Vikings at Saints Game Thread - Week Three

[frosted]

Nothing against you but after looking over 3 articles that are saying pretty much what I'm saying, one being espn, and many more out there, it's hard to believe someone on a message board over what I'm seeing and also believing. Especially when there hasn't been a whole lot of proof of teams using it as their primary scheme right now

It's not a matter of opinion. The Panthers DO use the cover 2 as their base defense. The Seahawks, while not a cover 2, run a cover 3 shell as their base defense, which has a lot of the same principles. Check the tape.

[Pondering Her Percy]

It's not a matter of opinion. The Panthers DO use the cover 2 as their base defense. The Seahawks, while not a cover 2, run a cover 3 shell as their base defense, which has a lot of the same principles. Check the tape.

Same principles is still not a traditional Tampa 2 regardless so thats not saying a whole lot. Either way, this thread is so far derailed it's not even funny. Fans are not going to change my perspective regarding this matter and especially how Frazier managed it so I guess we can just end it there

[Mothman]

Not missing your point at all. Here's what you said:

"... Tampa 2 defense is a joke..."

When I refuted that by explaining the effectiveness of the defense over the years, you replied with:

" ... Using a defense that was successful in the 1970s is a pretty poor example."

To which I explained that Tampa used the defense with great effect, as did the Bears (2012), the Panthers (currently), and even the Seahawks using a variation of the Tampa 2 whenever they run a 4-3 set (they are split about 50% between 4-3 and 3-4). The first article you post is from 2012, which was interestingly the same year the Bears were so successful running almost exclusively a Tampa 2. The second article you post is from 2009, which, given the later success of the Bears, Panthers, and Seahawks makes it premature. The third article you list is more about why the Tampa 2 doesn't work for the Cowboys ... again, personnel. The same reason it didn't work great for the Vikings.

The Panthers most definitely run a Tampa 2 ... it is a 4-3, they rush four and rarely blitz, they maintain single gap assignments, Kuechly has responsibility for dropping in to coverage on passing downs, and that coverage is soft-zone. The Seahawks do similarly out of a 4-3, although they tend more towards "Cover 3" rather than "Cover 2".

It would be correct to say that the Tampa-2 is fading as an exclusive, base defense ... but so are ALL defensive schemes. Most NFL teams have spent the last decade incorporating multiple schemes and producing hybrids to confuse QBs given the rule changes and the evolution of offenses, but the Tampa 2 is an extremely effective defense with the right personnel and will always be used as the primary counter to West Coast offenses. And that is why Frazier adopted it as DC here in Minnesota and kept it as head coach ... it is the most effective defense against West Coast offenses, and the NFC North was almost entirely a West Coast Offense division.

This "death of the Tampa 2" crap reminds me of the early 80s when, after the success the Dolphins, Raiders, Eagles and Giants had with the 3-4 over the previous decade, everyone was predicting the death of the 4-3 and that everyone would be using the 3-4 by the end of the century. But by 1995, only two teams were still using the 3-4, and suddenly everyone was declaring the "death of the 3-4" to be replaced by .... the Tampa 2. Now, over the last 15 years, we've seen a revival of the 3-4, and teams like the Seahawks are effectively using it in 50% of their defensive sets.

The Tampa 2 is going nowhere ... it is simply evolving and playing an important role in the constant metamorphosis of pro football strategy.

LEAFMAN THE PURPLE FAN

Excellent post, Leafman.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Was anyone else really impressed with Hodges?? I thought he looked very solid. Greenway could be out this week but with Hodges taking his place, it doesn't bother me as much. I thought Greenway has looked better than last year as well. Could be the change in scheme also.

Also, I have been very impressed with Tom Johnson. He was one guy I knew nothing about when we signed him but he has made consistent plays every game we have had. And Shamar Stephen was a great late round pick by Spielman. Plays often and has shown flashes. That doesn't happen often with late round picks

[frosted]

Was anyone else really impressed with Hodges?? I thought he looked very solid. Greenway could be out this week but with Hodges taking his place, it doesn't bother me as much. I thought Greenway has looked better than last year as well. Could be the change in scheme also.

Also, I have been very impressed with Tom Johnson. He was one guy I knew nothing about when we signed him but he has made consistent plays every game we have had. And Shamar Stephen was a great late round pick by Spielman. Plays often and has shown flashes. That doesn't happen often with late round picks

I was very pleased with how Hodges played as well.

[mondry]

One of the bigger things being overlooked is that there are different versions or "styles" of cover 2. Lovie's in chicago when they were good was simply more aggressive. They played the ball, went for turnovers, strips, etc. It was the hallmark of that Bears defense that they'd not just tackle you, but try to strip the ball as well on the way down. If you have the personnel for it, I think this style of cover 2 can still be effective at times.

The cover 2 that I don't think can work anymore, is the Frazier / cowboys style of "keep everything in front of you and tackle well to mitigate explosive plays". Offenses are just too good now so if you give them the 3-5 yard passes almost for free over and over, we saw what Rodgers does to that style of defense and the Packers didn't have to punt all game.

That style of cover 2 COMPLETELY RELIES on having elite defensive lineman (think Jared Allen, K.will. P.will in their primes) to get pressure with only the front 4. We've seen time and time again that without pressure from ONLY the front four, the soft zones get picked apart. What's worse is if you blitz or bring pressure elsewhere, it significantly compromises your zones further and the "web" of "adequate" coverage shrinks.

Personal wise, I think the cover 2 is very skill dependant. MLB has to be a stud, D-linemen have to be studs, safeties should have good "over the top" coverage skills, though the CB's aren't asked to do much so an average CB will do. Once you don't have that elite D-line though or the stud MLB like Urlacher it unravels pretty quickly. I think this is why you either see the cover 2 be pretty effective (like in chicago or seattle) or just downright awful (us and the cowboyz last year) since it's so personal dependant. Not saying you can get away with playing "trash" at every position for other schemes / defenses because every defense takes talent and skilled players but the soft cover 2 shell unravels much more quickly without the elite talent necessary on the D-line and at LB. (especially MLB)

My point is, I think that talent issues are a big reason a lot of teams have moved away from the cover 2. It sucks to just be bad if you can't continually draft borderline hall of fame D-lineman / MLB's (again like Urlacher) to make your scheme work.

[PacificNorseWest]

From PFF:

Minnesota Vikings — Performances of Note

Teddy Bridgewater, QB, +0.4

Breakdown: And so the Teddy Bridgewater era begins. Matt Cassel’s injury thrust Bridgewater onto the field a bit sooner than most expected, and it looks as if Bridgewater will be the starter for the foreseeable future. Considering the fewer reps he was given in practices as the backup, he played well in his first regular season action. The most impressive aspect was his ability to stay poised under pressure, where many rookie quarterbacks can get rattled easily. He was off target on a few passes as one would expect, but overall it was a very encouraging outing for the rookie.

Signature Stat: Bridgewater was pressured on 48% of his dropbacks, on which he had a 75% Accuracy Rate and +1.0 pass grade.

Anthony Barr, LB: +1.5
Breakdown: The Vikings’ other first round pick was impressive in his own right. Barr graded positively against the run and as a pass rusher. He rushed the quarterback just 14 times, but that didn’t stop him from picking up a sack, a hit, a hurry, and a batted pass. His only struggle was in pass coverage, where he graded negatively for the second straight week, this time due to a couple missed tackles after the catch. His five receptions allowed for 35 yards is not a terrible amount, but he has to do better at stopping the chains moving.

Signature Play: With 1:31 left in the second quarter, Barr was able to beat Jahri Evans inside and trip up Drew Brees for his first career sack.

Gerald Hodges, LB: +2.2

Breakdown: Barr may not have been the most impressive linebacker for the Vikings, however. Hodges, was on the field for just 19 snaps, but still finished with the highest grade on the Vikings’ defense. He came up with two run stops on 13 run plays and assisted on a couple other stops. He took on lead blockers well and disrupted another play that led to a short gain. Hodges is certainly making a compelling case to see more time on the field.

Signature Play: With 7:06 left in the third quarter, Hodges hits lead blocker Josh Hill in the hole, sheds the block, and is able to wrap up Pierre Thomas for a two yard loss with no yards allowed after contact.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... ts-week-3/

[Leafman]

My point is, I think that talent issues are a big reason a lot of teams have moved away from the cover 2. It sucks to just be bad if you can't continually draft borderline hall of fame D-lineman / MLB's (again like Urlacher) to make your scheme work.

You make some good points, but the fact remains that there is no defensive scheme that works with mediocre talent. If there was, everyone would be using it. Whether it's a 46 defense, 3-4, 4-3 under, 4-3 over, 4-3 2-gap, cover-2, Tampa-2, cover-3 ... they all rely on specific sets of skills from the defensive players deploying the scheme.

The reason NFL teams rely less on the Tampa-2 and Cover-2 defenses as a base set is because they see less of the base offense that these defenses were specifically designed to defend against ... the West Coast offense. NFL offenses have become sophisticated hybrids of multiple schemes especially those deploying multiple TE sets, which was only partially driven by rule changes but mostly driven by the natural evolution of the game, and this required defenses to adopt sophisticated hybrid schemes as well ... the prime example being the Seahawks, who deploy a mix of the 3-4, Tampa-2, cover-3 and other sets out of a 4-3 scheme.

The requirement to draft top-notch defensive talent for a scheme to work exists for ALL schemes, not just the cover-2/Tampa-2. For those specific schemes, the key is to have superior talent at the MLB, DT and S positions with excellent speed across the entire secondary. The talent requirements for a 3-4 or 46 defense are somewhat different, but superior talent for effective execution is still a requirement.

LEAFMAN THE PURPLE FAN

[frosted]

FWIW:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -bad-call/

Vikings cornerback Captain Munnerlyn got an unnecessary roughness penalty when he went all Hulk Hogan on Saints quarterback Drew Brees on Sunday. Now Munnerlyn says the NFL has admitted that the big hit he put on Brees was clean.

[Thaumaturgist]

FWIW:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -bad-call/

A lot of good it does now, but I'm surprised they admitted it.

[PurpleMustReign]

FWIW:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -bad-call/

HAHAHA!! I knew it!!
#### the NFL and their apologies. I am so sick of being the beneficiary of those. Every season we have to deal with three of them that change the flow of the game.

[PurpleKoolaid]

Anyone knowing the rules, should have known this wasn't a penalty. Captain was having a hard time tackling him (no whistle being blown) so he tried to throw him to the ground the same second Blanton came in. And then Brees getting up to retaliate, even a second grader would know that IS a penalty. But the refs have a thing for the 'elite' QBs. We don't have one. Yet. But when we do, he wont get this call.

[Mothman]

The NFL has made no admission that the call against Munnerlyn wasn't a penalty. There was no apology from the league, no concession that the call was wrong, nothing like that.

Here's the deal, from the exact same link frosted21 posted above:

Vikings cornerback Captain Munnerlyn got an unnecessary roughness penalty when he went all Hulk Hogan on Saints quarterback Drew Brees on Sunday. Now Munnerlyn says the NFL has admitted that the big hit he put on Brees was clean.

Munnerlyn thinks the NFL’s decision not to fine him amounts to an admission that he shouldn’t have been penalized.

All we have here is a player saying he feels vindicated because he wasn't fined.

[Purple Reign]

The NFL has made no admission that the call against Munnerlyn wasn't a penalty. There was no apology from the league, no concession that the call was wrong, nothing like that.

Here's the deal, from the exact same link frosted21 posted above:
All we have here is a player saying he feels vindicated because he wasn't fined.

Exactly - the NFL doesn't issue fines on all personal fouls, only the ones they think are excessive such as fighting or trying to injure a player. Just because the NFL didn't consider the play excessive doesn't mean that it wasn't a penalty. I think it's funny how some people take the non fine as an admission/apology from the NFL.

[Mothman]

Exactly - the NFL doesn't issue fines on all personal fouls, only the ones they think are excessive such as fighting or trying to injure a player. Just because the NFL didn't consider the play excessive doesn't mean that it wasn't a penalty. I think it's funny how some people take the non fine as an admission/apology from the NFL.

I'm guessing our fellow board members just read the quote from the link and didn't get the whole story.

I can understand why Munnerlyn doesn't want to believe he did anything wrong!.