Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Week 10: VIKINGS (5-4) vs. Lions (4-4)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 44, 45, 46  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
detfan782004


Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Posts: 51643
Location: Montana
PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nozizaki wrote:
Detroit's defense is still bad, if we can just simply return to what brought us success early on, I think we win. Maybe being without Harvin a week could be a good thing, less tight on coverage.


First off not trolling here. Hope now injuries and good game. Either team can win.

Now as for your statement I do not know if it is a joke or just misinformed. I will take it as the later so going to clear this up now.

-Taking away the 4 ST teams that are not attributed to DEF Det ranks #7 overall in points allowed

-They are #7 in yards allowed per game

-They are #14 in rush yards allowed per game

-They are #8 in pass yards allowed per game


They held Minny to ZERO pts on offense the first game when offense was clicking with Harvin.

They are far from a BAD defense. They have issues but what they have managed to hold opponents too considered how banged up secondary has been is amazing.




Good luck Sunday. Hope for nice clean and injury free game
_________________


AAL DT- C Reid
AAL MLB- Tulloch
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 48556
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 7:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Vikings defense has been good this year when they shut down the run. When teams run the ball down the Vikings throat, the defense is terrible. Question, can Detroit establish a running game? I think that is how teams have exploited the Vikes defense in recent weeks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chi_Vike1


Joined: 29 Oct 2012
Posts: 40
Location: Chicago
PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 10:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
Nozizaki wrote:
Detroit's defense is still bad, if we can just simply return to what brought us success early on, I think we win. Maybe being without Harvin a week could be a good thing, less tight on coverage.


Harvin's impact on the offense has steadily been on the decline, might give Simpson and Rudolph a better chance to get involved.

Being without Harvin is never a good thing. He is the only consistent playmaker we have at a receiving position. If he doesn't play, this game will be brutal to watch. Musgrave is left with a fade to simpson or a drag to Rudolph in his passing play chart.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 48556
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 10:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chi_Vike1 wrote:
vikingsrule wrote:
Nozizaki wrote:
Detroit's defense is still bad, if we can just simply return to what brought us success early on, I think we win. Maybe being without Harvin a week could be a good thing, less tight on coverage.


Harvin's impact on the offense has steadily been on the decline, might give Simpson and Rudolph a better chance to get involved.

Being without Harvin is never a good thing. He is the only consistent playmaker we have at a receiving position. If he doesn't play, this game will be brutal to watch. Musgrave is left with a fade to simpson or a drag to Rudolph in his passing play chart.


It will force the offense and Musgrave to try something new. That is the benefit i see in not having Harvin.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SteelKing728


Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 15153
Location: Gibsonia, Pennsylvania
PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 10:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
Chi_Vike1 wrote:
vikingsrule wrote:
Nozizaki wrote:
Detroit's defense is still bad, if we can just simply return to what brought us success early on, I think we win. Maybe being without Harvin a week could be a good thing, less tight on coverage.


Harvin's impact on the offense has steadily been on the decline, might give Simpson and Rudolph a better chance to get involved.

Being without Harvin is never a good thing. He is the only consistent playmaker we have at a receiving position. If he doesn't play, this game will be brutal to watch. Musgrave is left with a fade to simpson or a drag to Rudolph in his passing play chart.


It will force the offense and Musgrave to try something new. That is the benefit i see in not having Harvin.


bubble screens to Devin Aromashadu or Stephen Burton?

Harvin, please be ready this week.

Ponder will look like an average QB this week and everyone will have a sigh of relief.

calling it.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Chi_Vike1


Joined: 29 Oct 2012
Posts: 40
Location: Chicago
PostPosted: Mon Nov 05, 2012 10:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
Chi_Vike1 wrote:
vikingsrule wrote:
Nozizaki wrote:
Detroit's defense is still bad, if we can just simply return to what brought us success early on, I think we win. Maybe being without Harvin a week could be a good thing, less tight on coverage.


Harvin's impact on the offense has steadily been on the decline, might give Simpson and Rudolph a better chance to get involved.

Being without Harvin is never a good thing. He is the only consistent playmaker we have at a receiving position. If he doesn't play, this game will be brutal to watch. Musgrave is left with a fade to simpson or a drag to Rudolph in his passing play chart.


It will force the offense and Musgrave to try something new. That is the benefit i see in not having Harvin.

This is true. But one would think the inconsistent and lack of execution of these plays throughout the year would force him to try something new. And it hasn't
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nbanflguy


Joined: 16 Jan 2011
Posts: 696
Location: Minnesota
PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mossburg wrote:
milanb wrote:
Mossburg wrote:

Honestly, I think we lose out the the rest of the season. I don't see a single win left on the schedule, unless there are insane improvements.


That's a bit pessimistic. There are things that the team is doing wrong on both sides of the ball that are fixable. Maybe not fixable to the extent that they will be better than 2-5 the rest of the way, but I do expect them to play better than they have been.


Look at the remaining schedule. How many wins you see there? Next week is the best chance. The Rams game maybe, but IMO the Rams are underrated and it's on the road. Unless the Packers are resting their starters week 17, I don't see a win.


You are overreacting if you dont think we can beat the Rams. Their offense is even worse than ours and even with our current struggles, our defense is better. They have nothing on us.
_________________
"Friends dont let friends be Packer fans"
Vikings Fanatic
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mossburg


Most Valuable Poster (4th Ballot)
Joined: 02 Jan 2005
Posts: 43946
Location: Straight Cash Inc. Headquarters
PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nbanflguy wrote:
Mossburg wrote:
milanb wrote:
Mossburg wrote:

Honestly, I think we lose out the the rest of the season. I don't see a single win left on the schedule, unless there are insane improvements.


That's a bit pessimistic. There are things that the team is doing wrong on both sides of the ball that are fixable. Maybe not fixable to the extent that they will be better than 2-5 the rest of the way, but I do expect them to play better than they have been.


Look at the remaining schedule. How many wins you see there? Next week is the best chance. The Rams game maybe, but IMO the Rams are underrated and it's on the road. Unless the Packers are resting their starters week 17, I don't see a win.


You are overreacting if you dont think we can beat the Rams. Their offense is even worse than ours and even with our current struggles, our defense is better. They have nothing on us.


That game is a long way from now. Both teams could be headed in different directions by then. Like I said, that is a winnable game, and really the only one outside of this week's. Rams are well coached and are underrated. We've lost to worse teams already.
_________________
Equal Opportunity Hater

EFF YOUR FANTASY TEAM, I HOPE YOU LOSE

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -Mark Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mossburg


Most Valuable Poster (4th Ballot)
Joined: 02 Jan 2005
Posts: 43946
Location: Straight Cash Inc. Headquarters
PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 11:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
Chi_Vike1 wrote:
vikingsrule wrote:
Nozizaki wrote:
Detroit's defense is still bad, if we can just simply return to what brought us success early on, I think we win. Maybe being without Harvin a week could be a good thing, less tight on coverage.


Harvin's impact on the offense has steadily been on the decline, might give Simpson and Rudolph a better chance to get involved.

Being without Harvin is never a good thing. He is the only consistent playmaker we have at a receiving position. If he doesn't play, this game will be brutal to watch. Musgrave is left with a fade to simpson or a drag to Rudolph in his passing play chart.


It will force the offense and Musgrave to try something new. That is the benefit i see in not having Harvin.


I agree with this. I'm tired of seeing forced screens. I want to see a downfield offense with more Rudolph. Let Ponder lose and give him a chance to work out of his struggles. If he can't then it means he's probably not the QB to keep. Why can't we play with the same mentality like we did against the Niners? Seriously, this is ridiculous.
_________________
Equal Opportunity Hater

EFF YOUR FANTASY TEAM, I HOPE YOU LOSE

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -Mark Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SteelKing728


Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 15153
Location: Gibsonia, Pennsylvania
PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 12:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mossburg wrote:
vikingsrule wrote:
Chi_Vike1 wrote:
vikingsrule wrote:
Nozizaki wrote:
Detroit's defense is still bad, if we can just simply return to what brought us success early on, I think we win. Maybe being without Harvin a week could be a good thing, less tight on coverage.


Harvin's impact on the offense has steadily been on the decline, might give Simpson and Rudolph a better chance to get involved.

Being without Harvin is never a good thing. He is the only consistent playmaker we have at a receiving position. If he doesn't play, this game will be brutal to watch. Musgrave is left with a fade to simpson or a drag to Rudolph in his passing play chart.


It will force the offense and Musgrave to try something new. That is the benefit i see in not having Harvin.


I agree with this. I'm tired of seeing forced screens. I want to see a downfield offense with more Rudolph. Let Ponder lose and give him a chance to work out of his struggles. If he can't then it means he's probably not the QB to keep. Why can't we play with the same mentality like we did against the Niners? Seriously, this is ridiculous.


I know! After watching that game I thought our offense really turned the corner. Since then? Its all been downhill, except Harvin and Peterson.

Bill Musgrave is pathetic. So what if Ponder is in a slump? Let him throw the ball downfield. He's not going to get better by completing 2 yard passes.

This is a critical time to find out what our offense is made of, where we can sustain drives and, even if we don't score, atleast we aren't giving teams half a field to work with. Yet, I just don't think Musgrave can understand that. He wants to keep it simple for everyone to "limit" the mistakes, when really he's just doing the opposite.

At this point, I don't even know if we could get 100 yards total offense unless Peterson goes off. Musgrave must be fired.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
Mossburg


Most Valuable Poster (4th Ballot)
Joined: 02 Jan 2005
Posts: 43946
Location: Straight Cash Inc. Headquarters
PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 12:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SteelKing728 wrote:
Mossburg wrote:
vikingsrule wrote:
Chi_Vike1 wrote:
vikingsrule wrote:
Nozizaki wrote:
Detroit's defense is still bad, if we can just simply return to what brought us success early on, I think we win. Maybe being without Harvin a week could be a good thing, less tight on coverage.


Harvin's impact on the offense has steadily been on the decline, might give Simpson and Rudolph a better chance to get involved.

Being without Harvin is never a good thing. He is the only consistent playmaker we have at a receiving position. If he doesn't play, this game will be brutal to watch. Musgrave is left with a fade to simpson or a drag to Rudolph in his passing play chart.


It will force the offense and Musgrave to try something new. That is the benefit i see in not having Harvin.


I agree with this. I'm tired of seeing forced screens. I want to see a downfield offense with more Rudolph. Let Ponder lose and give him a chance to work out of his struggles. If he can't then it means he's probably not the QB to keep. Why can't we play with the same mentality like we did against the Niners? Seriously, this is ridiculous.


I know! After watching that game I thought our offense really turned the corner. Since then? Its all been downhill, except Harvin and Peterson.

Bill Musgrave is pathetic. So what if Ponder is in a slump? Let him throw the ball downfield. He's not going to get better by completing 2 yard passes.

This is a critical time to find out what our offense is made of, where we can sustain drives and, even if we don't score, atleast we aren't giving teams half a field to work with. Yet, I just don't think Musgrave can understand that. He wants to keep it simple for everyone to "limit" the mistakes, when really he's just doing the opposite.

At this point, I don't even know if we could get 100 yards total offense unless Peterson goes off. Musgrave must be fired.


I understand what Musgrave is doing though. He sees his QB struggling and he also sees that he can win games. Does he call the game more aggressive to give the QB a chance to work himself out of a slump, increasing the chance of game costing mistakes, or does he call it safer and (what he thinks) give his team a better chance to win? It's a fairly complex situation trying to balance that out. Obviously he's been leaning towards the latter, and it has worked in a few games. But big picture, it does not help IMO.

I think the season is already over given what's left on the schedule. There's no sense in trying to be conservative. We need to learn what we have in Ponder. No better opportunity than letting him learn against some good teams. Benching him for Webb would be stupid. We won't win regardless. Let Ponder play out the rest of the season so there is more film to evaluate him on, and more importantly giving him a chance to improve.
_________________
Equal Opportunity Hater

EFF YOUR FANTASY TEAM, I HOPE YOU LOSE

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -Mark Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vike daddy


Most Valuable Poster (2nd Ballot)

Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 75239
PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mossburg wrote:
I understand what Musgrave is doing though. He sees his QB struggling and he also sees that he can win games. Does he call the game more aggressive to give the QB a chance to work himself out of a slump, increasing the chance of game costing mistakes, or does he call it safer and (what he thinks) give his team a better chance to win? It's a fairly complex situation trying to balance that out. Obviously he's been leaning towards the latter, and it has worked in a few games. But big picture, it does not help IMO.

I think the season is already over given what's left on the schedule. There's no sense in trying to be conservative. We need to learn what we have in Ponder. No better opportunity than letting him learn against some good teams. Benching him for Webb would be stupid. We won't win regardless. Let Ponder play out the rest of the season so there is more film to evaluate him on, and more importantly giving him a chance to improve.

so nice to read rational analyses.
_________________


Webmaster wrote:
Can we knock off all the nonsense and stick to football?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
milanb


Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 6179
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mossburg wrote:

I understand what Musgrave is doing though. He sees his QB struggling and he also sees that he can win games. Does he call the game more aggressive to give the QB a chance to work himself out of a slump, increasing the chance of game costing mistakes, or does he call it safer and (what he thinks) give his team a better chance to win? It's a fairly complex situation trying to balance that out. Obviously he's been leaning towards the latter, and it has worked in a few games. But big picture, it does not help IMO.

I think the season is already over given what's left on the schedule. There's no sense in trying to be conservative. We need to learn what we have in Ponder. No better opportunity than letting him learn against some good teams. Benching him for Webb would be stupid. We won't win regardless. Let Ponder play out the rest of the season so there is more film to evaluate him on, and more importantly giving him a chance to improve.


The flip side of this is that the playbook has been designed around putting Ponder in a position to be successful by giving him a lot of easy targets in the quick timing routes that are the strength of his game. It worked really well for the first three games when all the teams they faced dropped back into a soft zone in order to take away the big play.

The problem is that since those three games the opposing defences have been stuffing the box, which has had the double effect of taking away both the running game and the easy underneath routes that Ponder had feasted on.

I know it's not all on the QB but you can't win in this league if you can't throw the ball down the field. The defences are just too good if you can't spread them out. I'm pretty sure that Musgrave understands this better than anyone. But you also can't win if you turn the ball over and Ponder has a tendency to float the ball up there even on the short passes. If you ask Ponder to throw the ball deeper, and have the OL hold their blocks long enough for him to go into seven-step drops, it becomes a trade-off between how many big plays you get vs how many more times you turn it over.

Confused
_________________

The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong. — Ecclesiastes 9:11

But that’s the way to bet. — Jimmy The Greek
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mossburg


Most Valuable Poster (4th Ballot)
Joined: 02 Jan 2005
Posts: 43946
Location: Straight Cash Inc. Headquarters
PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 2:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

milanb wrote:
Mossburg wrote:

I understand what Musgrave is doing though. He sees his QB struggling and he also sees that he can win games. Does he call the game more aggressive to give the QB a chance to work himself out of a slump, increasing the chance of game costing mistakes, or does he call it safer and (what he thinks) give his team a better chance to win? It's a fairly complex situation trying to balance that out. Obviously he's been leaning towards the latter, and it has worked in a few games. But big picture, it does not help IMO.

I think the season is already over given what's left on the schedule. There's no sense in trying to be conservative. We need to learn what we have in Ponder. No better opportunity than letting him learn against some good teams. Benching him for Webb would be stupid. We won't win regardless. Let Ponder play out the rest of the season so there is more film to evaluate him on, and more importantly giving him a chance to improve.


The flip side of this is that the playbook has been designed around putting Ponder in a position to be successful by giving him a lot of easy targets in the quick timing routes that are the strength of his game. It worked really well for the first three games when all the teams they faced dropped back into a soft zone in order to take away the big play.

The problem is that since those three games the opposing defences have been stuffing the box, which has had the double effect of taking away both the running game and the easy underneath routes that Ponder had feasted on.

I know it's not all on the QB but you can't win in this league if you can't throw the ball down the field. The defences are just too good if you can't spread them out. I'm pretty sure that Musgrave understands this better than anyone. But you also can't win if you turn the ball over and Ponder has a tendency to float the ball up there even on the short passes. If you ask Ponder to throw the ball deeper, and have the OL hold their blocks long enough for him to go into seven-step drops, it becomes a trade-off between how many big plays you get vs how many more times you turn it over.

Confused


The funny part is in all of those games the offense did not do anything UNTIL they started to go downfield. Both the Colts and Jags game the offense woke up and got more aggressive, and Ponder made PLENTY of downfield plays. That's really what I don't understand. Why not more of that?
_________________
Equal Opportunity Hater

EFF YOUR FANTASY TEAM, I HOPE YOU LOSE

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." -Mark Twain
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Freakout


Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 3121
PostPosted: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well teams have been playing a lot of press coverage and sending extra guys at Ponder. We talk about throwing down the seam but when you think about it what seam? Teams are playing 8 in the box with a single high safety. They are now using the SS to defend Rudolph. Our receivers cannot beat press coverage, at least not to the point of getting any separation. Add in that they are also poor in jump ball situations.

With that said Detroit is the type of team that we can have better success against. It is no secret our offensive line blocks better against 4-3 fronts. They also do not have a secondary stacked with the type of DB's that we have went against recently so hopefully Simpson can be able to help more.

On defense the lack of a running game by Detroit should help our struggling front 7. Having Cook out hurts but he didn't even really defend CJ in our first game.

If Harvin plays I think we win. If he doesn't I expect the game to be close, Jarius Wright has a good game, but we lose.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 44, 45, 46  Next
Page 3 of 46

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group