I expect the Vikings to do exactly what they did. Demote him to Nickle back. His play was piss poor. The coaches saw that, moved him down to arguably the easiest DB position in the game.

The thing is the guy is getting shutdown corner money. So yeah BOO fricken HOO, cry all you want but fans have more then enough reasons to dislike the guy. He brought it all on himself. All he can do now is string together some solid games playing in the easiest DB position in the game and try to win some fans back.

It's on him not the fans. Sorry I can't get excited over my team paying a Nickleback that much money. Did he have a good game sure he did. He better have a whole hell of a lot more games like that too playing in that position.

Sorry you don't get demoted to Nickleback because you only had two bad games.


Easiest DB position? Try telling that to Whitaker. There is no easy position in football, shut down corner money...as far as I'm concerned there is no such thing anymore, football has grown too dynamic to have anything in the sort.

Even the best corners in the game have their moments and go through the motions. As far as I'm concerned Smoot was benched because he was still grieving over his brothers death and a nagging groin injury, but nobody is even certain.

Marrdro
11-27-2006, 11:28 AM
It all starts up front.

I think our problem stems from the loss of Erasmus.
Trickle down effect is we have a backup at that end position (backups are doing pretty good for the experience they have) which allows them to chip on Udeze.

Think I heard the announcers mention it every time our D was on the field the Keneche doesn't have one sack.

Again, all starts up front.
If the ends can get pressure, the LB blitz will be picked up, the wide recievers have more time to get separation, the corners/secondary get burned.

Good side of all of this is that our young guys drafted this year are getting some playing time and looking pretty good and getting better.
;D

Caine
11-27-2006, 11:39 AM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"snowinapril" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:



I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.


Problem is Smoot has let down a lot of people by not playing up to expectations.
When he gets paid like he did, that mean he is supposed to be good or close to the best.
With big dollars come high expectations.
He was simply a benefactor of the Redskins D apparently.

Crap happens sometimes.


I understand that, he's really only had 2 bad games. Carolina game last year and Buffalo this year, other than that he has been solid if not a little better. My whole issue is exactly what Nodak said, despite how well he plays there is always a bunch of people bashing Smoot for no reason.

So the next time Smoot allows 2 TD's a bunch of yards like he did against Smith then you can bash him all you want but when he's doing his job and it's not him costing us the game then nobody has any right to bash him.


AS much as you may not like it, Smoot will continue to get bashed until he consistantly EARNS that fat paycheck he's getting.
HE set the tone of his stay here in Minnesota, not us.
HE was the one who failed to deliver last season.
HE was the one who promised to make everyone forget last season by playing much better this season.

Smoot did that, not the fans.
And Smoot failed to deliver.

Face it, Smoot is an ok DB, but he's not an elite DB...not like we thought he was.
He's better than Whitaker....but so are 70+ other DB's in the NFL.

Granted, Smoot is not the totality of our Pass "D" woes, but he doesn't help the situation much either.
In Washington, he averaged 4 INT's a year.
He got 2 last season, and has none this season so far.
He IS tackling better - at least his numbers are up.


But, we paid big money for him, and we expected a big money return on our investment...we didn't get it.

The way I see it, Smoot is in danger of losing a lot more than his starting job....he could lose his roster spot come next season.


With Nate Clements and Assante Samuel hitting Free Agency this off season, Smoot has given us little reason to keep paying him when we can replace him for a little more $$$ with a much more productive CB.

The bottom line is that Smoot can't afford to play "decent", Smoot has to play "awesome" in order to regain the trust of the fans...and possibly the franchise.

Smoot, however, isn't the whole problem.
Pass rush isn't getting it done.
With Kevin Williams logging 5 sacks, and Darrion Scott following with 3.5 at last tally, we lack a true impact player in the Pass Rush game.
Here is a list of players with MORE sacks than anyone in Minnesota:

Julius Peppers - CAR - 11
Aaron Kampman - GB - 10
Leonard Little - STL - 10
Shaun Phillips - SD - 9.5
Jason Taylor - MIA - 9
Adalius Thomas - BAL - 9
Aaron Schobel - BUF - 8.5
Robert Mathis - IND - 8.5
Trevor Pryce - BAL - 8.5
Robert Geathers - CIN - 8.5
Derrick Burgess - OAK - 8.5
Shawne Merriman - SD - 8.5
Will Smith - NO - 8.5
Julian Peterson - SEA - 8
Trent Cole - PHI - 8
Mark Anderson - CHI - 8
Kamerion Wimbley - CLE - 7.5
Bobby McCray - JAC - 7
Bart Scott - BAL - 6.5
Justin Smith - CIN - 6.5
Vonnie Holliday - MIA - 6
Terrell Suggs - BAL - 6
Elvis Dumervil - DEN - 6
Kenard Lang - DEN - 6
Jared Allen - KC - 6
Warren Sapp - OAK - 6
DeMarcus Ware - DAL - 6
Bertrand Berry - ARI - 6
Jarvis Green - NE - 5.5
Clark Haggans - PIT - 5.5

Face it, as long as our Pass "D" continues to allow it, teams will continue to throw against us.
So far, we've been able to dodge bullets by stealing red zone fumbles and toughening up at the goal line, but sooner or later, someone is going to make us pay like New England did.

We NEED better penetration of the O-Line, and we NEED better LB coverage...especially on crossing routes and slants.
until we get that, look for a LOT more passing yards to be generated against us.

Caine

CCthebest
11-27-2006, 11:40 AM
Smoot got demoted to playing nickle. The coaches must also see hes not earning his huge paycheck. All i really saw Smoot do yesterday was get hurt at a bad time.

Three things wrong with our D

No pass rush at all. Front four not getting it done. I bet we are dead last in sacks (just a guess).

Our LBs cant cover.

The cover 2 sucks for us for the 2 reasons listed above. Would love to see the 3-4 D or more man to man. The zone isnt working. Our blitz no longer is working.

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 11:43 AM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:








3.
Smoot just plain stinks.
Yes, I have jumped on the banwagon.
I have tried to stay positive with him and stick up for him but I have now turned the corner.
His cushions are way to big therefore he gives up the 7 yard pass or an even longer pass because because he can't do anything to alter a WRs route.
Plus, his tackling flat out stinks.
I learned in 3rd grade to wrap your arms.
I don't think I've ever seen him do that.
He uses his shoulder on every play to try and tackle tremendous athletes at 220+ lbs.


Yep, knew this was coming.
I saw a thread about pass defense, and thought "Someone is going to complain about Smoot".
Didn't take long. ::) Just curious, did everyone watch the same game I did yesterday's?
With the exception of the pass interference call, Smoot played a good came in the nickel slot.
The only time he played off was when the other CBs played off too.
But I guess that doesn't matter... because it's Smoot.
Maybe we should credit the fumble recovery to Winfield or someone too while we're at it. ;D

Anyway, I noticed we played a lot less zone and a lot more man yesterday than normal, and our defense did a pretty good job over all.
AZ didn't score an offensive touchdown until late in the fourth quarter.
All in all I am happy with yesterday's game.
Now if we can just do it again against Chicago...


At this moment if I had to single out a single position it would be the LB position. They are slacking in both coverage and tackles. You don't want your CB leading your team in tackles. That being said Smoot got outplayed and is now a Nickle back. Much like Brian Williams was when we got Smoot so you have to ask yourself was it worth it for a Nickle back? I don't think so.


I am not arguing that he got outplayed.
He is now the nickel back, and we are paying him too much to be a nickel back.
I was just laughing at the fact that every time someone mentions problems with our team, someone will blame Smoot, regardless of how well he plays.
He had a good game yesterday.
A better game than Griffin.

I agree that Winfield shouldn't be leading the team in tackles.
He had 13 tackles yesterday.
Griffin was the next closest with 6!
:o


All I am saying is the guy certainly isn't doing much to help his standing here in Minnesota he is going to have people calling for his head.


Well no offence but...what the hell do you expect the guy to do...tell Wilf to cancel his contract give all his money back and ride off into the sunset?

I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.


No I expect the Vikings to do exactly what they did. Demote him to Nickle back. His play was piss poor. The coaches saw that, moved him down to arguably the easiest DB position in the game.

The thing is the guy is getting shutdown corner money. So yeah BOO fricken HOO, cry all you want but fans have more then enough reasons to dislike the guy. He brought it all on himself. All he can do now is string together some solid games playing in the easiest DB position in the game and try to win some fans back.

It's on him not the fans. Sorry I can't get excited over my team paying a Nickleback that much money. Did he have a good game sure he did. He better have a whole hell of a lot more games like that too playing in that position.

Sorry you don't get demoted to Nickleback because you only had two bad games.


Easiest DB position? Try telling that to Whitaker. There is no easy position in football, shut down corner money...as far as I'm concerned there is no such thing anymore, football has grown too dynamic to have anything in the sort.

Even the best corners in the game have their moments and go through the motions. As far as I'm concerned Smoot was benched because he was still grieving over his brothers death and a nagging groin injury, but nobody is even certain.


Oh it's pretty certain the coaching staff said so, and yes it is arguably the easiest DB position in the NFL one you would not like filled by a guy who was brought in to take on a starting role and has failed to live up to expectations and pay both on and off of the field.

Zeus
11-27-2006, 11:47 AM
"thevikingfan" wrote:


OK enough is enough.Our pass defense is not terrible so stop saying it over and over and over....The only reason teams rack up the passing yards on us is because they give up running the ball.Thats what you get when you are the top rushing defense in the league!The card ran in only 5 times today!Leinhart threw it FIFTY ONE TIMES! 51! OF COARSE HE IS GONNA GET A LOT OF YARDS!


Jake Delhomme threw 38 times yesterday for 168 yards.
So your premise is totally wrong.

The Vikings pass rush is basically non-existant.
Kenechi Udeze has NO SACKS, which is an abomination for an NFL DE who has started every game.
The corners and safeties are doing an adequate job (particularly Antoine Winfield - the Vikings' BEST player) but with no pass rush, they will continue to get 8-yarded to death over the last 5 weeks.

=Z=

Zeus
11-27-2006, 11:49 AM
"midgensa" wrote:


Our pass defense is definitely not as bad as the numbers would indicate ... and our defensive backs are held far too accountable for something that seems to be pressure related. Losing Tank (A solid blitzing safety), Greenway (a fast LB who could provide more coverage/blitz packages) and Erasmus (a very solid pass rusher in the making) hurts us with pressure and is making our secondary work harder than it should.


RE:
Losing Tank -
* Since we never saw him play a down of football for the Vikings, there's absolutely no way to assess the impact of his loss.

RE:
Losing Greenway -
* Since we never saw him play a down of football for the Vikings, there's absolutely no way to assess the impact of his loss.


RE:
Losing James -
* I think Ray Edwards is a beast, and I'd rather have him in there than Erasmus.

=Z=

UndisputedVike
11-27-2006, 11:56 AM
"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:










3.
Smoot just plain stinks.
Yes, I have jumped on the banwagon.
I have tried to stay positive with him and stick up for him but I have now turned the corner.
His cushions are way to big therefore he gives up the 7 yard pass or an even longer pass because because he can't do anything to alter a WRs route.
Plus, his tackling flat out stinks.
I learned in 3rd grade to wrap your arms.
I don't think I've ever seen him do that.
He uses his shoulder on every play to try and tackle tremendous athletes at 220+ lbs.


Yep, knew this was coming.
I saw a thread about pass defense, and thought "Someone is going to complain about Smoot".
Didn't take long. ::) Just curious, did everyone watch the same game I did yesterday's?
With the exception of the pass interference call, Smoot played a good came in the nickel slot.
The only time he played off was when the other CBs played off too.
But I guess that doesn't matter... because it's Smoot.
Maybe we should credit the fumble recovery to Winfield or someone too while we're at it. ;D

Anyway, I noticed we played a lot less zone and a lot more man yesterday than normal, and our defense did a pretty good job over all.
AZ didn't score an offensive touchdown until late in the fourth quarter.
All in all I am happy with yesterday's game.
Now if we can just do it again against Chicago...


At this moment if I had to single out a single position it would be the LB position. They are slacking in both coverage and tackles. You don't want your CB leading your team in tackles. That being said Smoot got outplayed and is now a Nickle back. Much like Brian Williams was when we got Smoot so you have to ask yourself was it worth it for a Nickle back? I don't think so.


I am not arguing that he got outplayed.
He is now the nickel back, and we are paying him too much to be a nickel back.
I was just laughing at the fact that every time someone mentions problems with our team, someone will blame Smoot, regardless of how well he plays.
He had a good game yesterday.
A better game than Griffin.

I agree that Winfield shouldn't be leading the team in tackles.
He had 13 tackles yesterday.
Griffin was the next closest with 6!
:o


All I am saying is the guy certainly isn't doing much to help his standing here in Minnesota he is going to have people calling for his head.


Well no offence but...what the hell do you expect the guy to do...tell Wilf to cancel his contract give all his money back and ride off into the sunset?

I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.


No I expect the Vikings to do exactly what they did. Demote him to Nickle back. His play was piss poor. The coaches saw that, moved him down to arguably the easiest DB position in the game.

The thing is the guy is getting shutdown corner money. So yeah BOO fricken HOO, cry all you want but fans have more then enough reasons to dislike the guy. He brought it all on himself. All he can do now is string together some solid games playing in the easiest DB position in the game and try to win some fans back.

It's on him not the fans. Sorry I can't get excited over my team paying a Nickleback that much money. Did he have a good game sure he did. He better have a whole hell of a lot more games like that too playing in that position.

Sorry you don't get demoted to Nickleback because you only had two bad games.


Easiest DB position? Try telling that to Whitaker. There is no easy position in football, shut down corner money...as far as I'm concerned there is no such thing anymore, football has grown too dynamic to have anything in the sort.

Even the best corners in the game have their moments and go through the motions. As far as I'm concerned Smoot was benched because he was still grieving over his brothers death and a nagging groin injury, but nobody is even certain.


Oh it's pretty certain the coaching staff said so, and yes it is arguably the easiest DB position in the NFL one you would not like filled by a guy who was brought in to take on a starting role and has failed to live up to expectations and pay both on and off of the field.




Well unless I missed something I haven't seen anything where it states Childres or Tomlin saying that Smoot was downright awful and he lost his job outright, article please?

All I saw or heard Childress say was that he wanted to put the best players on the field right now that give us the best chance to win. Now provided of course that could mean anything, it could mean that Smoot is indeed done as a starter or they might just be giving him a break just to see if they could add a quick fix while he has a chance to gather himself.

Like I said nobody but the coaches really know why, and as far easy goes, I'm not buying that, I used to play football myself back in High school, there is no easy position.

Zeus
11-27-2006, 11:58 AM
"Del" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


Sorry the pass defense is horrible. It has been all year long. Even when teams were still trying to run. The zone is horrible, the pass pressure is in question and any time you can make a team one dimensional then you have absolutely no excuse for getting numbers run up on you.

If they can't run and you know they have to pass that favors you not them.

It needs lots of work.


If you were coaching the D, what would you do?
What do you think Tomlin is doing to make things better in the secondary?


From what I have seen he can't do much. In order for it to improve he would need to change his whole system and I don't think he will do that.

Honest to god, I would go into a 3-4 when they started gunning and force them to run.


They played some 3-4 yesterday to keep Leber on the field more.
Seemed to work out pretty good, as he had the 2 forced fumbles.

=Z=

Zeus
11-27-2006, 11:59 AM
"Acumen" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:

...So the next time Smoot allows 2 TD's a bunch of yards like he did against Smith then you can bash him all you want but when he's doing his job and it's not him costing us the game then nobody has any right to bash him.


That could be said about most of the players that get singled out and bashed.
The blame game is a cruel sport that doesn't have any rules.


I blame Prophet for that.

=Z=

Prophet
11-27-2006, 12:04 PM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:












3.
Smoot just plain stinks.
Yes, I have jumped on the banwagon.
I have tried to stay positive with him and stick up for him but I have now turned the corner.
His cushions are way to big therefore he gives up the 7 yard pass or an even longer pass because because he can't do anything to alter a WRs route.
Plus, his tackling flat out stinks.
I learned in 3rd grade to wrap your arms.
I don't think I've ever seen him do that.
He uses his shoulder on every play to try and tackle tremendous athletes at 220+ lbs.


Yep, knew this was coming.
I saw a thread about pass defense, and thought "Someone is going to complain about Smoot".
Didn't take long. ::) Just curious, did everyone watch the same game I did yesterday's?
With the exception of the pass interference call, Smoot played a good came in the nickel slot.
The only time he played off was when the other CBs played off too.
But I guess that doesn't matter... because it's Smoot.
Maybe we should credit the fumble recovery to Winfield or someone too while we're at it. ;D

Anyway, I noticed we played a lot less zone and a lot more man yesterday than normal, and our defense did a pretty good job over all.
AZ didn't score an offensive touchdown until late in the fourth quarter.
All in all I am happy with yesterday's game.
Now if we can just do it again against Chicago...


At this moment if I had to single out a single position it would be the LB position. They are slacking in both coverage and tackles. You don't want your CB leading your team in tackles. That being said Smoot got outplayed and is now a Nickle back. Much like Brian Williams was when we got Smoot so you have to ask yourself was it worth it for a Nickle back? I don't think so.


I am not arguing that he got outplayed.
He is now the nickel back, and we are paying him too much to be a nickel back.
I was just laughing at the fact that every time someone mentions problems with our team, someone will blame Smoot, regardless of how well he plays.
He had a good game yesterday.
A better game than Griffin.

I agree that Winfield shouldn't be leading the team in tackles.
He had 13 tackles yesterday.
Griffin was the next closest with 6!
:o


All I am saying is the guy certainly isn't doing much to help his standing here in Minnesota he is going to have people calling for his head.


Well no offence but...what the hell do you expect the guy to do...tell Wilf to cancel his contract give all his money back and ride off into the sunset?

I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.


No I expect the Vikings to do exactly what they did. Demote him to Nickle back. His play was piss poor. The coaches saw that, moved him down to arguably the easiest DB position in the game.

The thing is the guy is getting shutdown corner money. So yeah BOO fricken HOO, cry all you want but fans have more then enough reasons to dislike the guy. He brought it all on himself. All he can do now is string together some solid games playing in the easiest DB position in the game and try to win some fans back.

It's on him not the fans. Sorry I can't get excited over my team paying a Nickleback that much money. Did he have a good game sure he did. He better have a whole hell of a lot more games like that too playing in that position.

Sorry you don't get demoted to Nickleback because you only had two bad games.


Easiest DB position? Try telling that to Whitaker. There is no easy position in football, shut down corner money...as far as I'm concerned there is no such thing anymore, football has grown too dynamic to have anything in the sort.

Even the best corners in the game have their moments and go through the motions. As far as I'm concerned Smoot was benched because he was still grieving over his brothers death and a nagging groin injury, but nobody is even certain.


Oh it's pretty certain the coaching staff said so, and yes it is arguably the easiest DB position in the NFL one you would not like filled by a guy who was brought in to take on a starting role and has failed to live up to expectations and pay both on and off of the field.




Well unless I missed something I haven't seen anything where it states Childres or Tomlin saying that Smoot was downright awful and he lost his job outright, article please?

All I saw or heard Childress say was that he wanted to put the best players on the field right now that give us the best chance to win. Now provided of course that could mean anything, it could mean that Smoot is indeed done as a starter or they might just be giving him a break just to see if they could add a quick fix while he has a chance to gather himself.

Like I said nobody but the coaches really know why, and as far easy goes, I'm not buying that, I used to play football myself back in High school, there is no easy position.


The only article I'm aware of is filled with speculation.

Smoot benched in lineup shakeup (http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/sports/football/16085920.htm)

A few excerpts:


...Cornerback Fred Smoot has been benched and replaced by rookie Cedric Griffin, according to multiple people close to the situation,..


...The status of Smoot, however, is clear, with Griffin slated to start opposite Antoine Winfield. Griffin is listed on the injury report as questionable after he injured his neck against the Dolphins. But the second-round draft pick's confidence has grown each week this season, and he has impressed coaches with his aggressive style.

The reason for Smoot's benching is murky. He has endured a rough month, starting with the death of his half-brother Nov. 5 in a car accident and continuing with a groin injury that limited him last week.

The primary reason could be the cushion Smoot is providing receivers at the line of scrimmage. Griffin appears superior in press coverage and is a more capable and consistent tackler than Smoot...


...The move could foreshadow Smoot's departure from the team during the offseason. Signed to a six-year, $34 million contract in March 2005 that included $10.8 million in guaranteed money, Smoot has had a tumultuous run.

In 2005, he was slowed by injuries, most notably to his collarbone, and he could not regain his starting spot from Brian Williams late in the season.

Smoot, who clashed with former Vikings coach Mike Tice, welcomed the hiring of Childress, whom he was familiar with from their NFC East battles when Smoot was with the Washington Redskins and Childress was the offensive coordinator of the Philadelphia Eagles. But Smoot was benched for the first series against the Chicago Bears because he showed up late for a team meeting.

If the team cannot trade him, the salary cap hit for releasing him is minimal. Unlike most teams, the Vikings give most of their highest-paid players a roster bonus and opt not to spread out a signing bonus over the length of the deal. Because Smoot's deal included a $6.8 million roster bonus, the most his signing bonus could be is $4 million. Because he has played two seasons, the maximum cap hit would be around $2.66 million.

Smoot will continue to play a significant role for the Vikings over the final six games. He is expected to play in nickel situations.

But next season, the Vikings will welcome back cornerback Dovonte Edwards, who broke his arm in the final exhibition game against Dallas, and could add another cornerback via the draft or free agency...

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 12:06 PM
No problem let me find it for you guys.

UndisputedVike
11-27-2006, 12:14 PM
Yeah, I mean those are reliable sources but, as you said it's only media speculation, it didn't come straight from Childress or Tomlin.

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 12:15 PM
"I think the best thing is that the guys that give you the best chance to win are on the field," Childress said. "It's on merit. Cedric has played well, and therefore he goes to the front of the line."



"I'm just strictly looking at what he puts on the football field," Childress said. "We do that; we compete at all those positions, so [Griffin] has put enough on the field to step to the front of the line and get some reps."



http://www.startribune.com/510/story/833704.html


He outplayed Smoot straight out of the coaches mouth.

Prophet
11-27-2006, 12:17 PM
"Del" wrote:


"I think the best thing is that the guys that give you the best chance to win are on the field," Childress said. "It's on merit. Cedric has played well, and therefore he goes to the front of the line."



"I'm just strictly looking at what he puts on the football field," Childress said. "We do that; we compete at all those positions, so [Griffin] has put enough on the field to step to the front of the line and get some reps."



http://www.startribune.com/510/story/833704.html


He outplayed Smoot straight out of the coaches mouth.




Carve another notch in your belt.

Gift
11-27-2006, 12:23 PM
Our pass D is very bad & as said before its all about the D-line.
Give any QB 3-7 seconds or more to make a play & they will every time.

UndisputedVike
11-27-2006, 12:33 PM
"Del" wrote:


"I think the best thing is that the guys that give you the best chance to win are on the field," Childress said. "It's on merit. Cedric has played well, and therefore he goes to the front of the line."



"I'm just strictly looking at what he puts on the football field," Childress said. "We do that; we compete at all those positions, so [Griffin] has put enough on the field to step to the front of the line and get some reps."



http://www.startribune.com/510/story/833704.html


He outplayed Smoot straight out of the coaches mouth.




Ok yeah, I've seen that before he says he's done enough to play as a starter...in the absence of Smoot and while Smoot is hampered by problems. It would be interesting to see if had that not happend to Smoot would this still have occured.

If Griffin has been outplaying Smoot or there was an issue with Smoot's play why wasn't it addressed earlier, it's not clear. Now maybe that might be enough to set your mind at ease but with all do respect that really doesn't mean anything.

If my brother had just died a week before I wouldn't be focused on football either, anybody could jump right in and steal a job if that were to take place.

ChezPizmo
11-27-2006, 12:33 PM
"Ltrey33" wrote:


We got carved up by the Pats and the Packers because they threw the ball around on us. Not every team will be the Cards and turn it over 4 times.


All I gots to say is I hope that trend continues into the Bears game. I WANT to see Grossman tossin' it up like he has been.


"AND SHARPER IS IN THE ENDZONE!!"

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 12:35 PM
How could Childress saying he wants to put the best players on the field be taken as anything but.

"ITS ON MERIT CEDRIC HAS PLAYED WELL, AND THEREFORE HE GOES TO THE FRONT OF THE LINE"

Childress also said he is strictly looking at the football field, he said plain as day we COMPETE at all those positions, so GRIFFIN has put enough on the field to step to the FRONT.

I don't see must wiggle room for interpretation in those comments.

ChezPizmo
11-27-2006, 12:38 PM
"Del" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


Sorry the pass defense is horrible. It has been all year long. Even when teams were still trying to run. The zone is horrible, the pass pressure is in question and any time you can make a team one dimensional then you have absolutely no excuse for getting numbers run up on you.

If they can't run and you know they have to pass that favors you not them.

It needs lots of work.


If you were coaching the D, what would you do?
What do you think Tomlin is doing to make things better in the secondary?


From what I have seen he can't do much. In order for it to improve he would need to change his whole system and I don't think he will do that.

Honest to god, I would go into a 3-4 when they started gunning and force them to run.


That would probably be a smart thing to do.
If they're tossin' it up 51 times a game, I'd do it.

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 12:39 PM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"I think the best thing is that the guys that give you the best chance to win are on the field," Childress said. "It's on merit. Cedric has played well, and therefore he goes to the front of the line."



"I'm just strictly looking at what he puts on the football field," Childress said. "We do that; we compete at all those positions, so [Griffin] has put enough on the field to step to the front of the line and get some reps."



http://www.startribune.com/510/story/833704.html


He outplayed Smoot straight out of the coaches mouth.




Ok yeah, I've seen that before he says he's done enough to play as a starter...in the absence of Smoot and while Smoot is hampered by problems. It would be interesting to see if had that not happend to Smoot would this still have occured.

If Griffin has been outplaying Smoot or there was an issue with Smoot's play why wasn't it addressed earlier, it's not clear. Now maybe that might be enough to set your mind at ease but with all do respect that really doesn't mean anything.

If my brother had just died a week before I wouldn't be focused on football either, anybody could jump right in and steal a job if that were to take place.


It means everything. He was the best player we had for that position. He was coming off injury himself and still got the start. Childress said plain as day he earned it. It is what it is. Make all the excuses for it in the world you want but your wrong.

Childress said it is strictly going off the football field. He started, he played well and I expect you will see him remain the starter. The fact that Smoot played a good game at Nickle back is fine and dandy. He would make a great nickle back. Lets cut his pay in half.

The fact of the matter is he has missed big tackles this season, he has a troubled off the field past here, and now he is one of the highest paid nickles in the game. Nickles don't play every down. So yeah much like Caine stated the fans have more then enough reasons to place him under the microscope.

UndisputedVike
11-27-2006, 12:48 PM
"Del" wrote:


How could Childress saying he wants to put the best players on the field be taken as anything but.

"ITS ON MERIT CEDRIC HAS PLAYED WELL, AND THEREFORE HE GOES TO THE FRONT OF THE LINE"

Childress also said he is strictly looking at the football field, he said plain as day we COMPETE at all those positions, so GRIFFIN has put enough on the field to step to the FRONT.

I don't see must wiggle room for interpretation in those comments.


Because it doesn't make any sense, where was all this before. As I said if Smoot had been playing so bad why didn't they make the move before. While the guy is down and not playing then you finally figure out your move?

Obviously Smoot was playing good enough earlier to still hold his job and not be benched but as soon as something happens to him, he's not all there and loses his job?

Maybe Cedric won it because of how many tackles he put fourth I don't know, Smoot isn't a particularly a good tackler we all know but in the midst of a playoff race we swap for inexperience and to try and spark a secondary which isn't the real problem on defense in the first place.

Like I said it doesn't make sense and it doesn't add up.

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 12:50 PM
If that isn't enough then I can take solice in the fact that Cedric is a rookie, and has more interceptions and more passes defended then Smoot. He also has fewer starts and played the majority of his time at Nickle where he doesn't get the same play time as Smoot.

So he managed to intercept more balls, knock down more balls, and get some pretty solid tackle stats from a position that gets far less play time then a starting CB. Plus he is a rookie and we have a coach saying he earned it.

If it looks like a fact and smells like a fact...............

UndisputedVike
11-27-2006, 12:53 PM
"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"I think the best thing is that the guys that give you the best chance to win are on the field," Childress said. "It's on merit. Cedric has played well, and therefore he goes to the front of the line."



"I'm just strictly looking at what he puts on the football field," Childress said. "We do that; we compete at all those positions, so [Griffin] has put enough on the field to step to the front of the line and get some reps."



http://www.startribune.com/510/story/833704.html


He outplayed Smoot straight out of the coaches mouth.




Ok yeah, I've seen that before he says he's done enough to play as a starter...in the absence of Smoot and while Smoot is hampered by problems. It would be interesting to see if had that not happend to Smoot would this still have occured.

If Griffin has been outplaying Smoot or there was an issue with Smoot's play why wasn't it addressed earlier, it's not clear. Now maybe that might be enough to set your mind at ease but with all do respect that really doesn't mean anything.

If my brother had just died a week before I wouldn't be focused on football either, anybody could jump right in and steal a job if that were to take place.


It means everything. He was the best player we had for that position. He was coming off injury himself and still got the start. Childress said plain as day he earned it. It is what it is. Make all the excuses for it in the world you want but your wrong.

Childress said it is strictly going off the football field. He started, he played well and I expect you will see him remain the starter. The fact that Smoot played a good game at Nickle back is fine and dandy. He would make a great nickle back. Lets cut his pay in half.

The fact of the matter is he has missed big tackles this season, he has a troubled off the field past here, and now he is one of the highest paid nickles in the game. Nickles don't play every down. So yeah much like Caine stated the fans have more then enough reasons to place him under the microscope.


Putting someone under the microscope and bashing someone for doing the job they've been asked is a completely different thing. As I said what do you expect him to do now? give all his money back and walk, sure he's demoted but obviously even that's not enough to settle anyones nerves.

UndisputedVike
11-27-2006, 01:03 PM
"Del" wrote:


If that isn't enough then I can take solice in the fact that Cedric is a rookie, and has more interceptions and more passes defended then Smoot. He also has fewer starts and played the majority of his time at Nickle where he doesn't get the same play time as Smoot.

So he managed to intercept more balls, knock down more balls, and get some pretty solid tackle stats from a position that gets far less play time then a starting CB. Plus he is a rookie and we have a coach saying he earned it.

If it looks like a fact and smells like a fact...............


If I'm not mistaken the INT came off a reciever that was tipped in the air and well Cedric has been playing arguably the "easiest DB position" 3 of his 5 passes Defensed were from that position AND he plays special teams which could be why he has so many tackles.

Frankly I'm sick of arguing about it and I'm tired of hearing all the blame tossed on one man for the wrong reasons, who cares if he's payed that much, it's not you're money don't worry about it. If we get rid of him happy day you know, I'll be glad when I don't hear about it anymore.

Either way our Pass D looks like swiss cheese with whomever is starting so add that to the stat sheet because it doesn't matter who is at corner as long as the QB has all day to throw it won't matter.

NodakPaul
11-27-2006, 01:53 PM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:


Frankly I'm sick of arguing about it and I'm tired of hearing all the blame tossed on one man for the wrong reasons...


This is what annoys me too UV.
It isn't about whether or not Griffin is better than Smoot for me.
I actually was fairly impressed with Griffin's play this season, especially as a rookie.
I don't agree with Smoot being demoted, but it isn't the hill I want to die on.

My issue is that people simply blame Smoot for everything regardless of his play.
Look at the original post that started this debate:

3.
Smoot just plain stinks.
Yes, I have jumped on the banwagon.
I have tried to stay positive with him and stick up for him but I have now turned the corner.
His cushions are way to big therefore he gives up the 7 yard pass or an even longer pass because because he can't do anything to alter a WRs route.
Plus, his tackling flat out stinks.
I learned in 3rd grade to wrap your arms.
I don't think I've ever seen him do that.
He uses his shoulder on every play to try and tackle tremendous athletes at 220+ lbs.

I don't understand how you can single out Smoot as being one of the major problems in our pass defense and say he "just plain stinks" when he has been playing good ball.
Griffin is also playing well, which is why he got the nod, but that doesn't mean that Smoot is playing bad.
It only means that Griffin was playing better in the eyes of the coach.

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 01:55 PM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


If that isn't enough then I can take solice in the fact that Cedric is a rookie, and has more interceptions and more passes defended then Smoot. He also has fewer starts and played the majority of his time at Nickle where he doesn't get the same play time as Smoot.

So he managed to intercept more balls, knock down more balls, and get some pretty solid tackle stats from a position that gets far less play time then a starting CB. Plus he is a rookie and we have a coach saying he earned it.

If it looks like a fact and smells like a fact...............


If I'm not mistaken the INT came off a reciever that was tipped in the air and well Cedric has been playing arguably the "easiest DB position" 3 of his 5 passes Defensed were from that position AND he plays special teams which could be why he has so many tackles.

Frankly I'm sick of arguing about it and I'm tired of hearing all the blame tossed on one man for the wrong reasons, who cares if he's payed that much, it's not you're money don't worry about it. If we get rid of him happy day you know, I'll be glad when I don't hear about it anymore.

Either way our Pass D looks like swiss cheese with whomever is starting so add that to the stat sheet because it doesn't matter who is at corner as long as the QB has all day to throw it won't matter.


Nope because special teams tackles do not get counted in a players total. They are a seperate statistic.

I tired of you arguing too. So at least we can agree on something.

WaywardHoosier
11-27-2006, 01:59 PM
The Vikings pass defense is very weak.

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 02:03 PM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"I think the best thing is that the guys that give you the best chance to win are on the field," Childress said. "It's on merit. Cedric has played well, and therefore he goes to the front of the line."



"I'm just strictly looking at what he puts on the football field," Childress said. "We do that; we compete at all those positions, so [Griffin] has put enough on the field to step to the front of the line and get some reps."



http://www.startribune.com/510/story/833704.html


He outplayed Smoot straight out of the coaches mouth.




Ok yeah, I've seen that before he says he's done enough to play as a starter...in the absence of Smoot and while Smoot is hampered by problems. It would be interesting to see if had that not happend to Smoot would this still have occured.

If Griffin has been outplaying Smoot or there was an issue with Smoot's play why wasn't it addressed earlier, it's not clear. Now maybe that might be enough to set your mind at ease but with all do respect that really doesn't mean anything.

If my brother had just died a week before I wouldn't be focused on football either, anybody could jump right in and steal a job if that were to take place.


It means everything. He was the best player we had for that position. He was coming off injury himself and still got the start. Childress said plain as day he earned it. It is what it is. Make all the excuses for it in the world you want but your wrong.

Childress said it is strictly going off the football field. He started, he played well and I expect you will see him remain the starter. The fact that Smoot played a good game at Nickle back is fine and dandy. He would make a great nickle back. Lets cut his pay in half.

The fact of the matter is he has missed big tackles this season, he has a troubled off the field past here, and now he is one of the highest paid nickles in the game. Nickles don't play every down. So yeah much like Caine stated the fans have more then enough reasons to place him under the microscope.


Putting someone under the microscope and bashing someone for doing the job they've been asked is a completely different thing. As I said what do you expect him to do now? give all his money back and walk, sure he's demoted but obviously even that's not enough to settle anyones nerves.


Well you admited here he is demoted so I don't know what your continuing to bitch about. I don't expect him to do anything, it's not his decision to do anything it is the organizations decision and they did something they as you just stated, demoted his ass. That is fine by me and probably should have been done sooner.

Get the most out of what you have to work with. I have no problems with it. What I have a problem with is people voice concern over his play, which he has given them reason to do and they get assraped by people here. He is not a scapegoat, he is a player who is playing way below the potential he had.

I could care less if you call someone out that is spewing mindless drivel. And if you look back a few pages you will come to the realization that I wasn't even talking to you, I was talking to NODAK, you are the one that had a chip on your shoulder. I could give a shit about Smoot because his contributions to this team have always been inflated by the people who cannot admit we fucked up on that one.

Well no offence but...what the hell do you expect the guy to do...tell Wilf to cancel his contract give all his money back and ride off into the sunset?

I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.

You asked this I answered and somewhere between me talking to Nodak and here some one dropped the ball.

Zeus
11-27-2006, 02:06 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


My issue is that people simply blame Smoot for everything regardless of his play.
Look at the original post that started this debate:


I blame Smoot for the poor housing market.
I blame Smoot for my daughter's cold.
I blame Smoot for no NFL Network on my cable system.
I blame Smoot for no Fox Trot in the Star-Tribune.
I blame Smoot for cancer, rising diabetes rates and global warming.

=Z=

ejmat
11-27-2006, 02:14 PM
"AWZeus" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


My issue is that people simply blame Smoot for everything regardless of his play.
Look at the original post that started this debate:


I blame Smoot for the poor housing market.
I blame Smoot for my daughter's cold.
I blame Smoot for no NFL Network on my cable system.
I blame Smoot for no Fox Trot in the Star-Tribune.
I blame Smoot for cancer, rising diabetes rates and global warming.

=Z=


LOL AW.


Anyway, for NodakPaul, did you actually watch the game yesterday?
As I stated I have always backed Smoot up until yesterdays game.
Maybe when he learns to cover people and tackle, I will respect him.
I was extremely happy when the Vikings acquired him last year.
The fact is he has done nothing except for a good few plays here and there.
Also, if you look at my ENTIRE post, the Smoot section is only a part of what's I said is wrong with the defnese.
Sorry, but from what I see, he looked horrible.
Then he helps the Cards by crying with 18 seconds left by stopping the clock.
He got up and walked off 5 senonds later.
Why didn't he just tough it out and get off the field from the beginning?
When did I ever blame the entire defensive problems on Smoot?
Please tell me.

UndisputedVike
11-27-2006, 02:15 PM
"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"I think the best thing is that the guys that give you the best chance to win are on the field," Childress said. "It's on merit. Cedric has played well, and therefore he goes to the front of the line."



"I'm just strictly looking at what he puts on the football field," Childress said. "We do that; we compete at all those positions, so [Griffin] has put enough on the field to step to the front of the line and get some reps."



http://www.startribune.com/510/story/833704.html


He outplayed Smoot straight out of the coaches mouth.




Ok yeah, I've seen that before he says he's done enough to play as a starter...in the absence of Smoot and while Smoot is hampered by problems. It would be interesting to see if had that not happend to Smoot would this still have occured.

If Griffin has been outplaying Smoot or there was an issue with Smoot's play why wasn't it addressed earlier, it's not clear. Now maybe that might be enough to set your mind at ease but with all do respect that really doesn't mean anything.

If my brother had just died a week before I wouldn't be focused on football either, anybody could jump right in and steal a job if that were to take place.


It means everything. He was the best player we had for that position. He was coming off injury himself and still got the start. Childress said plain as day he earned it. It is what it is. Make all the excuses for it in the world you want but your wrong.

Childress said it is strictly going off the football field. He started, he played well and I expect you will see him remain the starter. The fact that Smoot played a good game at Nickle back is fine and dandy. He would make a great nickle back. Lets cut his pay in half.

The fact of the matter is he has missed big tackles this season, he has a troubled off the field past here, and now he is one of the highest paid nickles in the game. Nickles don't play every down. So yeah much like Caine stated the fans have more then enough reasons to place him under the microscope.


Putting someone under the microscope and bashing someone for doing the job they've been asked is a completely different thing. As I said what do you expect him to do now? give all his money back and walk, sure he's demoted but obviously even that's not enough to settle anyones nerves.


Well you admited here he is demoted so I don't know what your continuing to beeyatch about. I don't expect him to do anything, it's not his decision to do anything it is the organizations decision and they did something they as you just stated, demoted his jiggly butt. That is fine by me and probably should have been done sooner.

Get the most out of what you have to work with. I have no problems with it. What I have a problem with is people voice concern over his play, which he has given them reason to do and they get assraped by people here. He is not a scapegoat, he is a player who is playing way below the potential he had.

I could care less if you call someone out that is spewing mindless drivel. And if you look back a few pages you will come to the realization that I wasn't even talking to you, I was talking to NODAK, you are the one that had a chip on your shoulder. I could give a pooh about Smoot because his contributions to this team have always been inflated by the people who cannot admit we ~messed up~ up on that one.

Well no offence but...what the hell do you expect the guy to do...tell Wilf to cancel his contract give all his money back and ride off into the sunset?

I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.

You asked this I answered and somewhere between me talking to Nodak and here some one dropped the ball.



Dude, you don't have to be a slick willy about it, it's a discussion over a sport relax, does it really matter if you were talking to me, alot of people do the same thing, it's a forum...I voiced my opinion just like you and the rest do if there's a problem with what I said sue me.

Del Rio
11-27-2006, 02:37 PM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:




"I think the best thing is that the guys that give you the best chance to win are on the field," Childress said. "It's on merit. Cedric has played well, and therefore he goes to the front of the line."



"I'm just strictly looking at what he puts on the football field," Childress said. "We do that; we compete at all those positions, so [Griffin] has put enough on the field to step to the front of the line and get some reps."



http://www.startribune.com/510/story/833704.html


He outplayed Smoot straight out of the coaches mouth.




Ok yeah, I've seen that before he says he's done enough to play as a starter...in the absence of Smoot and while Smoot is hampered by problems. It would be interesting to see if had that not happend to Smoot would this still have occured.

If Griffin has been outplaying Smoot or there was an issue with Smoot's play why wasn't it addressed earlier, it's not clear. Now maybe that might be enough to set your mind at ease but with all do respect that really doesn't mean anything.

If my brother had just died a week before I wouldn't be focused on football either, anybody could jump right in and steal a job if that were to take place.


It means everything. He was the best player we had for that position. He was coming off injury himself and still got the start. Childress said plain as day he earned it. It is what it is. Make all the excuses for it in the world you want but your wrong.

Childress said it is strictly going off the football field. He started, he played well and I expect you will see him remain the starter. The fact that Smoot played a good game at Nickle back is fine and dandy. He would make a great nickle back. Lets cut his pay in half.

The fact of the matter is he has missed big tackles this season, he has a troubled off the field past here, and now he is one of the highest paid nickles in the game. Nickles don't play every down. So yeah much like Caine stated the fans have more then enough reasons to place him under the microscope.


Putting someone under the microscope and bashing someone for doing the job they've been asked is a completely different thing. As I said what do you expect him to do now? give all his money back and walk, sure he's demoted but obviously even that's not enough to settle anyones nerves.


Well you admited here he is demoted so I don't know what your continuing to beeyatch about. I don't expect him to do anything, it's not his decision to do anything it is the organizations decision and they did something they as you just stated, demoted his jiggly butt. That is fine by me and probably should have been done sooner.

Get the most out of what you have to work with. I have no problems with it. What I have a problem with is people voice concern over his play, which he has given them reason to do and they get assraped by people here. He is not a scapegoat, he is a player who is playing way below the potential he had.

I could care less if you call someone out that is spewing mindless drivel. And if you look back a few pages you will come to the realization that I wasn't even talking to you, I was talking to NODAK, you are the one that had a chip on your shoulder. I could give a pooh about Smoot because his contributions to this team have always been inflated by the people who cannot admit we ~messed up~ up on that one.

Well no offence but...what the hell do you expect the guy to do...tell Wilf to cancel his contract give all his money back and ride off into the sunset?

I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.

You asked this I answered and somewhere between me talking to Nodak and here some one dropped the ball.



Dude, you don't have to be a slick willy about it, it's a discussion over a sport relax, does it really matter if you were talking to me, alot of people do the same thing, it's a forum...I voiced my opinion just like you and the rest do if there's a problem with what I said sue me.


Well I don't know your the one saying your tired of arguing about it. I was just pointing out your the one that started it.

I could give a shit who comments on my posts, just don't cry about arguing when your the person who started bitching.

NodakPaul
11-27-2006, 02:44 PM
"ejmat" wrote:


"AWZeus" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


My issue is that people simply blame Smoot for everything regardless of his play.
Look at the original post that started this debate:


I blame Smoot for the poor housing market.
I blame Smoot for my daughter's cold.
I blame Smoot for no NFL Network on my cable system.
I blame Smoot for no Fox Trot in the Star-Tribune.
I blame Smoot for cancer, rising diabetes rates and global warming.

=Z=


LOL AW.


Anyway, for NodakPaul, did you actually watch the game yesterday?
As I stated I have always backed Smoot up until yesterdays game.
Maybe when he learns to cover people and tackle, I will respect him.
I was extremely happy when the Vikings acquired him last year.
The fact is he has done nothing except for a good few plays here and there.
Also, if you look at my ENTIRE post, the Smoot section is only a part of what's I said is wrong with the defnese.
Sorry, but from what I see, he looked horrible.
Then he helps the Cards by crying with 18 seconds left by stopping the clock.
He got up and walked off 5 senonds later.
Why didn't he just tough it out and get off the field from the beginning?
When did I ever blame the entire defensive problems on Smoot?
Please tell me.


:)

I did read your entire post ejmat.
You singled out Smoot and no other player as having problems when you were pointing out what was wrong with the defense.
In summary you listed 4 things wrong with the D.
1) No Pressure
2) The way the Linebackers are being used
3) QBs not passing toward Sharper
4) Smoot

And I did actually watch the game yesterday.
I am a little confused about why you thought Smoot played horrible.
He had a decent game.
If you really want to break it down among corner backs, Griffin (who you said was the best cover guy on the team) gave up over a hundred yards against the AZ receivers, and Smoot only gave up 40 (and recovered a fumble).

I also made sure to watch how far Smoot was playing off in relation to the other CBs when he was out there.
Winfield tends to play about a yard closer than Smoot when they are playing off, and Griffin was almost identical every time, so the argument about him playing off and not being able to defend the short pass or disrupt the receiver would apply to all three of them.

And I don't think he was "crying" on the field just because he wanted to annoy the fans.
But this is the one area that most people have a valid complaint about Smoot.
he throws his body into tackles and can end up hurting himself.
he put on weight in the offseason to counter this, but it hasn't really helped.

Don't get me wrong.
I think Smoot has areas that need vast improvement.
His tackling does suck, and he simply isn't the shutdown corner that we expected him to be when he came to Minnesota.
I won't disagree with the Vikings trading him in the off season.
But I just can't subscribe to the "Smoot just plain sucks" idea because he just plain doesn't.

UndisputedVike
11-27-2006, 02:54 PM
"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:






"I think the best thing is that the guys that give you the best chance to win are on the field," Childress said. "It's on merit. Cedric has played well, and therefore he goes to the front of the line."



"I'm just strictly looking at what he puts on the football field," Childress said. "We do that; we compete at all those positions, so [Griffin] has put enough on the field to step to the front of the line and get some reps."



http://www.startribune.com/510/story/833704.html


He outplayed Smoot straight out of the coaches mouth.




Ok yeah, I've seen that before he says he's done enough to play as a starter...in the absence of Smoot and while Smoot is hampered by problems. It would be interesting to see if had that not happend to Smoot would this still have occured.

If Griffin has been outplaying Smoot or there was an issue with Smoot's play why wasn't it addressed earlier, it's not clear. Now maybe that might be enough to set your mind at ease but with all do respect that really doesn't mean anything.

If my brother had just died a week before I wouldn't be focused on football either, anybody could jump right in and steal a job if that were to take place.


It means everything. He was the best player we had for that position. He was coming off injury himself and still got the start. Childress said plain as day he earned it. It is what it is. Make all the excuses for it in the world you want but your wrong.

Childress said it is strictly going off the football field. He started, he played well and I expect you will see him remain the starter. The fact that Smoot played a good game at Nickle back is fine and dandy. He would make a great nickle back. Lets cut his pay in half.

The fact of the matter is he has missed big tackles this season, he has a troubled off the field past here, and now he is one of the highest paid nickles in the game. Nickles don't play every down. So yeah much like Caine stated the fans have more then enough reasons to place him under the microscope.


Putting someone under the microscope and bashing someone for doing the job they've been asked is a completely different thing. As I said what do you expect him to do now? give all his money back and walk, sure he's demoted but obviously even that's not enough to settle anyones nerves.


Well you admited here he is demoted so I don't know what your continuing to beeyatch about. I don't expect him to do anything, it's not his decision to do anything it is the organizations decision and they did something they as you just stated, demoted his jiggly butt. That is fine by me and probably should have been done sooner.

Get the most out of what you have to work with. I have no problems with it. What I have a problem with is people voice concern over his play, which he has given them reason to do and they get assraped by people here. He is not a scapegoat, he is a player who is playing way below the potential he had.

I could care less if you call someone out that is spewing mindless drivel. And if you look back a few pages you will come to the realization that I wasn't even talking to you, I was talking to NODAK, you are the one that had a chip on your shoulder. I could give a pooh about Smoot because his contributions to this team have always been inflated by the people who cannot admit we ~messed up~ up on that one.

Well no offence but...what the hell do you expect the guy to do...tell Wilf to cancel his contract give all his money back and ride off into the sunset?

I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.

You asked this I answered and somewhere between me talking to Nodak and here some one dropped the ball.



Dude, you don't have to be a slick willy about it, it's a discussion over a sport relax, does it really matter if you were talking to me, alot of people do the same thing, it's a forum...I voiced my opinion just like you and the rest do if there's a problem with what I said sue me.


Well I don't know your the one saying your tired of arguing about it. I was just pointing out your the one that started it.

I could give a pooh who comments on my posts, just don't cry about arguing when your the person who started bitching.


Obviously you do because you fired back rather rudely anyway I told you no offence but obviously you took offence. You also stated "I wasn't even talking to you, I was talking to NODAK, you are the one that had a chip on your shoulder." No chip on my shoulder but I do very much disagree to arrogance.

Cry about arguing...How exactly was that crying, I said I'm of arguing about this, cause frankly it got to the point where it was getting ridiculous. You take things to the heart and too seriously.

Hey people get tired of hearing about Randy Moss, I'm getting tired of people hearing the same thing about Smoot cause frankly there isn't nothing we can do anyway, in a nut shell it's all the same.

Started what? I started a discussion isn't that what a forum is about? You basically implied this "Smoot isn't helping by being here in Minnesota, since his head is being called for" like I said, what's he supposed to do?

Ever heard the saying 'Stick to your guns'? yeah, well I do. I stand by my statement of Smoot being a scape goat, he's blamed for losses by few people when some of the losses were on the offense.

Del Rio
11-28-2006, 11:15 AM
"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"UndisputedVike" wrote:








"I think the best thing is that the guys that give you the best chance to win are on the field," Childress said. "It's on merit. Cedric has played well, and therefore he goes to the front of the line."



"I'm just strictly looking at what he puts on the football field," Childress said. "We do that; we compete at all those positions, so [Griffin] has put enough on the field to step to the front of the line and get some reps."



http://www.startribune.com/510/story/833704.html


He outplayed Smoot straight out of the coaches mouth.




Ok yeah, I've seen that before he says he's done enough to play as a starter...in the absence of Smoot and while Smoot is hampered by problems. It would be interesting to see if had that not happend to Smoot would this still have occured.

If Griffin has been outplaying Smoot or there was an issue with Smoot's play why wasn't it addressed earlier, it's not clear. Now maybe that might be enough to set your mind at ease but with all do respect that really doesn't mean anything.

If my brother had just died a week before I wouldn't be focused on football either, anybody could jump right in and steal a job if that were to take place.


It means everything. He was the best player we had for that position. He was coming off injury himself and still got the start. Childress said plain as day he earned it. It is what it is. Make all the excuses for it in the world you want but your wrong.

Childress said it is strictly going off the football field. He started, he played well and I expect you will see him remain the starter. The fact that Smoot played a good game at Nickle back is fine and dandy. He would make a great nickle back. Lets cut his pay in half.

The fact of the matter is he has missed big tackles this season, he has a troubled off the field past here, and now he is one of the highest paid nickles in the game. Nickles don't play every down. So yeah much like Caine stated the fans have more then enough reasons to place him under the microscope.


Putting someone under the microscope and bashing someone for doing the job they've been asked is a completely different thing. As I said what do you expect him to do now? give all his money back and walk, sure he's demoted but obviously even that's not enough to settle anyones nerves.


Well you admited here he is demoted so I don't know what your continuing to beeyatch about. I don't expect him to do anything, it's not his decision to do anything it is the organizations decision and they did something they as you just stated, demoted his jiggly butt. That is fine by me and probably should have been done sooner.

Get the most out of what you have to work with. I have no problems with it. What I have a problem with is people voice concern over his play, which he has given them reason to do and they get assraped by people here. He is not a scapegoat, he is a player who is playing way below the potential he had.

I could care less if you call someone out that is spewing mindless drivel. And if you look back a few pages you will come to the realization that I wasn't even talking to you, I was talking to NODAK, you are the one that had a chip on your shoulder. I could give a pooh about Smoot because his contributions to this team have always been inflated by the people who cannot admit we ~messed up~ up on that one.

Well no offence but...what the hell do you expect the guy to do...tell Wilf to cancel his contract give all his money back and ride off into the sunset?

I mean for cripes sake everyone uses Smoot as a flippn' scapegoat it's really annoying.

You asked this I answered and somewhere between me talking to Nodak and here some one dropped the ball.



Dude, you don't have to be a slick willy about it, it's a discussion over a sport relax, does it really matter if you were talking to me, alot of people do the same thing, it's a forum...I voiced my opinion just like you and the rest do if there's a problem with what I said sue me.


Well I don't know your the one saying your tired of arguing about it. I was just pointing out your the one that started it.

I could give a pooh who comments on my posts, just don't cry about arguing when your the person who started bitching.


Obviously you do because you fired back rather rudely anyway I told you no offence but obviously you took offence. You also stated "I wasn't even talking to you, I was talking to NODAK, you are the one that had a chip on your shoulder." No chip on my shoulder but I do very much disagree to arrogance.

Cry about arguing...How exactly was that crying, I said I'm of arguing about this, cause frankly it got to the point where it was getting ridiculous. You take things to the heart and too seriously.

Hey people get tired of hearing about Randy Moss, I'm getting tired of people hearing the same thing about Smoot cause frankly there isn't nothing we can do anyway, in a nut shell it's all the same.

Started what? I started a discussion isn't that what a forum is about? You basically implied this "Smoot isn't helping by being here in Minnesota, since his head is being called for" like I said, what's he supposed to do?

Ever heard the saying 'Stick to your guns'? yeah, well I do. I stand by my statement of Smoot being a scape goat, he's blamed for losses by few people when some of the losses were on the offense.


I'm sorry your getting tired of hearing about smoot and all the bad things he has done, and people are upset he got demoted, but that really has not a goddamn thing to do with me or my post.

I'm sure people who call smoot out are tired of hearing that your tired of it. Maybe take your own advice and since you can't do a gol 'darnit thing about it then live with it.

whackthepack
11-28-2006, 11:24 AM
"AWZeus" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


My issue is that people simply blame Smoot for everything regardless of his play.
Look at the original post that started this debate:


I blame Smoot for the poor housing market.
I blame Smoot for my daughter's cold.
I blame Smoot for no NFL Network on my cable system.
I blame Smoot for no Fox Trot in the Star-Tribune.
I blame Smoot for cancer, rising diabetes rates and global warming.

=Z=



You forgot he was to blame for higher oil prices too!

Prophet
11-28-2006, 11:26 AM
"whackthepack" wrote:


"AWZeus" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


My issue is that people simply blame Smoot for everything regardless of his play.
Look at the original post that started this debate:


I blame Smoot for the poor housing market.
I blame Smoot for my daughter's cold.
I blame Smoot for no NFL Network on my cable system.
I blame Smoot for no Fox Trot in the Star-Tribune.
I blame Smoot for cancer, rising diabetes rates and global warming.

=Z=



You forgot he was to blame for higher oil prices too!


His great grandfather caused the stock market crash.

Zeus
11-28-2006, 01:05 PM
"whackthepack" wrote:


"AWZeus" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


My issue is that people simply blame Smoot for everything regardless of his play.
Look at the original post that started this debate:


I blame Smoot for the poor housing market.
I blame Smoot for my daughter's cold.
I blame Smoot for no NFL Network on my cable system.
I blame Smoot for no Fox Trot in the Star-Tribune.
I blame Smoot for cancer, rising diabetes rates and global warming.

=Z=


You forgot he was to blame for higher oil prices too!


Only peripherally - mostly that's Dick Cheney.

Fred Smoot is, however, responsible for Prophet leaving the site and Del's expanding waistline.

=Z=

BloodyHorns82
11-28-2006, 01:30 PM
He's the sole reason that Magic Johnson has HIV.

Mr Anderson
11-28-2006, 01:43 PM
Im in class right now, I love it when we use the computer lab, so I don't have much time to read through the thread. So if this was already mentioned, I apologize, if not thank me later.


Im sure some of you get Sports Illustrated, and in last week's issue there was a whole section about the Cover 2 scheme, and how the Bears play it perfectly. After reading through that I realized what we were lacking.

In the article it said that in order to play the cover 2 you must disrupt the WR routes at the line of scrimmage, jam jam jam a responsibility of the CB, and sometimes the OLBs, so why do we give such cushions? The answer to that is, I don't know.

The only responsibility of the defensive line in a passing situation is to kill the QB, put as much pressure on him as possible, every single time.

Ron Jaworski is quoted in the article saying "there are two ways to beat the Cover 2, 19 yards down the sideline, past the CB's zone, and before the safety can pick him up, but it requires a perfect throw, if you under throw it it will be picked off by the corner and if you overthrow it the WR will end up in the hospital. The second way is with the post route(i.e Donald Driver, and Gabriel on the Pats against us), so you need a middle linebacker who can cover the middle of the field, and no one does that better than Brian Urlacher." That's pretty much exactly what he said in the article, but don't totally quote me on it.

So if the OLBs and Corners have to disrupt the WR's routes, and the middle linebacker's job to cover the middle of the field, why do we play with such a cushion at CB, and why do we blitz the LBs so frequently? Isn't that completely contradictory of the Cover 2 system we supposedly have in place?

What I took from the article is, our defensive line has to put more pressure on the QB without help from blitzing linebackers, our corners need to get in the face of the WR and jam them at the line, and Napoleon Harris needs to play deeper and cover the field.

We have not had the passing plays in the flat or within 8-12 yards in the middle of the field, which means our corners and outside linebackers are doing their job for the most part, however, we have been beaten(badly) by the post and the 18-20 yard sideline routes, exactly what Jaworski was talking about.

Napoleon Harris is a good enough athlete to cover the post, but if he's being blitzed all the time that's impossible, and if our corners would jam WRs at the line of scrimmage, the safeties would have more time to pick them up and the sideline routes would be pretty much eliminated.

I'm kind of surprised to say this, since I look at them as the strongest part of our team, but the defense's inability to stop the pass is because the defensive line can not get enough pressure on the QB on their own.

Hopefully next year when we get Erasmus James back and with the talent in our secondary we will give us enough of a speed rush to get to the QB more frequently, and pull a lot more balls out of the air. Then we should have a top 5 pass defense, and still the number one run defense... and if we add Calvin Johnson, or Dwayne Jarrett in the draft, pick up Leonard Davis or Max Starks in free agency, move Marcus Johnson to guard, and work Tarvaris Jackson hard in the offseason so he is ready to start next year the offense should be good to go, can anyone say Super Bowl?

Oh, and before I get back to doing really work, I seriously recommend picking up that issue of SI and reading that Cover 2 article, it really gives an understanding of how our defense is supposed to be played.

VikemanX84
11-28-2006, 01:44 PM
Fred Smoot killed my dog.

It's probably been said but Grossman is short and getting big guys to get in his face or clog up the line could lead to a lot of batted down balls and some pretty errant throws.
I've been saying it for years - The Bears don't scare me. BJ and Chester don't turn the ball over and we get a lucky break or two and this game is ours.

NodakPaul
11-28-2006, 01:48 PM
I'll have to pick up that issue today on my way home.
We do have some fundamental problems with our version of the Cover 2, primarily, IMHO on the DL.
They simply are not getting any pressure on the quarterback.


As far as jamming the receivers, that is a
big part of the Bears cover 2, but I think Tomlin had different strategy in mind, perhaps he figures that our CBs can get out run if they are in bump and run, and would rather see then defend through coverage... who knows.

It all starts with the DL though.

Del Rio
11-28-2006, 01:48 PM
"Mr" wrote:


Im in class right now, I love it when we use the computer lab, so I don't have much time to read through the thread. So if this was already mentioned, I apologize, if not thank me later.


Im sure some of you get Sports Illustrated, and in last week's issue there was a whole section about the Cover 2 scheme, and how the Bears play it perfectly. After reading through that I realized what we were lacking.

In the article it said that in order to play the cover 2 you must disrupt the WR routes at the line of scrimmage, jam jam jam a responsibility of the CB, and sometimes the OLBs, so why do we give such cushions? The answer to that is, I don't know.

The only responsibility of the defensive line in a passing situation is to kill the QB, put as much pressure on him as possible, every single time.

Ron Jaworski is quoted in the article saying "there are two ways to beat the Cover 2, 19 yards down the sideline, past the CB's zone, and before the safety can pick him up, but it requires a perfect throw, if you under throw it it will be picked off by the corner and if you overthrow it the WR will end up in the hospital. The second way is with the post route(i.e Donald Driver, and Gabriel on the Pats against us), so you need a middle linebacker who can cover the middle of the field, and no one does that better than Brian Urlacher." That's pretty much exactly what he said in the article, but don't totally quote me on it.

So if the OLBs and Corners have to disrupt the WR's routes, and the middle linebacker's job to cover the middle of the field, why do we play with such a cushion at CB, and why do we blitz the LBs so frequently? Isn't that completely contradictory of the Cover 2 system we supposedly have in place?

What I took from the article is, our defensive line has to put more pressure on the QB without help from blitzing linebackers, our corners need to get in the face of the WR and jam them at the line, and Napoleon Harris needs to play deeper and cover the field.

We have not had the passing plays in the flat or within 8-12 yards in the middle of the field, which means our corners and outside linebackers are doing their job for the most part, however, we have been beaten(badly) by the post and the 18-20 yard sideline routes, exactly what Jaworski was talking about.

Napoleon Harris is a good enough athlete to cover the post, but if he's being blitzed all the time that's impossible, and if our corners would jam WRs at the line of scrimmage, the safeties would have more time to pick them up and the sideline routes would be pretty much eliminated.

I'm kind of surprised to say this, since I look at them as the strongest part of our team, but the defense's inability to stop the pass is because the defensive line can not get enough pressure on the QB on their own.

Hopefully next year when we get Erasmus James back and with the talent in our secondary we will give us enough of a speed rush to get to the QB more frequently, and pull a lot more balls out of the air. Then we should have a top 5 pass defense, and still the number one run defense... and if we add Calvin Johnson, or Dwayne Jarrett in the draft, pick up Leonard Davis or Max Starks in free agency, move Marcus Johnson to guard, and work Tarvaris Jackson hard in the offseason so he is ready to start next year the offense should be good to go, can anyone say Super Bowl?

Oh, and before I get back to doing really work, I seriously recommend picking up that issue of SI and reading that Cover 2 article, it really gives an understanding of how our defense is supposed to be played.





The answer to your question is simple. Tomlin doesn't play a traditional cover two, he does what many coaches do and play their own version of a system. He said coming in it will be a cover 2 look with some changes.

So maybe that is where you are seeing inconsistencies.

Mr Anderson
11-28-2006, 01:56 PM
"Del" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


Im in class right now, I love it when we use the computer lab, so I don't have much time to read through the thread. So if this was already mentioned, I apologize, if not thank me later.


Im sure some of you get Sports Illustrated, and in last week's issue there was a whole section about the Cover 2 scheme, and how the Bears play it perfectly. After reading through that I realized what we were lacking.

In the article it said that in order to play the cover 2 you must disrupt the WR routes at the line of scrimmage, jam jam jam a responsibility of the CB, and sometimes the OLBs, so why do we give such cushions? The answer to that is, I don't know.

The only responsibility of the defensive line in a passing situation is to kill the QB, put as much pressure on him as possible, every single time.

Ron Jaworski is quoted in the article saying "there are two ways to beat the Cover 2, 19 yards down the sideline, past the CB's zone, and before the safety can pick him up, but it requires a perfect throw, if you under throw it it will be picked off by the corner and if you overthrow it the WR will end up in the hospital. The second way is with the post route(i.e Donald Driver, and Gabriel on the Pats against us), so you need a middle linebacker who can cover the middle of the field, and no one does that better than Brian Urlacher." That's pretty much exactly what he said in the article, but don't totally quote me on it.

So if the OLBs and Corners have to disrupt the WR's routes, and the middle linebacker's job to cover the middle of the field, why do we play with such a cushion at CB, and why do we blitz the LBs so frequently? Isn't that completely contradictory of the Cover 2 system we supposedly have in place?

What I took from the article is, our defensive line has to put more pressure on the QB without help from blitzing linebackers, our corners need to get in the face of the WR and jam them at the line, and Napoleon Harris needs to play deeper and cover the field.

We have not had the passing plays in the flat or within 8-12 yards in the middle of the field, which means our corners and outside linebackers are doing their job for the most part, however, we have been beaten(badly) by the post and the 18-20 yard sideline routes, exactly what Jaworski was talking about.

Napoleon Harris is a good enough athlete to cover the post, but if he's being blitzed all the time that's impossible, and if our corners would jam WRs at the line of scrimmage, the safeties would have more time to pick them up and the sideline routes would be pretty much eliminated.

I'm kind of surprised to say this, since I look at them as the strongest part of our team, but the defense's inability to stop the pass is because the defensive line can not get enough pressure on the QB on their own.

Hopefully next year when we get Erasmus James back and with the talent in our secondary we will give us enough of a speed rush to get to the QB more frequently, and pull a lot more balls out of the air. Then we should have a top 5 pass defense, and still the number one run defense... and if we add Calvin Johnson, or Dwayne Jarrett in the draft, pick up Leonard Davis or Max Starks in free agency, move Marcus Johnson to guard, and work Tarvaris Jackson hard in the offseason so he is ready to start next year the offense should be good to go, can anyone say Super Bowl?

Oh, and before I get back to doing really work, I seriously recommend picking up that issue of SI and reading that Cover 2 article, it really gives an understanding of how our defense is supposed to be played.





The answer to your question is simple. Tomlin doesn't play a traditional cover two, he does what many coaches do and play their own version of a system. He said coming in it will be a cover 2 look with some changes.

So maybe that is where you are seeing inconsistencies.


I understand that it is a varied system, but with LBs blitzing instead of in coverages, and Corners not jamming, the only thing that even resembles the Cover 2 is the safeties splitting the field.

Del Rio
11-28-2006, 01:59 PM
"Mr" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


Im in class right now, I love it when we use the computer lab, so I don't have much time to read through the thread. So if this was already mentioned, I apologize, if not thank me later.


Im sure some of you get Sports Illustrated, and in last week's issue there was a whole section about the Cover 2 scheme, and how the Bears play it perfectly. After reading through that I realized what we were lacking.

In the article it said that in order to play the cover 2 you must disrupt the WR routes at the line of scrimmage, jam jam jam a responsibility of the CB, and sometimes the OLBs, so why do we give such cushions? The answer to that is, I don't know.

The only responsibility of the defensive line in a passing situation is to kill the QB, put as much pressure on him as possible, every single time.

Ron Jaworski is quoted in the article saying "there are two ways to beat the Cover 2, 19 yards down the sideline, past the CB's zone, and before the safety can pick him up, but it requires a perfect throw, if you under throw it it will be picked off by the corner and if you overthrow it the WR will end up in the hospital. The second way is with the post route(i.e Donald Driver, and Gabriel on the Pats against us), so you need a middle linebacker who can cover the middle of the field, and no one does that better than Brian Urlacher." That's pretty much exactly what he said in the article, but don't totally quote me on it.

So if the OLBs and Corners have to disrupt the WR's routes, and the middle linebacker's job to cover the middle of the field, why do we play with such a cushion at CB, and why do we blitz the LBs so frequently? Isn't that completely contradictory of the Cover 2 system we supposedly have in place?

What I took from the article is, our defensive line has to put more pressure on the QB without help from blitzing linebackers, our corners need to get in the face of the WR and jam them at the line, and Napoleon Harris needs to play deeper and cover the field.

We have not had the passing plays in the flat or within 8-12 yards in the middle of the field, which means our corners and outside linebackers are doing their job for the most part, however, we have been beaten(badly) by the post and the 18-20 yard sideline routes, exactly what Jaworski was talking about.

Napoleon Harris is a good enough athlete to cover the post, but if he's being blitzed all the time that's impossible, and if our corners would jam WRs at the line of scrimmage, the safeties would have more time to pick them up and the sideline routes would be pretty much eliminated.

I'm kind of surprised to say this, since I look at them as the strongest part of our team, but the defense's inability to stop the pass is because the defensive line can not get enough pressure on the QB on their own.

Hopefully next year when we get Erasmus James back and with the talent in our secondary we will give us enough of a speed rush to get to the QB more frequently, and pull a lot more balls out of the air. Then we should have a top 5 pass defense, and still the number one run defense... and if we add Calvin Johnson, or Dwayne Jarrett in the draft, pick up Leonard Davis or Max Starks in free agency, move Marcus Johnson to guard, and work Tarvaris Jackson hard in the offseason so he is ready to start next year the offense should be good to go, can anyone say Super Bowl?

Oh, and before I get back to doing really work, I seriously recommend picking up that issue of SI and reading that Cover 2 article, it really gives an understanding of how our defense is supposed to be played.





The answer to your question is simple. Tomlin doesn't play a traditional cover two, he does what many coaches do and play their own version of a system. He said coming in it will be a cover 2 look with some changes.

So maybe that is where you are seeing inconsistencies.


I understand that it is a varied system, but with LBs blitzing instead of in coverages, and Corners not jamming, the only thing that even resembles the Cover 2 is the safeties splitting the field.


LB's blitz in cover two all the time.

it would be interesting to see some numbers but I know for a fact I have seen our LB's in coverage more often then i have seen them blitzing.

Del Rio
11-28-2006, 02:06 PM
I have a hard time believing that Tomlin who coached LB's for a truely dominant cover two team doesn't know how to run a cover two.

I have never played in the NFL so I have no idea how it works but in college, in HS, in pee-wee.......if you do not do what the coach asks you to do then you do not play. I assume if in the NFL Tomlin is telling his CB's to JAM then they will Jam and if he tells his LB's to cover then they cover.

So it must be on him, and the only solution I can think of (If everything you have said is true) is he isn't playing the traditional cover two at all.

Storm
11-28-2006, 02:31 PM
Well, whichever version of cover 2 he's running is obviously not working for us. So maybe he should start jamming WRs at the line to give rushers more time to get to QB. Assuming they can do it at all, of course.
::)

D_Sharp_24
11-28-2006, 02:56 PM
Our pass defense is not as bad as it looks... Lienhart or whatever the hell his name was threw like 52 times? i am not sure his completion % but anytime a quarterback throws more than 20-30 times you have to expect big yardage, I mean look what brady did you chicago, what was it he had like 285 passing yards or somthing on i dont know how many passes like 28-32? give him 52 and see what he does... even though leinhart is a rookie he is still a pro and very good at what he does.

Del Rio
11-28-2006, 03:02 PM
"Storm" wrote:


Well, whichever version of cover 2 he's running is obviously not working for us. So maybe he should start jamming WRs at the line to give rushers more time to get to QB. Assuming they can do it at all, of course.
::)


I guess if it was that easy then we would win the SB every year.

Storm
11-28-2006, 03:05 PM
Erm, no. Lots of passing attempts does not neccessarily equal lots of yards. Big Ben threw 41 times against the Ravens this week and only got 214 yards. When you know the pass is coming every play you ought to stop it, its actually easier to play D when your opponent is one dimensional.

Storm
11-28-2006, 03:06 PM
"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:


Well, whichever version of cover 2 he's running is obviously not working for us. So maybe he should start jamming WRs at the line to give rushers more time to get to QB. Assuming they can do it at all, of course.
::)


I guess if it was that easy then we would win the SB every year.




Yeah, lets keep doing the same thing on pass D because we're doing it so well. Changing things is bad, mmmkay.

ultravikingfan
11-28-2006, 03:14 PM
You know just kills me?

When somebody starts a thread that is a tad controversial, and never shows back up!

Del Rio
11-28-2006, 03:25 PM
"Storm" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:


Well, whichever version of cover 2 he's running is obviously not working for us. So maybe he should start jamming WRs at the line to give rushers more time to get to QB. Assuming they can do it at all, of course.
::)


I guess if it was that easy then we would win the SB every year.




Yeah, lets keep doing the same thing on pass D because we're doing it so well. Changing things is bad, mmmkay.


It really depends mmmmmmmmmmmkay.

I mean you have a system you want to play, and everybody progresses differently. So what if half your team has it down a handful of players are on the verge and a few are struggling? You're not going to go in an entirely different direction, and confuse everyone.

I love it, lets flip this switch and make it all better ;D

If it was that easy of a fix what makes you think Tomlin wouldn't do it in a heartbeat. Yeah it is great for defensive cords to get lit up, works wonders for the career plan.

Del Rio
11-28-2006, 03:31 PM
Storm, that post was supposed to come off as more sarcasm then anything. If it didn't stick that way I apologize.

Storm
11-28-2006, 03:36 PM
"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:


Well, whichever version of cover 2 he's running is obviously not working for us. So maybe he should start jamming WRs at the line to give rushers more time to get to QB. Assuming they can do it at all, of course.
::)


I guess if it was that easy then we would win the SB every year.




Yeah, lets keep doing the same thing on pass D because we're doing it so well. Changing things is bad, mmmkay.


It really depends mmmmmmmmmmmkay.

I mean you have a system you want to play, and everybody progresses differently. So what if half your team has it down a handful of players are on the verge and a few are struggling? You're not going to go in an entirely different direction, and confuse everyone.

I love it, lets flip this switch and make it all better ;D

If it was that easy of a fix what makes you think Tomlin wouldn't do it in a heartbeat. Yeah it is great for defensive cords to get lit up, works wonders for the career plan.


What makes you think that jamming WRs at the line takes your defense into entirely new direction? OH NOES, we have to stand two yards closer to receivers, call the police! Its still cover 2...

And yeah, making changes and adjustments is sometimes easy. It didnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that we needed to mix things up on offense with longer throws, TE involvement and some personal changes. And look, it worked!

How about trying something new on pass D as well?

Storm
11-28-2006, 03:37 PM
"Del" wrote:


Storm, that post was supposed to come off as more sarcasm then anything. If it didn't stick that way I apologize.


Ah sorry then, my sarcasm detector needs a major upgrade. :D

Del Rio
11-28-2006, 03:41 PM
"Storm" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:


Well, whichever version of cover 2 he's running is obviously not working for us. So maybe he should start jamming WRs at the line to give rushers more time to get to QB. Assuming they can do it at all, of course.
::)


I guess if it was that easy then we would win the SB every year.




Yeah, lets keep doing the same thing on pass D because we're doing it so well. Changing things is bad, mmmkay.


It really depends mmmmmmmmmmmkay.

I mean you have a system you want to play, and everybody progresses differently. So what if half your team has it down a handful of players are on the verge and a few are struggling? You're not going to go in an entirely different direction, and confuse everyone.

I love it, lets flip this switch and make it all better ;D

If it was that easy of a fix what makes you think Tomlin wouldn't do it in a heartbeat. Yeah it is great for defensive cords to get lit up, works wonders for the career plan.


What makes you think that jamming WRs at the line takes your diffence into entirely new direction? OH NOES, we have to stand two yards closer to recievers, call the police! Its still cover 2...

And yeah, making changes and adjustments is soemtimes easy. It didnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that we needed to mix things up on offense with longer throws, TE involvement and some personal changes. And look, it worked!

How about trying something new on pass D as well?


It worked against the worst team in the NFL, that being said it had been working over time anyway, plus having a healthy Marcus Robinson helped.

As you said how hard would it be to jam the WR? If it is easy then why not do it? Are you suggesting Tomlin is stubborn or are you suggesting he just doesn't know how to run a defense?

Even so I would be willing to bet anyone here 20$ that if you tape the Bears Vikings game this week, you will see we blitz no more then they do and we jam just as often. We have been jamming all year and if someone wants to take me up on this that has TIVO we can go play by play and count who does what. Because I guarantee you we jam the WR's quite a bit.

We all have our theory's as to why it isn't working and the truth is probably somewhere in between. I have been saying this pass defense was bad since week one when I saw NAPO running 30 yards downfield with a WR.

I don't think the problem is the jaming, or the blitzing it is the large ammount of space Tomlin expects his LB's to be able to cover.

Storm
11-28-2006, 03:48 PM
It worked against the worst team in the NFL, that being said it had been working over time anyway, plus having a healthy Marcus Robinson helped.

As you said how hard would it be to jam the WR? If it is easy then why not do it? Are you suggesting Tomlin is stubborn or are you suggesting he just doesn't know how to run a defense?


Well, why is our pass defense ranked at the bottom of the league? Is it because our players are so god awful that they cant defend a pass worth a crap? Or maybe is it because Tomlin has chosen a system that doesnt exactly work for us?

If offense can make some changes and be succesful, why cant the D do the same?

Webby
11-28-2006, 03:51 PM
emoticons are your friend!

singersp
11-28-2006, 03:53 PM
"Webby" wrote:


emoticons are your friend!


They sure are! I just wish we had more of them to choose from. * hint, hint *

Del Rio
11-28-2006, 03:55 PM
"Storm" wrote:




It worked against the worst team in the NFL, that being said it had been working over time anyway, plus having a healthy Marcus Robinson helped.

As you said how hard would it be to jam the WR? If it is easy then why not do it? Are you suggesting Tomlin is stubborn or are you suggesting he just doesn't know how to run a defense?


Well, why is our pass defense ranked at the bottom of the league? Is it because our players are so god awful that they cant defend a pass worth a crap? Or maybe is it because Tomlin has chosen a system that doesnt exactly work for us?

If offense can make some changes and be succesful, why cant the D do the same?


They can and they probably are. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Then again I think the only significant change the offense made was limit their mistakes. Which is not on coaching imo.
;D ;D ;D ;D

Sure they moves Williamson down the depth chart, and Tomlin did the same with Smoot. Changes are being made, but I doubt we will find a solution as easy as jam a little more. (Not that you said that) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Del Rio
11-28-2006, 03:58 PM
"Webby" wrote:


emoticons are your friend!


Actually they aren't very friendly to me considering I have been chastized for being an asshole even when using an abundance of annoying smiley faces.

So I like to try and remember to tell someone that way it clears up any doubt.

Some people see emoticons as an "I can be an asshole free card," so I rarely bother.

ejmat
11-28-2006, 04:02 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


"ejmat" wrote:


"AWZeus" wrote:


"NodakPaul" wrote:


My issue is that people simply blame Smoot for everything regardless of his play.
Look at the original post that started this debate:


I blame Smoot for the poor housing market.
I blame Smoot for my daughter's cold.
I blame Smoot for no NFL Network on my cable system.
I blame Smoot for no Fox Trot in the Star-Tribune.
I blame Smoot for cancer, rising diabetes rates and global warming.

=Z=


LOL AW.


Anyway, for NodakPaul, did you actually watch the game yesterday?
As I stated I have always backed Smoot up until yesterdays game.
Maybe when he learns to cover people and tackle, I will respect him.
I was extremely happy when the Vikings acquired him last year.
The fact is he has done nothing except for a good few plays here and there.
Also, if you look at my ENTIRE post, the Smoot section is only a part of what's I said is wrong with the defnese.
Sorry, but from what I see, he looked horrible.
Then he helps the Cards by crying with 18 seconds left by stopping the clock.
He got up and walked off 5 senonds later.
Why didn't he just tough it out and get off the field from the beginning?
When did I ever blame the entire defensive problems on Smoot?
Please tell me.


:)

I did read your entire post ejmat.
You singled out Smoot and no other player as having problems when you were pointing out what was wrong with the defense.
In summary you listed 4 things wrong with the D.
1) No Pressure
2) The way the Linebackers are being used
3) QBs not passing toward Sharper
4) Smoot

And I did actually watch the game yesterday.
I am a little confused about why you thought Smoot played horrible.
He had a decent game.
If you really want to break it down among corner backs, Griffin (who you said was the best cover guy on the team) gave up over a hundred yards against the AZ receivers, and Smoot only gave up 40 (and recovered a fumble).

I also made sure to watch how far Smoot was playing off in relation to the other CBs when he was out there.
Winfield tends to play about a yard closer than Smoot when they are playing off, and Griffin was almost identical every time, so the argument about him playing off and not being able to defend the short pass or disrupt the receiver would apply to all three of them.

And I don't think he was "crying" on the field just because he wanted to annoy the fans.
But this is the one area that most people have a valid complaint about Smoot.
he throws his body into tackles and can end up hurting himself.
he put on weight in the offseason to counter this, but it hasn't really helped.

Don't get me wrong.
I think Smoot has areas that need vast improvement.
His tackling does suck, and he simply isn't the shutdown corner that we expected him to be when he came to Minnesota.
I won't disagree with the Vikings trading him in the off season.
But I just can't subscribe to the "Smoot just plain sucks" idea because he just plain doesn't.


Fair post Nodak but you have to realize I was calling out pretty much the entire team on defense.
I do believe Griffin is the best cover guy on the team and the fact is Smoot really hasn't done much since arriving.
I'm not sure how you came up with the stats as far as how much Griffin gave up vs. Smoot but I'll believe you.
Just remember Griffin was the CB most of the game and Smoot was the Nickel.
I'm not saying Griffin had a great game either.
I'm saying he's the best "cover guy" on the team.
Smoot picked up a fumble but he just happened to be at the right place.
I don't think he did anything else on the play except to be there.
I guess you can say he was around the ball so that's a good thing.
Again, I'm not a Smoot hater.
I just watched and saw he can't cover well or tackle well.
Hence the reason why he does get injured alot.

Storm
11-28-2006, 04:05 PM
They can and they probably are. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Then again I think the only significant change the offense made was limit their mistakes. Which is not on coaching imo.
;D ;D ;D ;D

Sure they moves Williamson down the depth chart, and Tomlin did the same with Smoot. Changes are being made, but I doubt we will find a solution as easy as jam a little more. (Not that you said that) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Emoticons might be your friend, but knowing when to use 'em is your friend too. :D

Anyway, the point is that our pass D blows. I think we kinda agree on that. But for you Tomlin is some sort of a God walking among us, and his system and his variations of cover 2 shall not be questioned be mere mortals. I, on the other hand, think that his system is full of crap. Prevent big play mentality on pass D leads to rookies throwing for 400 yards. Jamming some more might not make us shut teams out, but it might be worth looking at. Same thing with LBs not really doing anything on pass plays, as mentioned before. See, its the coach who should fix this, not players themselves. I cant really point at some one on our D and say that he got owned badly one on one. We do make some mistakes, but nothing too huge. Which leads me to think that its not solely on players, its on the coach as well.

Prophet
11-28-2006, 04:06 PM
"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:


"Del" wrote:




Well, whichever version of cover 2 he's running is obviously not working for us. So maybe he should start jamming WRs at the line to give rushers more time to get to QB. Assuming they can do it at all, of course.
::)


I guess if it was that easy then we would win the SB every year.




Yeah, lets keep doing the same thing on pass D because we're doing it so well. Changing things is bad, mmmkay.


It really depends mmmmmmmmmmmkay.

I mean you have a system you want to play, and everybody progresses differently. So what if half your team has it down a handful of players are on the verge and a few are struggling? You're not going to go in an entirely different direction, and confuse everyone.

I love it, lets flip this switch and make it all better ;D

If it was that easy of a fix what makes you think Tomlin wouldn't do it in a heartbeat. Yeah it is great for defensive cords to get lit up, works wonders for the career plan.


What makes you think that jamming WRs at the line takes your diffence into entirely new direction? OH NOES, we have to stand two yards closer to recievers, call the police! Its still cover 2...

And yeah, making changes and adjustments is soemtimes easy. It didnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that we needed to mix things up on offense with longer throws, TE involvement and some personal changes. And look, it worked!

How about trying something new on pass D as well?


It worked against the worst team in the NFL, that being said it had been working over time anyway, plus having a healthy Marcus Robinson helped.

As you said how hard would it be to jam the WR? If it is easy then why not do it? Are you suggesting Tomlin is stubborn or are you suggesting he just doesn't know how to run a defense?

Even so I would be willing to bet anyone here 20$ that if you tape the Bears Vikings game this week, you will see we blitz no more then they do and we jam just as often. We have been jamming all year and if someone wants to take me up on this that has TIVO we can go play by play and count who does what. Because I guarantee you we jam the WR's quite a bit.

We all have our theory's as to why it isn't working and the truth is probably somewhere in between. I have been saying this pass defense was bad since week one when I saw NAPO running 30 yards downfield with a WR.

I don't think the problem is the jaming, or the blitzing it is the large ammount of space Tomlin expects his LB's to be able to cover.


It would be worth $20 just to make you do that.

jargomcfargo
11-28-2006, 04:10 PM
"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:


"Del" wrote:




Well, whichever version of cover 2 he's running is obviously not working for us. So maybe he should start jamming WRs at the line to give rushers more time to get to QB. Assuming they can do it at all, of course.
::)


I guess if it was that easy then we would win the SB every year.




Yeah, lets keep doing the same thing on pass D because we're doing it so well. Changing things is bad, mmmkay.


It really depends mmmmmmmmmmmkay.

I mean you have a system you want to play, and everybody progresses differently. So what if half your team has it down a handful of players are on the verge and a few are struggling? You're not going to go in an entirely different direction, and confuse everyone.

I love it, lets flip this switch and make it all better ;D

If it was that easy of a fix what makes you think Tomlin wouldn't do it in a heartbeat. Yeah it is great for defensive cords to get lit up, works wonders for the career plan.


What makes you think that jamming WRs at the line takes your diffence into entirely new direction? OH NOES, we have to stand two yards closer to recievers, call the police! Its still cover 2...

And yeah, making changes and adjustments is soemtimes easy. It didnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that we needed to mix things up on offense with longer throws, TE involvement and some personal changes. And look, it worked!

How about trying something new on pass D as well?


It worked against the worst team in the NFL, that being said it had been working over time anyway, plus having a healthy Marcus Robinson helped.

As you said how hard would it be to jam the WR? If it is easy then why not do it? Are you suggesting Tomlin is stubborn or are you suggesting he just doesn't know how to run a defense?

Even so I would be willing to bet anyone here 20$ that if you tape the Bears Vikings game this week, you will see we blitz no more then they do and we jam just as often. We have been jamming all year and if someone wants to take me up on this that has TIVO we can go play by play and count who does what. Because I guarantee you we jam the WR's quite a bit.

We all have our theory's as to why it isn't working and the truth is probably somewhere in between. I have been saying this pass defense was bad since week one when I saw NAPO running 30 yards downfield with a WR.

I don't think the problem is the jaming, or the blitzing it is the large ammount of space Tomlin expects his LB's to be able to cover.


I agree. You could see it a bit more clearly when Dontarrius Thomas spelled Napo. Thomas played his heart out but didn't have the speed to quite get there on some coverages.
I also blame the lack of a pass rush. No zone can stand up to a quarterback with no pressure on him.
And yes we do jam receivers at times. More last week than before it seemed. Probably because there was nothing but passing.

There are key elements to every scheme. You need a middle linebacker with a lot of talent to run this type of defense.You need speed from your other linebackers as well. You also need a pocket disrupting line.Erasmus was a huge loss.They seemed to do much better at least with hurries when he was playing.

Del Rio
11-28-2006, 04:14 PM
"Storm" wrote:




They can and they probably are. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Then again I think the only significant change the offense made was limit their mistakes. Which is not on coaching imo.
;D ;D ;D ;D

Sure they moves Williamson down the depth chart, and Tomlin did the same with Smoot. Changes are being made, but I doubt we will find a solution as easy as jam a little more. (Not that you said that) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Emoticons might be your friend, but knowing when to use 'em is your friend too. :D

Anyway, the point is that our pass D blows. I think we kinda agree on that. But for you Tomlin is some sort of a God walking among us, and his system and his variations of cover 2 shall not be questioned be mere mortals. I, on the other hand, think that his system is full of crap. Prevent big play mentality on pass D leads to rookies throwing for 400 yards. Jamming some more might not make us shut teams out, but it might be worth looking at. Same thing with LBs not really doing anything on pass plays, as mentioned before. See, its the coach who should fix this, not players themselves. I cant really point at some one on our D and say that he got owned badly one on one. We do make some mistakes, but nothing too huge. Which leads me to think that its not solely on players, its on the coach as well.


Your assuming an awful lot by saying i think Tomlin is a god, lmao. Especially given the fact that I just got done telling you I was critisizing his defense week one and took a considerable ammount of heat for it.

I do not think Tomlin is a God, I do however think he is a coach, and I do think I would take his word over a fellow fan any day of the week. Especially when fans want a quick fix, and fans are saying things like we do not jam and we blitz too much when I watch every single game and see the exact opposite.

Del Rio
11-28-2006, 04:16 PM
"jargomcfargo" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:






Well, whichever version of cover 2 he's running is obviously not working for us. So maybe he should start jamming WRs at the line to give rushers more time to get to QB. Assuming they can do it at all, of course.
::)


I guess if it was that easy then we would win the SB every year.




Yeah, lets keep doing the same thing on pass D because we're doing it so well. Changing things is bad, mmmkay.


It really depends mmmmmmmmmmmkay.

I mean you have a system you want to play, and everybody progresses differently. So what if half your team has it down a handful of players are on the verge and a few are struggling? You're not going to go in an entirely different direction, and confuse everyone.

I love it, lets flip this switch and make it all better ;D

If it was that easy of a fix what makes you think Tomlin wouldn't do it in a heartbeat. Yeah it is great for defensive cords to get lit up, works wonders for the career plan.


What makes you think that jamming WRs at the line takes your diffence into entirely new direction? OH NOES, we have to stand two yards closer to recievers, call the police! Its still cover 2...

And yeah, making changes and adjustments is soemtimes easy. It didnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that we needed to mix things up on offense with longer throws, TE involvement and some personal changes. And look, it worked!

How about trying something new on pass D as well?


It worked against the worst team in the NFL, that being said it had been working over time anyway, plus having a healthy Marcus Robinson helped.

As you said how hard would it be to jam the WR? If it is easy then why not do it? Are you suggesting Tomlin is stubborn or are you suggesting he just doesn't know how to run a defense?

Even so I would be willing to bet anyone here 20$ that if you tape the Bears Vikings game this week, you will see we blitz no more then they do and we jam just as often. We have been jamming all year and if someone wants to take me up on this that has TIVO we can go play by play and count who does what. Because I guarantee you we jam the WR's quite a bit.

We all have our theory's as to why it isn't working and the truth is probably somewhere in between. I have been saying this pass defense was bad since week one when I saw NAPO running 30 yards downfield with a WR.

I don't think the problem is the jaming, or the blitzing it is the large ammount of space Tomlin expects his LB's to be able to cover.


I agree. You could see it a bit more clearly when Dontarrius Thomas spelled Napo. Thomas played his heart out but didn't have the speed to quite get there on some coverages.
I also blame the lack of a pass rush. No zone can stand up to a quarterback with no pressure on him.
And yes we do jam receivers at times. More last week than before it seemed. Probably because there was nothing but passing.

There are key elements to every scheme. You need a middle linebacker with a lot of talent to run this type of defense.You need speed from your other linebackers as well. You also need a pocket disrupting line.Erasmus was a huge loss.They seemed to do much better at least with hurries when he was playing.




I agree with you.


Furthermore I don't see how Tomlin can change the entire scheme at this point in the season and jamming WR's is not the problem.

Too much field to cover. A LB will not outrun a WR, if he does he is in the Probowl.

Storm
11-28-2006, 04:19 PM
"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:




They can and they probably are. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Then again I think the only significant change the offense made was limit their mistakes. Which is not on coaching imo.
;D ;D ;D ;D

Sure they moves Williamson down the depth chart, and Tomlin did the same with Smoot. Changes are being made, but I doubt we will find a solution as easy as jam a little more. (Not that you said that) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Emoticons might be your friend, but knowing when to use 'em is your friend too. :D

Anyway, the point is that our pass D blows. I think we kinda agree on that. But for you Tomlin is some sort of a God walking among us, and his system and his variations of cover 2 shall not be questioned be mere mortals. I, on the other hand, think that his system is full of crap. Prevent big play mentality on pass D leads to rookies throwing for 400 yards. Jamming some more might not make us shut teams out, but it might be worth looking at. Same thing with LBs not really doing anything on pass plays, as mentioned before. See, its the coach who should fix this, not players themselves. I cant really point at some one on our D and say that he got owned badly one on one. We do make some mistakes, but nothing too huge. Which leads me to think that its not solely on players, its on the coach as well.


Your assuming an awful lot by saying i think Tomlin is a god, lmao. Especially given the fact that I just got done telling you I was critisizing his defense week one and took a considerable ammount of heat for it.

I do not think Tomlin is a God, I do however think he is a coach, and I do think I would take his word over a fellow fan any day of the week. Especially when fans want a quick fix, and fans are saying things like we do not jam and we blitz too much when I watch every single game and see the exact opposite.



Erm, nowhere did I write that we dont jam. We do jam sometimes, but not nearly enough for my liking. And we do line up an awful lot with big cushions to Wrs. As if we are afraid that they will run right past our backs and burn us for a big play. And that what ticks me off, because everytime we do that their QB throws for 10-15 yards almost at will.

thevikingfan
11-28-2006, 04:22 PM
"singersp" wrote:


"thevikingfan" wrote:


OK enough is enough.Our pass defense is not terrible so stop saying it over and over and over....The only reason teams rack up the passing yards on us is because they give up running the ball.Thats what you get when you are the top rushing defense in the league!The card ran in only 5 times today!Leinhart threw it FIFTY ONE TIMES! 51! OF COARSE HE IS GONNA GET A LOT OF YARDS!


I'll say it again, our pass defense is terrible. We do not get enough pressure on the QB & teams seem to be successfully throwing 10-15 yard passes on us at will.

Whether it's 20 or 50 times a game, they are moving the chains time & time again. I may be mistaken, but I believe the Cardinals never even punted yesterday.

They don't seem to tighten up the coverage until our opponents are in the redzone.

How often this year have we held a team to a 3 & out?


they didnt punt because they had 5 turnovers

WINchester FIELDer
11-28-2006, 04:37 PM
i dont know if anybody has said this yet because i was too lazy to read all the relplies but i think the hole in our secondary is not the corners but is the fault of Dwight Smith

Dont let the interceptions fool you he constantly gives up big plays


and what happend to the pressure by our d-line some sacks please

ultravikingfan
11-28-2006, 04:39 PM
"thevikingfan" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"thevikingfan" wrote:


OK enough is enough.Our pass defense is not terrible so stop saying it over and over and over....The only reason teams rack up the passing yards on us is because they give up running the ball.Thats what you get when you are the top rushing defense in the league!The card ran in only 5 times today!Leinhart threw it FIFTY ONE TIMES! 51! OF COARSE HE IS GONNA GET A LOT OF YARDS!


I'll say it again, our pass defense is terrible. We do not get enough pressure on the QB & teams seem to be successfully throwing 10-15 yard passes on us at will.

Whether it's 20 or 50 times a game, they are moving the chains time & time again. I may be mistaken, but I believe the Cardinals never even punted yesterday.

They don't seem to tighten up the coverage until our opponents are in the redzone.

How often this year have we held a team to a 3 & out?


they didnt punt because they had 5 turnovers


Sweet, you did finally have balls enough to come back.

Now, how about that pass D?
Not so good is it?

Also, not all of the fumbles came from the offense.
Better check on that.

cajunvike
11-28-2006, 04:47 PM
"jargomcfargo" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:






Well, whichever version of cover 2 he's running is obviously not working for us. So maybe he should start jamming WRs at the line to give rushers more time to get to QB. Assuming they can do it at all, of course.
::)


I guess if it was that easy then we would win the SB every year.




Yeah, lets keep doing the same thing on pass D because we're doing it so well. Changing things is bad, mmmkay.


It really depends mmmmmmmmmmmkay.

I mean you have a system you want to play, and everybody progresses differently. So what if half your team has it down a handful of players are on the verge and a few are struggling? You're not going to go in an entirely different direction, and confuse everyone.

I love it, lets flip this switch and make it all better ;D

If it was that easy of a fix what makes you think Tomlin wouldn't do it in a heartbeat. Yeah it is great for defensive cords to get lit up, works wonders for the career plan.


What makes you think that jamming WRs at the line takes your diffence into entirely new direction? OH NOES, we have to stand two yards closer to recievers, call the police! Its still cover 2...

And yeah, making changes and adjustments is soemtimes easy. It didnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that we needed to mix things up on offense with longer throws, TE involvement and some personal changes. And look, it worked!

How about trying something new on pass D as well?


It worked against the worst team in the NFL, that being said it had been working over time anyway, plus having a healthy Marcus Robinson helped.

As you said how hard would it be to jam the WR? If it is easy then why not do it? Are you suggesting Tomlin is stubborn or are you suggesting he just doesn't know how to run a defense?

Even so I would be willing to bet anyone here 20$ that if you tape the Bears Vikings game this week, you will see we blitz no more then they do and we jam just as often. We have been jamming all year and if someone wants to take me up on this that has TIVO we can go play by play and count who does what. Because I guarantee you we jam the WR's quite a bit.

We all have our theory's as to why it isn't working and the truth is probably somewhere in between. I have been saying this pass defense was bad since week one when I saw NAPO running 30 yards downfield with a WR.

I don't think the problem is the jaming, or the blitzing it is the large ammount of space Tomlin expects his LB's to be able to cover.


I agree. You could see it a bit more clearly when Dontarrius Thomas spelled Napo. Thomas played his heart out but didn't have the speed to quite get there on some coverages.
I also blame the lack of a pass rush. No zone can stand up to a quarterback with no pressure on him.
And yes we do jam receivers at times. More last week than before it seemed. Probably because there was nothing but passing.

There are key elements to every scheme. You need a middle linebacker with a lot of talent to run this type of defense.You need speed from your other linebackers as well. You also need a pocket disrupting line.Erasmus was a huge loss.They seemed to do much better at least with hurries when he was playing.




DT runs a 4.4...how much faster does he need to be?
It was probably more a problem with his reads than his speed.

whackthepack
11-28-2006, 04:47 PM
"Storm" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:




They can and they probably are. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Then again I think the only significant change the offense made was limit their mistakes. Which is not on coaching imo.
;D ;D ;D ;D

Sure they moves Williamson down the depth chart, and Tomlin did the same with Smoot. Changes are being made, but I doubt we will find a solution as easy as jam a little more. (Not that you said that) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Emoticons might be your friend, but knowing when to use 'em is your friend too. :D

Anyway, the point is that our pass D blows. I think we kinda agree on that. But for you Tomlin is some sort of a God walking among us, and his system and his variations of cover 2 shall not be questioned be mere mortals. I, on the other hand, think that his system is full of crap. Prevent big play mentality on pass D leads to rookies throwing for 400 yards. Jamming some more might not make us shut teams out, but it might be worth looking at. Same thing with LBs not really doing anything on pass plays, as mentioned before. See, its the coach who should fix this, not players themselves. I cant really point at some one on our D and say that he got owned badly one on one. We do make some mistakes, but nothing too huge. Which leads me to think that its not solely on players, its on the coach as well.


Your assuming an awful lot by saying i think Tomlin is a god, lmao. Especially given the fact that I just got done telling you I was critisizing his defense week one and took a considerable ammount of heat for it.

I do not think Tomlin is a God, I do however think he is a coach, and I do think I would take his word over a fellow fan any day of the week. Especially when fans want a quick fix, and fans are saying things like we do not jam and we blitz too much when I watch every single game and see the exact opposite.



Erm, nowhere did I write that we dont jam. We do jam sometimes, but not nearly enough for my liking. And we do line up an awful lot with big cushions to Wrs. As if we are afraid that they will run right past our backs and burn us for a big play. And that what ticks me off, because everytime we do that their QB throws for 10-15 yards almost at will.




It all comes back to Smoot eventually he is terrible at jamming and plays off to far on the receivers and that is that.
I am sorry if somebody disagrees but after watching him for a season and a half with the Vikes he is not worth the money we are paying him and should be traded (don't think we would get much) or released after this season.

If you watch Griffin he has an instinct for jamming and bumming a receiver and by next year with him Winfield and Devonte Edwards and a new CB added in the offseason we will have an improved backfield.

I think Sharper will still be at the top of his game and with Tank back and Blue and Smith we should be set at safety.

Plus I really like Gordon and think he will be a great reserve for our CB's.

Mr Anderson
11-28-2006, 07:25 PM
"Del" wrote:


I have a hard time believing that Tomlin who coached LB's for a truely dominant cover two team doesn't know how to run a cover two.

I have never played in the NFL so I have no idea how it works but in college, in HS, in pee-wee.......if you do not do what the coach asks you to do then you do not play. I assume if in the NFL Tomlin is telling his CB's to JAM then they will Jam and if he tells his LB's to cover then they cover.

So it must be on him, and the only solution I can think of (If everything you have said is true) is he isn't playing the traditional cover two at all.


It's 100% true according to Sports Illustrated.

And yes linebackers do blitz in the cover 2, but very rarely overload blitzes like we have been showing, and it usually is not the MLB, which is the most important position in the system, we need to keep Harris or DT back, whoever is in there and they need to stop that post route or we will never stop any passing teams.


I am truly scared when we play the Rams at the end of the year, Bulger has been picking zones apart all season, and if we don't step it up he might have 500 yards. Leinart had 51 attempts yesterday, last year against the giants Bulger had 63..... 63!!!!

sleepagent
11-28-2006, 08:08 PM
"thevikingfan" wrote:


OK enough is enough.Our pass defense is not terrible so stop saying it over and over and over....The only reason teams rack up the passing yards on us is because they give up running the ball.Thats what you get when you are the top rushing defense in the league!The card ran in only 5 times today!Leinhart threw it FIFTY ONE TIMES! 51! OF COARSE HE IS GONNA GET A LOT OF YARDS!


I am not gonna read 10 pages of responses, so I'll give you mine.

WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING?

We got shredded.
The reason he passed 51 times is because we couldn't stop them!
If we could stop a passing game, there would be under 200 yards regardless of the rushing.

Our pass defense stinks to high heaven and we need 2 shutdown cover corners for starters!

Not that bad?
::)

Prophet
11-28-2006, 08:17 PM
Remember when Urlacher went down with injury (last year or the year before??) and the Bears D took a nosedive?
I saw Greenway play a couple games in college and liked his style, but have no clue how he will do in the big league.
I do think, like others have mentioned, that we really need an Urlacheresque MLB.
Does Greenway have that potential?

BadlandsVikings
11-28-2006, 08:21 PM
"Acumen" wrote:


Remember when Urlacher went down with injury (last year or the year before??) and the Bears D took a nosedive?
I saw Greenway play a couple games in college and liked his style, but have no clue how he will do in the big league.
I do think, like others have mentioned, that we really need an Urlacheresque MLB.
Does Greenway have that potential?


Hopefully Greenway is healthy next year so we can find out if he has a Urlacheresque animal quality of play.

Mr Anderson
11-28-2006, 08:34 PM
"sleepagent" wrote:


"thevikingfan" wrote:


OK enough is enough.Our pass defense is not terrible so stop saying it over and over and over....The only reason teams rack up the passing yards on us is because they give up running the ball.Thats what you get when you are the top rushing defense in the league!The card ran in only 5 times today!Leinhart threw it FIFTY ONE TIMES! 51! OF COARSE HE IS GONNA GET A LOT OF YARDS!


I am not gonna read 10 pages of responses, so I'll give you mine.

WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING?

We got shredded.
The reason he passed 51 times is because we couldn't stop them!
If we could stop a passing game, there would be under 200 yards regardless of the rushing.

Our pass defense stinks to high heaven and we need 2 shutdown cover corners for starters!

Not that bad?
::)


You don't need two shutdown corners to be a successful pass defense in the NFL.

Look at the Bears, their corners really are not talented at all, but they can jam at the line and really disrupt a WR's routes.

Like Plaxico Burress said "they can catch balls that come straight at them"

No team has two shut down corners, the best pass defense in the league is the raiders, and they have Namdi Asomugha and Fabian Washington, who are young and talented, but it's not like they have Deion Sanders and Mel Blount on the field.

Big C
11-28-2006, 08:39 PM
I agree that the D-Line is not getting enough pressure. I was watching the Arizona game a again and boy did we blitz a lot. Unfortunately for us Lienert was pocket aware enough to side-step the blitzer that got through. We can beat most teams with this pass defense, but when you play good QBs (Brady, Favre) they will just tear us apart because we play zone instead of man-to-man.

Potus2028
11-28-2006, 10:01 PM
"Big" wrote:


I agree that the D-Line is not getting enough pressure. I was watching the Arizona game a again and boy did we blitz a lot. Unfortunately for us Lienert was pocket aware enough to side-step the blitzer that got through. We can beat most teams with this pass defense, but when you play good QBs (Brady, Favre) they will just tear us apart because we play zone instead of man-to-man.


caus we beat 4 in a row with it..

let's be real, our pass Defense stinks! because of our horrible zone coverage.. our D line may need to get to the qb better... but our pass D stinks, we are we fooling?

Ltrey33
11-28-2006, 10:47 PM
"Potus2028" wrote:


"Big" wrote:


I agree that the D-Line is not getting enough pressure. I was watching the Arizona game a again and boy did we blitz a lot. Unfortunately for us Lienert was pocket aware enough to side-step the blitzer that got through. We can beat most teams with this pass defense, but when you play good QBs (Brady, Favre) they will just tear us apart because we play zone instead of man-to-man.


caus we beat 4 in a row with it..

let's be real, our pass Defense stinks! because of our horrible zone coverage.. our D line may need to get to the qb better... but our pass D stinks, we are we fooling?


I agree. The only way we'll win giving up 400 yards passing is if we force 4 turnovers again, and let's face it, that won't happen every week. Nor will it happen against good teams in the playoffs.

thevikingfan
11-28-2006, 11:57 PM
O_0 i started a flame war........

thevikingfan
11-29-2006, 12:03 AM
"Mr" wrote:


"sleepagent" wrote:


"thevikingfan" wrote:


OK enough is enough.Our pass defense is not terrible so stop saying it over and over and over....The only reason teams rack up the passing yards on us is because they give up running the ball.Thats what you get when you are the top rushing defense in the league!The card ran in only 5 times today!Leinhart threw it FIFTY ONE TIMES! 51! OF COARSE HE IS GONNA GET A LOT OF YARDS!


I am not gonna read 10 pages of responses, so I'll give you mine.

WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING?

We got shredded.
The reason he passed 51 times is because we couldn't stop them!
If we could stop a passing game, there would be under 200 yards regardless of the rushing.

Our pass defense stinks to high heaven and we need 2 shutdown cover corners for starters!

Not that bad?
::)


You don't need two shutdown corners to be a successful pass defense in the NFL.

Look at the Bears, their corners really are not talented at all, but they can jam at the line and really disrupt a WR's routes.

Like Plaxico Burress said "they can catch balls that come straight at them"

No team has two shut down corners, the best pass defense in the league is the raiders, and they have Namdi Asomugha and Fabian Washington, who are young and talented, but it's not like they have Deion Sanders and Mel Blount on the field.


i would disagree with that.We got passed on 51 times cuz the cardinals are the worst rushing team and we are the best run d.If the cardinals thought they could run it they would have but instead they decided to do what the patriots did.

Del Rio
11-29-2006, 07:45 AM
"Storm" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:




They can and they probably are. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Then again I think the only significant change the offense made was limit their mistakes. Which is not on coaching imo.
;D ;D ;D ;D

Sure they moves Williamson down the depth chart, and Tomlin did the same with Smoot. Changes are being made, but I doubt we will find a solution as easy as jam a little more. (Not that you said that) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D


Emoticons might be your friend, but knowing when to use 'em is your friend too. :D

Anyway, the point is that our pass D blows. I think we kinda agree on that. But for you Tomlin is some sort of a God walking among us, and his system and his variations of cover 2 shall not be questioned be mere mortals. I, on the other hand, think that his system is full of crap. Prevent big play mentality on pass D leads to rookies throwing for 400 yards. Jamming some more might not make us shut teams out, but it might be worth looking at. Same thing with LBs not really doing anything on pass plays, as mentioned before. See, its the coach who should fix this, not players themselves. I cant really point at some one on our D and say that he got owned badly one on one. We do make some mistakes, but nothing too huge. Which leads me to think that its not solely on players, its on the coach as well.


Your assuming an awful lot by saying i think Tomlin is a god, lmao. Especially given the fact that I just got done telling you I was critisizing his defense week one and took a considerable ammount of heat for it.

I do not think Tomlin is a God, I do however think he is a coach, and I do think I would take his word over a fellow fan any day of the week. Especially when fans want a quick fix, and fans are saying things like we do not jam and we blitz too much when I watch every single game and see the exact opposite.



Erm, nowhere did I write that we dont jam. We do jam sometimes, but not nearly enough for my liking. And we do line up an awful lot with big cushions to Wrs. As if we are afraid that they will run right past our backs and burn us for a big play. And that what ticks me off, because everytime we do that their QB throws for 10-15 yards almost at will.


And unless you encompass all of fandom I never said you did write that now did I?

Del Rio
11-29-2006, 07:52 AM
The problem with jamming in a zone defense is you are not covering a player you are covering a portion of the field. If you have 4 yards from sideline to center and 8 yards back and you are on the line to jam your giving up all that space.

We do jam, we do blitz, we do cushion, we do coverage instead of blitz. I do not think there is one thing that can be done that will change the results. We need better players or we need a simpler system.

The only thing I can think of that they can do and have been doing with limited success is go into a 3-4. They showed it a few times last week it worked well.

He is trying changes. It is frustrating, but it would be the same as trying to fix a levy with flood waters rushing through. People see the zone so they are exploiting it as much as possible. It's like trying to get a bruise to heal with someone poking it over and over every week.

cogitans
11-29-2006, 08:08 AM
"Del" wrote:


The problem with jamming in a zone defense is you are not covering a player you are covering a portion of the field. If you have 4 yards from sideline to center and 8 yards back and you are on the line to jam your giving up all that space.

We do jam, we do blitz, we do cushion, we do coverage instead of blitz. I do not think there is one thing that can be done that will change the results. We need better players or we need a simpler system.

The only thing I can think of that they can do and have been doing with limited success is go into a 3-4. They showed it a few times last week it worked well.

He is trying changes. It is frustrating, but it would be the same as trying to fix a levy with flood waters rushing through. People see the zone so they are exploiting it as much as possible. It's like trying to get a bruise to heal with someone poking it over and over every week.


As usual a disclaimer, because I probably don't know what I'm talking about.

But haven't our zones mostly been beaten underneath, and between the zones where one ends and the other starts.

Isn't it possible to start up closer to LOS, and then follow back as recievers progress down the field.

I know they risk loosing a step if they jam, but couldn't that be ok to take that risk from time to time.

singersp
11-29-2006, 08:12 AM
"whackthepack" wrote:

It all comes back to Smoot eventually he is terrible at jamming and plays off to far on the receivers and that is that.
I am sorry if somebody disagrees but after watching him for a season and a half with the Vikes he is not worth the money we are paying him and should be traded (don't think we would get much) or released after this season.

Sure he does, so does Griffin & the other DB's. It's called zone defense. You act like Smoot is the only one doing it, when that is not the case.

They are giving up too much field in front of them & that is what is being exploited.

You need to get to a game & sit in the upper level & look at the defensive coverage. You get a whole new perspective of the field of play & can see how the plays develop from a view they seldom show on television.

ejmat
11-29-2006, 08:23 AM
One of the other problems is when the DBs are playing 10 yards off the line the Safeties are too (meaning they are too close).
Also, the LBs are playing even closer than the DBs.
That is why Seattle and GB both had those slant plays that went for long yardage because no one was there to pick it up.

Zeus
11-29-2006, 08:49 AM
"Del" wrote:


"Webby" wrote:


emoticons are your friend!


Actually they aren't very friendly to me considering I have been chastized for being an donkey butt even when using an abundance of annoying smiley faces.

So I like to try and remember to tell someone that way it clears up any doubt.

Some people see emoticons as an "I can be an donkey butt free card," so I rarely bother.


Free Donkey Butt?
Where???
And is there a limit of one per customer?

=Z=

Del Rio
11-29-2006, 08:50 AM
"cogitans" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


The problem with jamming in a zone defense is you are not covering a player you are covering a portion of the field. If you have 4 yards from sideline to center and 8 yards back and you are on the line to jam your giving up all that space.

We do jam, we do blitz, we do cushion, we do coverage instead of blitz. I do not think there is one thing that can be done that will change the results. We need better players or we need a simpler system.

The only thing I can think of that they can do and have been doing with limited success is go into a 3-4. They showed it a few times last week it worked well.

He is trying changes. It is frustrating, but it would be the same as trying to fix a levy with flood waters rushing through. People see the zone so they are exploiting it as much as possible. It's like trying to get a bruise to heal with someone poking it over and over every week.


As usual a disclaimer, because I probably don't know what I'm talking about.

But haven't our zones mostly been beaten underneath, and between the zones where one ends and the other starts.

Isn't it possible to start up closer to LOS, and then follow back as recievers progress down the field.

I know they risk loosing a step if they jam, but couldn't that be ok to take that risk from time to time.


They do take that risk from time to time, and you hit the nail on the head, but it is something that can only be done sparingly and we do that.

Zeus
11-29-2006, 08:52 AM
"Del" wrote:


I have a hard time believing that Tomlin who coached LB's for a truely dominant cover two team doesn't know how to run a cover two.


I thought Tomlin was the secondary coach for TB, not LB coach.

=Z=

cogitans
11-29-2006, 09:01 AM
"Del" wrote:


"cogitans" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


The problem with jamming in a zone defense is you are not covering a player you are covering a portion of the field. If you have 4 yards from sideline to center and 8 yards back and you are on the line to jam your giving up all that space.

We do jam, we do blitz, we do cushion, we do coverage instead of blitz. I do not think there is one thing that can be done that will change the results. We need better players or we need a simpler system.

The only thing I can think of that they can do and have been doing with limited success is go into a 3-4. They showed it a few times last week it worked well.

He is trying changes. It is frustrating, but it would be the same as trying to fix a levy with flood waters rushing through. People see the zone so they are exploiting it as much as possible. It's like trying to get a bruise to heal with someone poking it over and over every week.


As usual a disclaimer, because I probably don't know what I'm talking about.

But haven't our zones mostly been beaten underneath, and between the zones where one ends and the other starts.

Isn't it possible to start up closer to LOS, and then follow back as recievers progress down the field.

I know they risk loosing a step if they jam, but couldn't that be ok to take that risk from time to time.


They do take that risk from time to time, and you hit the nail on the head, but it is something that can only be done sparingly and we do that.




Yeah I saw we did it some last week.

As for the other part. Is it a problem when you cover the zone to start closer to the LOS, so you don't risk getting beat underneath?

Del Rio
11-29-2006, 09:05 AM
"AWZeus" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


I have a hard time believing that Tomlin who coached LB's for a truely dominant cover two team doesn't know how to run a cover two.


I thought Tomlin was the secondary coach for TB, not LB coach.

=Z=


Your right he was a DB coach.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Tomlin

Storm
11-29-2006, 09:46 AM
"Del" wrote:


The problem with jamming in a zone defense is you are not covering a player you are covering a portion of the field. If you have 4 yards from sideline to center and 8 yards back and you are on the line to jam your giving up all that space.

We do jam, we do blitz, we do cushion, we do coverage instead of blitz. I do not think there is one thing that can be done that will change the results. We need better players or we need a simpler system.

The only thing I can think of that they can do and have been doing with limited success is go into a 3-4. They showed it a few times last week it worked well.

He is trying changes. It is frustrating, but it would be the same as trying to fix a levy with flood waters rushing through. People see the zone so they are exploiting it as much as possible. It's like trying to get a bruise to heal with someone poking it over and over every week.


I'm not seeing those changes that you are seeing. What I see is that we line up far away from receivers far too many times. Quick turn by a WR for a slant or to the sideline leaves our backs no chance. I'm seeing this defense give up yards on such plays far too many times this season to buy into the whole "we are attmepting many chages" theory. When I will see that our backs give up those big cushions and line up on the LOS much more than they do now, I'll buy that.

All in all it comes down to the "dont give up a big play" mentality of this defense. Good offenses will exploit this all day, like the Pats did.

Del Rio
11-29-2006, 10:17 AM
"Storm" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


The problem with jamming in a zone defense is you are not covering a player you are covering a portion of the field. If you have 4 yards from sideline to center and 8 yards back and you are on the line to jam your giving up all that space.

We do jam, we do blitz, we do cushion, we do coverage instead of blitz. I do not think there is one thing that can be done that will change the results. We need better players or we need a simpler system.

The only thing I can think of that they can do and have been doing with limited success is go into a 3-4. They showed it a few times last week it worked well.

He is trying changes. It is frustrating, but it would be the same as trying to fix a levy with flood waters rushing through. People see the zone so they are exploiting it as much as possible. It's like trying to get a bruise to heal with someone poking it over and over every week.


I'm not seeing those changes that you are seeing. What I see is that we line up far away from receivers far too many times. Quick turn by a WR for a slant or to the sideline leaves our backs no chance. I'm seeing this defense give up yards on such plays far too many times this season to buy into the whole "we are attmepting many chages" theory. When I will see that our backs give up those big cushions and line up on the LOS much more than they do now, I'll buy that.

All in all it comes down to the "dont give up a big play" mentality of this defense. Good offenses will exploit this all day, like the Pats did.


Well it is there on the games for all to see. Record it sometime if you really want to just check it out.

It's a team sport. Zone defense is even more so because you rely on your teamates to do their jobs. If you jam with no saftey help and no pressure on the QB it goes for 80+ and a TD. We do plenty of both. We even rotate in and out of cover 1, man to man, and as of last week some 3-4.

Maybe this week we tie it together against a QB who is easily riled and mistake prone.

Del Rio
11-29-2006, 10:25 AM
Cover 2
In traditional Cover 2 schemes the free safety (FS) and strong safety (SS) have deep responsibilities, each guarding half of the field.

Cover 2 can be run from any seven-man defensive fronts such as the 3-4 and the 4-3. (It is difficult to implement Cover 2 from an eight-in-the-box front, because the strong safety or someone replacing him is usually the eighth man.) Various "underneath" coverage played by cornerbacks and linebackers may also be implemented. For example, Cover 2 Man means 2 safeties have deep responsibility while the cornerbacks and linebackers follow their offensive assignment in one-on-one coverage. Cover 2 can also be paired with underneath zone schemes: Cover 2 Zone refers to 2 safeties with deep responsibility but now the CBs and LBs drop back into specific coverage zones where they defend passes only in their assigned area.

Teams that play Cover 2 shells usually ascribe to the "bend-but-don't-break" philosophy, preferring to keep offensive players in front of them for short gains while limiting long passes. This is in stark contrast to a more aggressive Cover 1 type scheme which leaves the offensive team's wide receivers in single man-to-man coverage with only one deep helper. By splitting the deep field between two defenders, the defense can drastically reduce the number of long gains.

The main weakness of the Cover 2 shell occurs in the middle of the field between the safeties. The safeties attempt to gain width upon the snap of the ball to cover any long passes to quick wide receivers down the sideline. This movement creates a natural hole between the safeties that can be attacked. By sending a receiver (usually a tight end) into the hole, the offense forces the safety to make a decision: play the vulnerable hole in the middle of the field or help out on the wide receiver. The quarterback reads the safety's decision and decides on the best matchup (which mismatch is better--TE vs S or WR vs CB).

Cover 1
Cover 1 schemes employ only one deep defender, usually a safety. Many underneath coverages paired with Cover 1 shells are strictly man-to-man with LBs and defensive backs each assigned a different offensive player to cover. By using only one deep defender in Cover 1, the other deep defender is free to blitz the quarterback or provide man-to-man pass coverage help.

Cover 1 schemes are usually very aggressive, preferring to proactively disrupt the offense by giving the quarterback little time to make a decision while collapsing the pocket quickly. This is the main advantage of Cover 1 schemes--the ability to blitz from various pre-snap formations while engaging in complex man-to-man coverage schemes post-snap. For example, a safety may blitz while a CB is locked in man coverage with a WR. Or the CB may blitz with the safety rotating into man coverage on the WR post-snap.

The main weakness of Cover 1 schemes is the lone deep defender that must cover a large amount of field and provide help on any deep threats. Offenses can attack Cover 1 schemes with a vertical stretch by sending two receivers on deep routes, provided that the quarterback has enough time for his receivers to get open. The deep defender must decide which receiver to help out on, leaving the other in man coverage which may be a mismatch.

A secondary weakness is inherent its design: the use of man coverage opens up yards after catch lanes. Man coverage is attacked by offenses in various ways that try to isolate their best athletes on defenders by passing them the ball quickly before the defender can react or designing plays that clear defenders from certain areas thus opening yards after catch lanes.


For anyone that cares or doesn't know what the defense is.

whackthepack
11-29-2006, 10:39 AM
The Vikes D is ranked 10 overall in the NFL, most people were hoping that we would have a D that was top 10 and for now they still are.

BloodyHorns82
11-29-2006, 10:56 AM
Every time I read the title to this thread, I can't help but think to myself, "Wait, yes it is!".

Prophet
11-29-2006, 11:03 AM
"Del" wrote:


Cover 2
In traditional Cover 2 schemes the free safety (FS) and strong safety (SS) have deep responsibilities, each guarding half of the field.

Cover 2 can be run from any seven-man defensive fronts such as the 3-4 and the 4-3. (It is difficult to implement Cover 2 from an eight-in-the-box front, because the strong safety or someone replacing him is usually the eighth man.) Various "underneath" coverage played by cornerbacks and linebackers may also be implemented. For example, Cover 2 Man means 2 safeties have deep responsibility while the cornerbacks and linebackers follow their offensive assignment in one-on-one coverage. Cover 2 can also be paired with underneath zone schemes: Cover 2 Zone refers to 2 safeties with deep responsibility but now the CBs and LBs drop back into specific coverage zones where they defend passes only in their assigned area.

Teams that play Cover 2 shells usually ascribe to the "bend-but-don't-break" philosophy, preferring to keep offensive players in front of them for short gains while limiting long passes. This is in stark contrast to a more aggressive Cover 1 type scheme which leaves the offensive team's wide receivers in single man-to-man coverage with only one deep helper. By splitting the deep field between two defenders, the defense can drastically reduce the number of long gains.

The main weakness of the Cover 2 shell occurs in the middle of the field between the safeties. The safeties attempt to gain width upon the snap of the ball to cover any long passes to quick wide receivers down the sideline. This movement creates a natural hole between the safeties that can be attacked. By sending a receiver (usually a tight end) into the hole, the offense forces the safety to make a decision: play the vulnerable hole in the middle of the field or help out on the wide receiver. The quarterback reads the safety's decision and decides on the best matchup (which mismatch is better--TE vs S or WR vs CB).

Cover 1
Cover 1 schemes employ only one deep defender, usually a safety. Many underneath coverages paired with Cover 1 shells are strictly man-to-man with LBs and defensive backs each assigned a different offensive player to cover. By using only one deep defender in Cover 1, the other deep defender is free to blitz the quarterback or provide man-to-man pass coverage help.

Cover 1 schemes are usually very aggressive, preferring to proactively disrupt the offense by giving the quarterback little time to make a decision while collapsing the pocket quickly. This is the main advantage of Cover 1 schemes--the ability to blitz from various pre-snap formations while engaging in complex man-to-man coverage schemes post-snap. For example, a safety may blitz while a CB is locked in man coverage with a WR. Or the CB may blitz with the safety rotating into man coverage on the WR post-snap.

The main weakness of Cover 1 schemes is the lone deep defender that must cover a large amount of field and provide help on any deep threats. Offenses can attack Cover 1 schemes with a vertical stretch by sending two receivers on deep routes, provided that the quarterback has enough time for his receivers to get open. The deep defender must decide which receiver to help out on, leaving the other in man coverage which may be a mismatch.

A secondary weakness is inherent its design: the use of man coverage opens up yards after catch lanes. Man coverage is attacked by offenses in various ways that try to isolate their best athletes on defenders by passing them the ball quickly before the defender can react or designing plays that clear defenders from certain areas thus opening yards after catch lanes.


For anyone that cares or doesn't know what the defense is.


We need a volunteer with TIVO to track the D schemes this week and also to track the bumps at the line, LBs positioning, blitz packages, etc.
Would be nice to see a summary.
NFL.com should some more geeks and keep track of those stats.

jargomcfargo
11-29-2006, 11:16 AM
"cajunvike" wrote:


"jargomcfargo" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:


"Del" wrote:








Well, whichever version of cover 2 he's running is obviously not working for us. So maybe he should start jamming WRs at the line to give rushers more time to get to QB. Assuming they can do it at all, of course.
::)


I guess if it was that easy then we would win the SB every year.




Yeah, lets keep doing the same thing on pass D because we're doing it so well. Changing things is bad, mmmkay.


It really depends mmmmmmmmmmmkay.

I mean you have a system you want to play, and everybody progresses differently. So what if half your team has it down a handful of players are on the verge and a few are struggling? You're not going to go in an entirely different direction, and confuse everyone.

I love it, lets flip this switch and make it all better ;D

If it was that easy of a fix what makes you think Tomlin wouldn't do it in a heartbeat. Yeah it is great for defensive cords to get lit up, works wonders for the career plan.


What makes you think that jamming WRs at the line takes your diffence into entirely new direction? OH NOES, we have to stand two yards closer to recievers, call the police! Its still cover 2...

And yeah, making changes and adjustments is soemtimes easy. It didnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that we needed to mix things up on offense with longer throws, TE involvement and some personal changes. And look, it worked!

How about trying something new on pass D as well?


It worked against the worst team in the NFL, that being said it had been working over time anyway, plus having a healthy Marcus Robinson helped.

As you said how hard would it be to jam the WR? If it is easy then why not do it? Are you suggesting Tomlin is stubborn or are you suggesting he just doesn't know how to run a defense?

Even so I would be willing to bet anyone here 20$ that if you tape the Bears Vikings game this week, you will see we blitz no more then they do and we jam just as often. We have been jamming all year and if someone wants to take me up on this that has TIVO we can go play by play and count who does what. Because I guarantee you we jam the WR's quite a bit.

We all have our theory's as to why it isn't working and the truth is probably somewhere in between. I have been saying this pass defense was bad since week one when I saw NAPO running 30 yards downfield with a WR.

I don't think the problem is the jaming, or the blitzing it is the large ammount of space Tomlin expects his LB's to be able to cover.


I agree. You could see it a bit more clearly when Dontarrius Thomas spelled Napo. Thomas played his heart out but didn't have the speed to quite get there on some coverages.
I also blame the lack of a pass rush. No zone can stand up to a quarterback with no pressure on him.
And yes we do jam receivers at times. More last week than before it seemed. Probably because there was nothing but passing.

There are key elements to every scheme. You need a middle linebacker with a lot of talent to run this type of defense.You need speed from your other linebackers as well. You also need a pocket disrupting line.Erasmus was a huge loss.They seemed to do much better at least with hurries when he was playing.




DT runs a 4.4...how much faster does he need to be?
It was probably more a problem with his reads than his speed.


Yeah I knew that he had speed, and thought he did pretty well at mlb in the old system.I'm pretty sure it was his reads and the fact he was dogged ass tired from giving an outstanding effort.
But he was late on his coverages by a step or two on a few occasions.
I'm still a fan of his.I'm just not sure he can do it in the middle in this scheme.
I'm not sure Napo can do it in this scheme despite the fact he has played well!

jargomcfargo
11-29-2006, 11:43 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"whackthepack" wrote:

It all comes back to Smoot eventually he is terrible at jamming and plays off to far on the receivers and that is that.
I am sorry if somebody disagrees but after watching him for a season and a half with the Vikes he is not worth the money we are paying him and should be traded (don't think we would get much) or released after this season.

Sure he does, so does Griffin & the other DB's. It's called zone defense. You act like Smoot is the only one doing it, when that is not the case.

They are giving up too much field in front of them & that is what is being exploited.

You need to get to a game & sit in the upper level & look at the defensive coverage. You get a whole new perspective of the field of play & can see how the plays develop from a view they seldom show on television.


Are you saying you don't have very good seats? lol

Ltrey33
11-29-2006, 01:25 PM
"Mr" wrote:


"sleepagent" wrote:


"thevikingfan" wrote:


OK enough is enough.Our pass defense is not terrible so stop saying it over and over and over....The only reason teams rack up the passing yards on us is because they give up running the ball.Thats what you get when you are the top rushing defense in the league!The card ran in only 5 times today!Leinhart threw it FIFTY ONE TIMES! 51! OF COARSE HE IS GONNA GET A LOT OF YARDS!


I am not gonna read 10 pages of responses, so I'll give you mine.

WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING?

We got shredded.
The reason he passed 51 times is because we couldn't stop them!
If we could stop a passing game, there would be under 200 yards regardless of the rushing.

Our pass defense stinks to high heaven and we need 2 shutdown cover corners for starters!

Not that bad?
::)


You don't need two shutdown corners to be a successful pass defense in the NFL.

Look at the Bears, their corners really are not talented at all, but they can jam at the line and really disrupt a WR's routes.

Like Plaxico Burress said "they can catch balls that come straight at them"

No team has two shut down corners, the best pass defense in the league is the raiders, and they have Namdi Asomugha and Fabian Washington, who are young and talented, but it's not like they have Deion Sanders and Mel Blount on the field.


The reason the Raiders have the best pass defense is because everyone just runs the ball on them. Why throw the ball when you can eat up clock and get just as many points running it?

They're giving up 4.1 yards per carry and have been run on more times than any team in the league. Heck, Rivers only threw 11 times against them week 1 and they still won by almost 30.

Prophet
11-29-2006, 01:26 PM
"Ltrey33" wrote:


...The reason the Raiders have the best pass defense is because everyone just runs the ball on them. Why throw the ball when you can eat up clock and get just as many yards running it?

They're giving up 4.1 yards per carry and have been run on more times than any team in the league. Heck, Rivers only threw 11 times against them week 1 and they still won by almost 30.


You can pretty much say the same thing about the Vikings.
Why run when you can throw all day long?

Ltrey33
11-29-2006, 01:29 PM
"Acumen" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


Cover 2
In traditional Cover 2 schemes the free safety (FS) and strong safety (SS) have deep responsibilities, each guarding half of the field.

Cover 2 can be run from any seven-man defensive fronts such as the 3-4 and the 4-3. (It is difficult to implement Cover 2 from an eight-in-the-box front, because the strong safety or someone replacing him is usually the eighth man.) Various "underneath" coverage played by cornerbacks and linebackers may also be implemented. For example, Cover 2 Man means 2 safeties have deep responsibility while the cornerbacks and linebackers follow their offensive assignment in one-on-one coverage. Cover 2 can also be paired with underneath zone schemes: Cover 2 Zone refers to 2 safeties with deep responsibility but now the CBs and LBs drop back into specific coverage zones where they defend passes only in their assigned area.

Teams that play Cover 2 shells usually ascribe to the "bend-but-don't-break" philosophy, preferring to keep offensive players in front of them for short gains while limiting long passes. This is in stark contrast to a more aggressive Cover 1 type scheme which leaves the offensive team's wide receivers in single man-to-man coverage with only one deep helper. By splitting the deep field between two defenders, the defense can drastically reduce the number of long gains.

The main weakness of the Cover 2 shell occurs in the middle of the field between the safeties. The safeties attempt to gain width upon the snap of the ball to cover any long passes to quick wide receivers down the sideline. This movement creates a natural hole between the safeties that can be attacked. By sending a receiver (usually a tight end) into the hole, the offense forces the safety to make a decision: play the vulnerable hole in the middle of the field or help out on the wide receiver. The quarterback reads the safety's decision and decides on the best matchup (which mismatch is better--TE vs S or WR vs CB).

Cover 1
Cover 1 schemes employ only one deep defender, usually a safety. Many underneath coverages paired with Cover 1 shells are strictly man-to-man with LBs and defensive backs each assigned a different offensive player to cover. By using only one deep defender in Cover 1, the other deep defender is free to blitz the quarterback or provide man-to-man pass coverage help.

Cover 1 schemes are usually very aggressive, preferring to proactively disrupt the offense by giving the quarterback little time to make a decision while collapsing the pocket quickly. This is the main advantage of Cover 1 schemes--the ability to blitz from various pre-snap formations while engaging in complex man-to-man coverage schemes post-snap. For example, a safety may blitz while a CB is locked in man coverage with a WR. Or the CB may blitz with the safety rotating into man coverage on the WR post-snap.

The main weakness of Cover 1 schemes is the lone deep defender that must cover a large amount of field and provide help on any deep threats. Offenses can attack Cover 1 schemes with a vertical stretch by sending two receivers on deep routes, provided that the quarterback has enough time for his receivers to get open. The deep defender must decide which receiver to help out on, leaving the other in man coverage which may be a mismatch.

A secondary weakness is inherent its design: the use of man coverage opens up yards after catch lanes. Man coverage is attacked by offenses in various ways that try to isolate their best athletes on defenders by passing them the ball quickly before the defender can react or designing plays that clear defenders from certain areas thus opening yards after catch lanes.


For anyone that cares or doesn't know what the defense is.


We need a volunteer with TIVO to track the D schemes this week and also to track the bumps at the line, LBs positioning, blitz packages, etc.
Would be nice to see a summary.
NFL.com should some more geeks and keep track of those stats.


I'll tape it and see if I can take a look at it. I'm not sure how much I'll be able to track, because we all know FOX LOVES to give full views of the field.
::) But I'll TIVO it and do my best.

Prophet
11-29-2006, 01:32 PM
"Ltrey33" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


Cover 2
In traditional Cover 2 schemes the free safety (FS) and strong safety (SS) have deep responsibilities, each guarding half of the field.

Cover 2 can be run from any seven-man defensive fronts such as the 3-4 and the 4-3. (It is difficult to implement Cover 2 from an eight-in-the-box front, because the strong safety or someone replacing him is usually the eighth man.) Various "underneath" coverage played by cornerbacks and linebackers may also be implemented. For example, Cover 2 Man means 2 safeties have deep responsibility while the cornerbacks and linebackers follow their offensive assignment in one-on-one coverage. Cover 2 can also be paired with underneath zone schemes: Cover 2 Zone refers to 2 safeties with deep responsibility but now the CBs and LBs drop back into specific coverage zones where they defend passes only in their assigned area.

Teams that play Cover 2 shells usually ascribe to the "bend-but-don't-break" philosophy, preferring to keep offensive players in front of them for short gains while limiting long passes. This is in stark contrast to a more aggressive Cover 1 type scheme which leaves the offensive team's wide receivers in single man-to-man coverage with only one deep helper. By splitting the deep field between two defenders, the defense can drastically reduce the number of long gains.

The main weakness of the Cover 2 shell occurs in the middle of the field between the safeties. The safeties attempt to gain width upon the snap of the ball to cover any long passes to quick wide receivers down the sideline. This movement creates a natural hole between the safeties that can be attacked. By sending a receiver (usually a tight end) into the hole, the offense forces the safety to make a decision: play the vulnerable hole in the middle of the field or help out on the wide receiver. The quarterback reads the safety's decision and decides on the best matchup (which mismatch is better--TE vs S or WR vs CB).

Cover 1
Cover 1 schemes employ only one deep defender, usually a safety. Many underneath coverages paired with Cover 1 shells are strictly man-to-man with LBs and defensive backs each assigned a different offensive player to cover. By using only one deep defender in Cover 1, the other deep defender is free to blitz the quarterback or provide man-to-man pass coverage help.

Cover 1 schemes are usually very aggressive, preferring to proactively disrupt the offense by giving the quarterback little time to make a decision while collapsing the pocket quickly. This is the main advantage of Cover 1 schemes--the ability to blitz from various pre-snap formations while engaging in complex man-to-man coverage schemes post-snap. For example, a safety may blitz while a CB is locked in man coverage with a WR. Or the CB may blitz with the safety rotating into man coverage on the WR post-snap.

The main weakness of Cover 1 schemes is the lone deep defender that must cover a large amount of field and provide help on any deep threats. Offenses can attack Cover 1 schemes with a vertical stretch by sending two receivers on deep routes, provided that the quarterback has enough time for his receivers to get open. The deep defender must decide which receiver to help out on, leaving the other in man coverage which may be a mismatch.

A secondary weakness is inherent its design: the use of man coverage opens up yards after catch lanes. Man coverage is attacked by offenses in various ways that try to isolate their best athletes on defenders by passing them the ball quickly before the defender can react or designing plays that clear defenders from certain areas thus opening yards after catch lanes.


For anyone that cares or doesn't know what the defense is.


We need a volunteer with TIVO to track the D schemes this week and also to track the bumps at the line, LBs positioning, blitz packages, etc.
Would be nice to see a summary.
NFL.com should some more geeks and keep track of those stats.


I'll tape it and see if I can take a look at it. I'm not sure how much I'll be able to track, because we all know FOX LOVES to give full views of the field.
::) But I'll TIVO it and do my best.


That would be awesome (n=1).
At least it's something to see what's going on.
I know what you're saying about their coverage.
It's tough to see a lot of the intricacies even when you're looking for them because you're at the mercy of whatever they decide to show you...like Kimmel ripping on Theisman.

Ltrey33
11-29-2006, 01:39 PM
"Acumen" wrote:


"Ltrey33" wrote:


...The reason the Raiders have the best pass defense is because everyone just runs the ball on them. Why throw the ball when you can eat up clock and get just as many yards running it?

They're giving up 4.1 yards per carry and have been run on more times than any team in the league. Heck, Rivers only threw 11 times against them week 1 and they still won by almost 30.


You can pretty much say the same thing about the Vikings.
Why run when you can throw all day long?


Exactly, and that is what has happend as far as our total defensive rushing yards go.

There is one main difference though as to why the two don't line up.

The Vikes are also leading the league in yards per attempt, only giving up 2.8 yards per carry. That means that their success isn't artificial just because teams have stopped running on them. They have a lot less total yards given up because teams have stopped running on them, but they also have the best run defense as far as avg. yards per carry, which helps make them more legitimate as the #1 run D.

The Raiders on the other hand are giving up 5.9 yards per pass attempt and the Vikes, who are 31st against the pass are giving up 6.3 yards per pass.

If you look at a team like Miami, which is technically 7th against the pass, they only give up 5.6 yards per pass or Carolina which is 8th and giving up 5.7 per pass, both better than the Raiders.

Also, technically Chicago is second to the Raiders in pass defense, yet they're giving up an average of a FULL YARD less per pass.

The whole "total yards' thing for defensive rankings can be misleading. It's much better to look at averages to see how successful people are play in and play out.

Prophet
11-29-2006, 01:50 PM
"Ltrey33" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


"Ltrey33" wrote:


...The reason the Raiders have the best pass defense is because everyone just runs the ball on them. Why throw the ball when you can eat up clock and get just as many yards running it?

They're giving up 4.1 yards per carry and have been run on more times than any team in the league. Heck, Rivers only threw 11 times against them week 1 and they still won by almost 30.


You can pretty much say the same thing about the Vikings.
Why run when you can throw all day long?


Exactly, and that is what has happend as far as our total defensive rushing yards go.

There is one main difference though as to why the two don't line up.

The Vikes are also leading in yards per attempt, only giving up 2.8 yards per carry. That means that their success isn't artificial just because teams have stopped running on them. They have a lot less yards given up because teams have stopped running on them, but they also have the best run defense as far as avg. yards per carry, which helps make them more legitimate as the #1 run D.

The Raiders on the other hand are giving up 5.9 yards per pass attempt and the Vikes, who are 31st against the pass are giving up 6.3 yards per pass.

If you look at a team like Miami, which is technically 7th against the pass, they only give up 5.6 yards per pass or Carolina which is 8th and giving up 5.7 per pass.

Also, technically Chicago is second to the Raiders in pass defense, yet they're giving up an average of a FULL YARD less per pass.

The whole "total yards' thing to defensive rankings can be misleading. It's much better to look at averages to see how successful people are play in and play out.


The Vikings have stuffed some good backs this year.
Good points, the average does show some of the consistency but without the standard error thrown into the mix the outliers can wreak havoc on the stats and show some treands that aren't necessarily true.
There are some teams this year that haven't even tried to run on the Vikes, but even the teams that did have over 20 attempts rushing still were stuffed.
Jones has had a few good games this year, just don't see him moving into the #5 slot in their franchise history this weekend, he would need >105 yds.

Zeus
11-29-2006, 01:55 PM
"Ltrey33" wrote:


They're giving up 4.1 yards per carry and have been run on more times than any team in the league. Heck, Rivers only threw 11 times against them week 1 and they still won by almost 30.


Well - I don't know if that's a fair analysis since the Chargers have the best RB in the NFL.
How did somebody with a mediocre RB do against them?

=Z=

Zeus
11-29-2006, 01:59 PM
"Acumen" wrote:


The Vikings have stuffed some good backs this year.
Good points, the average does show some of the consistency but without the standard error thrown into the mix the outliers can wreak havoc on the stats and show some treands that aren't necessarily true.
There are some teams this year that haven't even tried to run on the Vikes, but even the teams that did have over 20 attempts rushing still were stuffed.
Jones has had a few good games this year, just don't see him moving into the #5 slot in their franchise history this weekend, he would need >105 yds.


I disagree with the assessment that the Vikings have "stuffed some good backs this year".
They've only faced (IMHO) two truly top-tier backs this season - Willis McGahee and Frank Gore.


The rest of the backs have either been injured (Portis), stifled by a terrible O-Line (Edgerrin James) or 2nd-tier stiffs (T. Jones, D. Foster, K. Jones, M. Morris, C. Dillon, A. Green, R. Brown).

It would be interesting to see how the Run D would do against one of the top top studs like LT or Larry Johnson.

=Z=

Prophet
11-29-2006, 02:07 PM
"AWZeus" wrote:


"Acumen" wrote:


The Vikings have stuffed some good backs this year.
Good points, the average does show some of the consistency but without the standard error thrown into the mix the outliers can wreak havoc on the stats and show some treands that aren't necessarily true.
There are some teams this year that haven't even tried to run on the Vikes, but even the teams that did have over 20 attempts rushing still were stuffed.
Jones has had a few good games this year, just don't see him moving into the #5 slot in their franchise history this weekend, he would need >105 yds.


I disagree with the assessment that the Vikings have "stuffed some good backs this year".
They've only faced (IMHO) two truly top-tier backs this season - Willis McGahee and Frank Gore.


The rest of the backs have either been injured (Portis), stifled by a terrible O-Line (Edgerrin James) or 2nd-tier stiffs (T. Jones, D. Foster, K. Jones, M. Morris, C. Dillon, A. Green, R. Brown).

It would be interesting to see how the Run D would do against one of the top top studs like LT or Larry Johnson.

=Z=


Yeah, I would love to see how they would do against Tomlinson or Huggies.
T. Jones has had at least four games over 100 yds this year (wks 5,8, 10, & 11), D. Foster and K. Jones have both had a couple, M. Morris has had a couple too...but he shares a lot of carries with R. Brown.
A. Green has had at least three 100 yd+ games.
Tomlinson has had 4-5 >100 yd games while Huggies has had at least 6.
Bottom-line is that the Vikings run D has been stuffing them or they haven't been running.
No 100 yders yet.

whackthepack
11-29-2006, 02:07 PM
"singersp" wrote:


"whackthepack" wrote:

It all comes back to Smoot eventually he is terrible at jamming and plays off to far on the receivers and that is that.
I am sorry if somebody disagrees but after watching him for a season and a half with the Vikes he is not worth the money we are paying him and should be traded (don't think we would get much) or released after this season.

Sure he does, so does Griffin & the other DB's. It's called zone defense. You act like Smoot is the only one doing it, when that is not the case.

They are giving up too much field in front of them & that is what is being exploited.

You need to get to a game & sit in the upper level & look at the defensive coverage. You get a whole new perspective of the field of play & can see how the plays develop from a view they seldom show on television.



Singer when smoot goes to bump the receiver he is terrible at it, it is pretty obvious and if you watch Griffin do he is way better at it.

And it is a zone but you still cover you guy until you release him form the zone to the safety and Smoot was supposed to be a good cover guy when he came here and he is not I am sorry that he might be a favorite of yours, but he has to go.

And watch a good cover corner in a zone defense they don't give a 10 yard cushion very often unless the are covering a speed guy like Steve Smith.
Smoot does it to almost ever receiver he plays against and there are conflicting reports that Smoot is giving such a big cushion without being told to and that is part of the reason why he was demoted to nickle.

ultravikingfan
11-29-2006, 04:07 PM
"Del" wrote:


Cover 2
In traditional Cover 2 schemes the free safety (FS) and strong safety (SS) have deep responsibilities, each guarding half of the field.

Cover 2 can be run from any seven-man defensive fronts such as the 3-4 and the 4-3. (It is difficult to implement Cover 2 from an eight-in-the-box front, because the strong safety or someone replacing him is usually the eighth man.) Various "underneath" coverage played by cornerbacks and linebackers may also be implemented. For example, Cover 2 Man means 2 safeties have deep responsibility while the cornerbacks and linebackers follow their offensive assignment in one-on-one coverage. Cover 2 can also be paired with underneath zone schemes: Cover 2 Zone refers to 2 safeties with deep responsibility but now the CBs and LBs drop back into specific coverage zones where they defend passes only in their assigned area.

Teams that play Cover 2 shells usually ascribe to the "bend-but-don't-break" philosophy, preferring to keep offensive players in front of them for short gains while limiting long passes. This is in stark contrast to a more aggressive Cover 1 type scheme which leaves the offensive team's wide receivers in single man-to-man coverage with only one deep helper. By splitting the deep field between two defenders, the defense can drastically reduce the number of long gains.

The main weakness of the Cover 2 shell occurs in the middle of the field between the safeties. The safeties attempt to gain width upon the snap of the ball to cover any long passes to quick wide receivers down the sideline. This movement creates a natural hole between the safeties that can be attacked. By sending a receiver (usually a tight end) into the hole, the offense forces the safety to make a decision: play the vulnerable hole in the middle of the field or help out on the wide receiver. The quarterback reads the safety's decision and decides on the best matchup (which mismatch is better--TE vs S or WR vs CB).

Cover 1
Cover 1 schemes employ only one deep defender, usually a safety. Many underneath coverages paired with Cover 1 shells are strictly man-to-man with LBs and defensive backs each assigned a different offensive player to cover. By using only one deep defender in Cover 1, the other deep defender is free to blitz the quarterback or provide man-to-man pass coverage help.

Cover 1 schemes are usually very aggressive, preferring to proactively disrupt the offense by giving the quarterback little time to make a decision while collapsing the pocket quickly. This is the main advantage of Cover 1 schemes--the ability to blitz from various pre-snap formations while engaging in complex man-to-man coverage schemes post-snap. For example, a safety may blitz while a CB is locked in man coverage with a WR. Or the CB may blitz with the safety rotating into man coverage on the WR post-snap.

The main weakness of Cover 1 schemes is the lone deep defender that must cover a large amount of field and provide help on any deep threats. Offenses can attack Cover 1 schemes with a vertical stretch by sending two receivers on deep routes, provided that the quarterback has enough time for his receivers to get open. The deep defender must decide which receiver to help out on, leaving the other in man coverage which may be a mismatch.

A secondary weakness is inherent its design: the use of man coverage opens up yards after catch lanes. Man coverage is attacked by offenses in various ways that try to isolate their best athletes on defenders by passing them the ball quickly before the defender can react or designing plays that clear defenders from certain areas thus opening yards after catch lanes.


For anyone that cares or doesn't know what the defense is.


Oh no you diiiiidn't!

Everybody here knows Defense; especially the guy who started this thread.
Our pass D kicks some major butt!

NodakPaul
11-29-2006, 04:19 PM
"whackthepack" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"whackthepack" wrote:

It all comes back to Smoot eventually he is terrible at jamming and plays off to far on the receivers and that is that.
I am sorry if somebody disagrees but after watching him for a season and a half with the Vikes he is not worth the money we are paying him and should be traded (don't think we would get much) or released after this season.

Sure he does, so does Griffin & the other DB's. It's called zone defense. You act like Smoot is the only one doing it, when that is not the case.

They are giving up too much field in front of them & that is what is being exploited.

You need to get to a game & sit in the upper level & look at the defensive coverage. You get a whole new perspective of the field of play & can see how the plays develop from a view they seldom show on television.



Singer when smoot goes to bump the receiver he is terrible at it, it is pretty obvious and if you watch Griffin do he is way better at it.

And it is a zone but you still cover you guy until you release him form the zone to the safety and Smoot was supposed to be a good cover guy when he came here and he is not I am sorry that he might be a favorite of yours, but he has to go.

And watch a good cover corner in a zone defense they don't give a 10 yard cushion very often unless the are covering a speed guy like Steve Smith.
Smoot does it to almost ever receiver he plays against and there are conflicting reports that Smoot is giving such a big cushion without being told to and that is part of the reason why he was demoted to nickle.


I haven't seen those reports anywhere.
Could you post a link?
Anyway, Smoot plays with the exact same cushion as the other DBs do, just as often as the other DBs do too.
I don't know how anybody can say otherwise.

His coverage skills are not as good as Winfields, but are better then Griffin's (although griffin has room to grow still).
His tackling is worse than both.

I don't mind when people point of the things that Smoot does wrong.. there are pleanty to pick from.
But at least stick to the ones that exist... ;)

JDogg926
11-29-2006, 04:34 PM
I think the problem with Smoot is he's overrated.
He's not terrible, but he came here with this reputation of being this awesome corner, of Winfield's caliber.
He's been talked up and hyped up by media and by his own mouth, but when it comes down to it, he hasn't backed it up on the field.
He's nowhere near as good as Winfield.
I also don't understand why Smoot added weight in the offseason, I know he wanted to decrease his chance of injury and be more physical, but he was getting burned last year because he didn't have the speed, how is adding 10 lbs supposed to help that.

I think Griffin has actually performed better this year, so I actually like him starting, Smoot then becomes one of the best nickelbacks in the league.
I wonder how Troy Williamson would fair in that role (nickle or dime back), similar to Troy Brown?

whackthepack
11-29-2006, 04:39 PM
"NodakPaul" wrote:


"whackthepack" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"whackthepack" wrote:

It all comes back to Smoot eventually he is terrible at jamming and plays off to far on the receivers and that is that.
I am sorry if somebody disagrees but after watching him for a season and a half with the Vikes he is not worth the money we are paying him and should be traded (don't think we would get much) or released after this season.

Sure he does, so does Griffin & the other DB's. It's called zone defense. You act like Smoot is the only one doing it, when that is not the case.

They are giving up too much field in front of them & that is what is being exploited.

You need to get to a game & sit in the upper level & look at the defensive coverage. You get a whole new perspective of the field of play & can see how the plays develop from a view they seldom show on television.



Singer when smoot goes to bump the receiver he is terrible at it, it is pretty obvious and if you watch Griffin do he is way better at it.

And it is a zone but you still cover you guy until you release him form the zone to the safety and Smoot was supposed to be a good cover guy when he came here and he is not I am sorry that he might be a favorite of yours, but he has to go.

And watch a good cover corner in a zone defense they don't give a 10 yard cushion very often unless the are covering a speed guy like Steve Smith.
Smoot does it to almost ever receiver he plays against and there are conflicting reports that Smoot is giving such a big cushion without being told to and that is part of the reason why he was demoted to nickle.


I haven't seen those reports anywhere.
Could you post a link?
Anyway, Smoot plays with the exact same cushion as the other DBs do, just as often as the other DBs do too.
I don't know how anybody can say otherwise.

His coverage skills are not as good as Winfields, but are better then Griffin's (although griffin has room to grow still).
His tackling is worse than both.

I don't mind when people point of the things that Smoot does wrong.. there are pleanty to pick from.
But at least stick to the ones that exist... ;)


it was about a week and a half ago if you want to go look them up.

Desertvikingfan
11-29-2006, 04:40 PM
"Acumen" wrote:


"Del" wrote:


Cover 2
In traditional Cover 2 schemes the free safety (FS) and strong safety (SS) have deep responsibilities, each guarding half of the field.

Cover 2 can be run from any seven-man defensive fronts such as the 3-4 and the 4-3. (It is difficult to implement Cover 2 from an eight-in-the-box front, because the strong safety or someone replacing him is usually the eighth man.) Various "underneath" coverage played by cornerbacks and linebackers may also be implemented. For example, Cover 2 Man means 2 safeties have deep responsibility while the cornerbacks and linebackers follow their offensive assignment in one-on-one coverage. Cover 2 can also be paired with underneath zone schemes: Cover 2 Zone refers to 2 safeties with deep responsibility but now the CBs and LBs drop back into specific coverage zones where they defend passes only in their assigned area.

Teams that play Cover 2 shells usually ascribe to the "bend-but-don't-break" philosophy, preferring to keep offensive players in front of them for short gains while limiting long passes. This is in stark contrast to a more aggressive Cover 1 type scheme which leaves the offensive team's wide receivers in single man-to-man coverage with only one deep helper. By splitting the deep field between two defenders, the defense can drastically reduce the number of long gains.

The main weakness of the Cover 2 shell occurs in the middle of the field between the safeties. The safeties attempt to gain width upon the snap of the ball to cover any long passes to quick wide receivers down the sideline. This movement creates a natural hole between the safeties that can be attacked. By sending a receiver (usually a tight end) into the hole, the offense forces the safety to make a decision: play the vulnerable hole in the middle of the field or help out on the wide receiver. The quarterback reads the safety's decision and decides on the best matchup (which mismatch is better--TE vs S or WR vs CB).

Cover 1
Cover 1 schemes employ only one deep defender, usually a safety. Many underneath coverages paired with Cover 1 shells are strictly man-to-man with LBs and defensive backs each assigned a different offensive player to cover. By using only one deep defender in Cover 1, the other deep defender is free to blitz the quarterback or provide man-to-man pass coverage help.

Cover 1 schemes are usually very aggressive, preferring to proactively disrupt the offense by giving the quarterback little time to make a decision while collapsing the pocket quickly. This is the main advantage of Cover 1 schemes--the ability to blitz from various pre-snap formations while engaging in complex man-to-man coverage schemes post-snap. For example, a safety may blitz while a CB is locked in man coverage with a WR. Or the CB may blitz with the safety rotating into man coverage on the WR post-snap.

The main weakness of Cover 1 schemes is the lone deep defender that must cover a large amount of field and provide help on any deep threats. Offenses can attack Cover 1 schemes with a vertical stretch by sending two receivers on deep routes, provided that the quarterback has enough time for his receivers to get open. The deep defender must decide which receiver to help out on, leaving the other in man coverage which may be a mismatch.

A secondary weakness is inherent its design: the use of man coverage opens up yards after catch lanes. Man coverage is attacked by offenses in various ways that try to isolate their best athletes on defenders by passing them the ball quickly before the defender can react or designing plays that clear defenders from certain areas thus opening yards after catch lanes.


For anyone that cares or doesn't know what the defense is.


We need a volunteer with TIVO to track the D schemes this week and also to track the bumps at the line, LBs positioning, blitz packages, etc.
Would be nice to see a summary.
NFL.com should some more geeks and keep track of those stats.


I have TIVO, BUT I am not a volunteer. I will say that it is fun to go back after reading some of the generalizations that the some of Challenged Hillbilly Lovers post on this board and check them out. After a brief review of the "Smoot phenomenon" he does play off BUT the two corners appear to be consistent in playing up or back. It appears that maybe, just maybe that is THE called formation. I know I'm going out on a limb here ;). The problem on quite a few pass plays looks to me (with the limited FOX play coverage), to be the linebacker play. the are required to do some deep drops or cover large zones in the middle and just can't do it. All that being said Grossman should make them all look like stars on Sunday! GO VIKES!

singersp
11-29-2006, 09:51 PM
"whackthepack" wrote:


"singersp" wrote:


"whackthepack" wrote:

It all comes back to Smoot eventually he is terrible at jamming and plays off to far on the receivers and that is that.
I am sorry if somebody disagrees but after watching him for a season and a half with the Vikes he is not worth the money we are paying him and should be traded (don't think we would get much) or released after this season.

Sure he does, so does Griffin & the other DB's. It's called zone defense. You act like Smoot is the only one doing it, when that is not the case.

They are giving up too much field in front of them & that is what is being exploited.

You need to get to a game & sit in the upper level & look at the defensive coverage. You get a whole new perspective of the field of play & can see how the plays develop from a view they seldom show on television.



Singer when smoot goes to bump the receiver he is terrible at it, it is pretty obvious and if you watch Griffin do he is way better at it.

And it is a zone but you still cover you guy until you release him form the zone to the safety and Smoot was supposed to be a good cover guy when he came here and he is not I am sorry that he might be a favorite of yours, but he has to go.

And watch a good cover corner in a zone defense they don't give a 10 yard cushion very often unless the are covering a speed guy like Steve Smith.
Smoot does it to almost ever receiver he plays against and there are conflicting reports that Smoot is giving such a big cushion without being told to and that is part of the reason why he was demoted to nickle.


We are not talking about the "bump" or man-on-man plays here. We are talking about the plays were there is a big cushion being left by the DB's. They are all doing it.

Smoot is not one of my favorites. I just calling it like I see it. Some people here act like the the big cushions is something that only Smoot does.

On the "bump" it's obvious that Griffin is a better hitter & he is also a better tackler. He has more bang for the buck than Smoot ever will & Smoot's poor tackling skills is one reason he was demoted. If you watch the replay of this past game, you will see he was actually wrapping up the receivers on some of his tackles. That's something I have rarely see him do all season.

The only thing I'm bringing attention to is the big cushion/soft zone they are all leaving in front of them on several plays. It is not just Smoot.

Perhaps someone like Del can elaborate more on the cover 2 zone. Exactly how many yards from the LOS is the LB's zone? And from there how many yards is the DB's zone?

Tomlin will keep using the cover 2 defense. That is why speed & qick reaction time is so important in being successful with the defense. You can't always anticipate when & where the receiver is going to make his cut.

Mr Anderson
11-29-2006, 10:15 PM
I've been thinking about it today and I am now sure that I place the blame on our defensive line.

They can not put the pressure on the opposing QB without blitz assistance, leaving the middle of the field wide open, we need to disrupt other teams timing or we will continue to get picked apart.

Ltrey33
11-29-2006, 10:20 PM
"AWZeus" wrote:


"Ltrey33" wrote:


They're giving up 4.1 yards per carry and have been run on more times than any team in the league. Heck, Rivers only threw 11 times against them week 1 and they still won by almost 30.


Well - I don't know if that's a fair analysis since the Chargers have the best RB in the NFL.
How did somebody with a mediocre RB do against them?

=Z=


Well they've played some pretty good backs this year (Larry Johnson, Tomlinson, whoever was playing for the Broncos). They did give up 100 yards and 4 YPC average to Reuben Droughns and 138 yards and 4.6 YPC average to Maurice Morris. The did stuff Edgerrin James though....but then again, who hasn't?

Prophet
11-29-2006, 10:47 PM
"Mr" wrote:


I've been thinking about it today and I am now sure that I place the blame on our defensive line.

They can not put the pressure on the opposing QB without blitz assistance, leaving the middle of the field wide open, we need to disrupt other teams timing or we will continue to get picked apart.


You may be partially correct.
But now you claim, "I've been thinking about it today and I am now sure that I place the blame on our defensive line."

Let's take a look at how long the defensive coaching staff has thinking about this at a professional level and make the comparison to how long you have been thinking about it.

Professional experience coaching (exclusive of playing and being a fan)
Brad Childress: 29 yrs of coaching
Brendan Daly (defensive quality control): 8 yrs
Karl Dunbar (defensive line coach): 9 yrs
Jeff Imamura (defensive assistant): 9 yrs
Fred Pagac (linebackers coach): 28 yrs
Mike Tomlin (defensive coordinator): 10 yrs
Joe Woods (secondary coach): 15 yrs

Professional experience coaching for defensive coaching staff: 107 yrs

Time Mr. Anderson took to "know for sure" what the problem is: <1 day

Congratulations!
You are a genius!
It only took you < 1 day and those morons couldn't figure it out with over 100 yrs of professional coaching experience. ;D

singersp
11-29-2006, 11:05 PM
"Acumen" wrote:


"Mr" wrote:


I've been thinking about it today and I am now sure that I place the blame on our defensive line.

They can not put the pressure on the opposing QB without blitz assistance, leaving the middle of the field wide open, we need to disrupt other teams timing or we will continue to get picked apart.


You may be partially correct.
But now you claim, "I've been thinking about it today and I am now sure that I place the blame on our defensive line."

Let's take a look at how long the defensive coaching staff has thinking about this at a professional level and make the comparison to how long you have been thinking about it.

Professional experience coaching (exclusive of playing and being a fan)
Brad Childress: 29 yrs of coaching
Brendan Daly (defensive quality control): 8 yrs
Karl Dunbar (defensive line coach): 9 yrs
Jeff Imamura (defensive assistant): 9 yrs
Fred Pagac (linebackers coach): 28 yrs
Mike Tomlin (defensive coordinator): 10 yrs
Joe Woods (secondary coach): 15 yrs

Professional experience coaching for defensive coaching staff: 107 yrs

Time Mr. Anderson took to "know for sure" what the problem is: <1 day

Congratulations!
You are a genius!
It only took you < 1 day and those morons couldn't figure it out with over 100 yrs of professional coaching experience. ;D



Just out of curiosity, how many of those years were in the college ranks & how many at the pro level?

I know a lot of our coaches came from the college ranks & I have been pondering the question:

If players have to learn to play at a pro level because they were previously coached & played at the college level, is there also a learning curve for the college coaches to learn & teach at the pro level?

Could part of the problem be that some of the coaches are teaching them things at a college level of play?

Prophet
11-29-2006, 11:08 PM
"singersp" wrote:


...Just out of curiosity, how many of those years were in the college ranks & how many at the pro level?

I know a lot of our coaches came from the college ranks & I have been pondering the question:

If players have to learn to play at a pro level because they were previously coached & played at the college level, is there also a learning curve for the college coaches to learn & teach at the pro level?

Could part of the problem be that some of the coaches are teaching them things at a college level of play?


Some of those yrs are as college coaching, that's why I put professional coaching experience.
It'a all there at nfl.com.

gohawksgovikes
11-29-2006, 11:51 PM
Ok my first post here, here goes. I am very familiar with this "bend dont break" defense as my favorite college team uses it, as a matter of fact I hate it. But trust me it works when your Linebackers buy into it, and play effectively. I am salivating to see Greenway in this system when he returns from injury as he knows this system extremely well from his days at Iowa. But as I said before I hate to see the gaudy numbers teams put up through the air against it. Just remember to tell yourself (I have to) that that only stats that matter is the final score. Anyways glad to join this community, seems very cool!

Storm
11-29-2006, 11:53 PM
Congratulations!
You are a genius!
It only took you < 1 day and those morons couldn't figure it out with over 100 yrs of professional coaching experience. ;D



Those morons do have their Pass D ranked 31st out of 32 teams, so they might as well just take their 100 years of experience and shove it.
;D

thevikingfan
11-29-2006, 11:59 PM
"Acumen" wrote:


"Ltrey33" wrote:


...The reason the Raiders have the best pass defense is because everyone just runs the ball on them. Why throw the ball when you can eat up clock and get just as many yards running it?

They're giving up 4.1 yards per carry and have been run on more times than any team in the league. Heck, Rivers only threw 11 times against them week 1 and they still won by almost 30.


You can pretty much say the same thing about the Vikings.
Why run when you can throw all day long?


which brings me to my point why bother running on a team thats allowing 56 yards rushing a game when you can spread 5 receivers and make quick passes.I need to point out that this is the reason we are not getting a lot of sacks also.When you have 5 receivers and the qb in the shotgun its very hard to get to him b4 he throws the ball because they are usually quick reads and passes

singersp
11-30-2006, 06:22 AM
"Storm" wrote:




Congratulations!
You are a genius!
It only took you < 1 day and those morons couldn't figure it out with over 100 yrs of professional coaching experience. ;D



Those morons do have their Pass D ranked 31st out of 32 teams, so they might as well just take their 100 years of experience and shove it.
;D



::) I hardly think are defensive coaching staff are morons. We have the #1 rushing defense & the 10th overall.

So where do you get off calling them morons?

Zeus
11-30-2006, 08:02 AM
"JDogg926" wrote:


I think the problem with Smoot is he's overrated.


Smoot was never the #1 guy in Washington.
First he had Champ Bailey on the other side and then Shawn Springs.
We gave him #1 money and he hasn't lived up to that - plain and simple.

Now - that's enough rationality.

I blame Fred Smoot for the brutal cold which has descended upon the TC.

=Z=

Prophet
11-30-2006, 09:58 AM
"singersp" wrote:


"Storm" wrote:




Congratulations!
You are a genius!
It only took you < 1 day and those morons couldn't figure it out with over 100 yrs of professional coaching experience. ;D



Those morons do have their Pass D ranked 31st out of 32 teams, so they might as well just take their 100 years of experience and shove it.
;D



::) I hardly think are defensive coaching staff are morons. We have the #1 rushing defense & the 10th overall.

So where do you get off calling them morons?


If you look back a few posts at their first reference as 'morons' it should become readily apparent that it was sarcasm.
I doubt that most people would take that seriously when the comparison was being made between 107 yrs of professional coaching experience versus a fan that thought about it for less than a day.
I'll go with the 107 yrs of experience and their decisions 100% of the time.

Storm
11-30-2006, 10:27 AM
::) I hardly think are defensive coaching staff are morons. We have the #1 rushing defense & the 10th overall.

So where do you get off calling them morons?


Emoticons are your friend (© Webby).

cyviking
11-30-2006, 10:36 AM
my DVD player isnt working DANG U Fred Smoot its your fault!!!
come on you cant blame the whole secondary issues on a single guy.

They have issues but im confidant we will get better, our season is over to me so im just hopeing to win a couple more and trying to stay optmistic about next year seeing any progress we can make in every area.

SKOL Vikings

Suick
11-30-2006, 12:27 PM
Bend but don't break is Horse $hit. 400 yds is 400 yds, wether its on the ground or through the air.

Prophet
11-30-2006, 12:29 PM
"Suick" wrote:


Bend but don't break is Horse $hit. 400 yds is 400 yds, wether its on the ground or through the air.


# of yds does not points make.

Suick
11-30-2006, 12:35 PM
True that Acu-Yoda. But I hate watching teams like AZ and Miami jam it down our throats

ultravikingfan
11-30-2006, 03:57 PM
"Suick" wrote:


True that Acu-Yoda. But I hate watching teams like AZ and Miami jam it down our throats


LMAO!

Good one!

jargomcfargo
11-30-2006, 05:40 PM
"thevikingfan" wrote:


OK enough is enough.Our pass defense is not terrible so stop saying it over and over and over....The only reason teams rack up the passing yards on us is because they give up running the ball.Thats what you get when you are the top rushing defense in the league!The card ran in only 5 times today!Leinhart threw it FIFTY ONE TIMES! 51! OF COARSE HE IS GONNA GET A LOT OF YARDS!


So 16 pages of responses is a fair indication that the pass defense isn't that great!

In preseason we knew Tomlin came from a team that had the number one ranked pass defense in 2002 and 2004. He was the defensive backs coach at that time.

We knew he was going to impliment a similar scheme here.

He was going to "create a frenzy" with big guys running and little guys hitting.

By definition the basic cover two is a zone type defense that demands pressure from your primary rushers and great play from your linebackers.

Any zone type defense is going to allow more space.

The biggest difference I see is :

Derrick Brooks, LB, 9 time pro bowl,

Ronde Barber, CB, pro bowl 2001,2004,2005,

John Lynch, S, pro bowl 2001,2002.

Their defensive line was pretty good at pressuringthe quarterback as well.

So the scheme is fine if you have the horses to pull the wagon.

VKG4LFE
11-30-2006, 09:05 PM
"snowinapril" wrote:


ONLY?

I can see some of what you are saying, but we still need to get better on Pass D.

The way other teams move the ball down field tells the story about our D.



I agree. Teams pass the ball way to easily on us. Plus if we KNOW it's coming shouldn't that make it easier for us to scheme to stop it??