Pathetic

[StumpHunter]

Being this bad against the run is a new thing this year.

Sure, the team that dominated time of possession against the Vikes and rushed for 158 yards in the season opener this year also dominated ToP and ran for a combined 328 yards in two games against the Vikes last season but this is a "new" problem.

Your statement above is demonstrably false.

In the three drives where the Packers actually scored, they had a total of 35 yards rushing. Despite what you claim before, you only looked at box score, saw 158 yards rushing, and took those yards out of context.

GB punted 8 times in that game and was 5-15 on 3rd down. The defense gave the offense plenty of chances to stay in the game, gave the offense plenty of chances to even out that TOP.

Maybe you should try a different game, this one just proves my point about teams running more when they are winning and that run defense wasn't close to being the biggest issue on this team until this year.

[Mothman]

In the three drives where the Packers actually scored, they had a total of 35 yards rushing. Despite what you claim before, you only looked at box score, saw 158 yards rushing, and took those yards out of context.

As I said, I watched or listened to the games. I'm aware of the context.

Maybe you should try a different game, this one just proves my point about teams running more when they are winning and that run defense wasn't close to being the biggest issue on this team until this year.

My "game" is fine. I simply understand how time of possession and a highly effective running game can influence outcomes.

I never said run defense was the team's biggest issue. That's another straw man.

I think we're done here.

[StumpHunter]

As I said, I watched or listened to the games. I'm aware of the context.

Really? Because the context proves my point, which is why I thought it was a strange decision to bring up this game.

My "game" is fine. I simply understand how time of possession and a highly effective running game can influence outcomes.

You claim that, and then fail to bring up the failure of one half of that TOP battle. The offense.

I never said run defense was the team's biggest issue. That's another straw man.

No. But you did say this:

I'm not sure the secondary was the biggest issue in week 1. They gave 158 rushing yards.

Run defense is an increasingly significant problem for the Vikings.

Implying if not right out stating the run game was the biggest issue week one. You then brought up week 2's run defense, mentioned no other issues besides the run defense and claimed it was similar to week 1 of this year. Week 2 last year was similar to week 1 this year, where you implied the rushing yards given up were the biggest issue. Straw man? I don't think so.

Your point about how much the Packers ran on drives when they actually scored implies a fundamental lack of understanding about how the running game can influence outcomes (not solely determine them—influence them).

Ouch. Let's see if you can back up this claim of my football ignorance.

It's not simply about how much a team ran on scoring drives or how many points were scored with the running game. It's about balance, game management, clock management, etc. Teams often end up with more rushing attempts in a when they win because running effectively helps them win. An effective running game engenders more carries by enabling a team to sustain drives and add downs. It allows a team to build an advantage in time of possession, keep the opposing offense on the sidelines, wear out the opposing defense, close out games, etc.

ALL of this is Football 101.

Nope, nothing to backup what you claim, and nothing that contradicts what I wrote.

If you look closely at my post, I addressed all of that with the defense. They forced GB to punt 8 times and had a 33 % 3rd down conversion against. A 33 % conversion rate on 3rd down would have been 29th in the NFL last year, so clearly GB was not doing well on the 3rd down. So how were they sustaining drives with this great run game? Well, they weren't.

We look at the TOP per drive in that game for the Viking's defense, and look at that: 2 minutes, 25 seconds per drive. In case you were wondering, that is the exact number NE's defense averaged per drive and would have been good for 2nd in the NFL. Seems pretty good considering they struggled to stop the run and couldn't get off the field. Can you explain how that works to me. Can't wait.

We dig deeper into that TOP number for them (we will get to our offense in a second), and we see that the first three drives took about 10 minutes total. That is 24 minutes for the other 11 drives, which means outside of those first 3 drives where the run game didn't really play that big of a role, the Packer's offense averaged 2 minutes and 10 seconds per drive. That TOP against would be the best in the NFL by a good bit.

One thing to add with this TOP stat, it can be a good thing, like with NE, but it also can be a bad thing like it was with Philly, who were #1. Philly gave up a lot of big plays and so teams scored quickly on them, which meant they weren't on the field a lot. NE forced a bunch of three and outs and turnovers to achieve their short TOP. Tangent, but I apparently have to explain the obvious here.

Now on to our offense, and what the real issue with TOP was. Looks like we had the ball for 1 minute and 45 seconds on average. That would be dead last among offenses last year by about 40 seconds. So dead last by a mile, versus 2nd overall. Which one was a significant problem and which one was actually a strength? Defensive TOP or Offensive? Dead last or 2nd overall? Please explain it slowly, football 101 slow.

To bring it back to the most recent game this year. TOP was bad on both sides of the football.

4 minutes 26 seconds per drive for the Packers on offense
1 minute 52 seconds for the Vikings offense.

The top one was best in the NFL week 1
The bottom one was 2nd to worst behind only the Jets

[CharVike]

Vikings TEAM stats through the first 2 weeks:

Total Offense: 30th
Pass Offense: 32nd
Run Offense: 20th

Total Defense: 29th
Pass Defense: 28th
Run Defense: 28th

Those stats alone point to a much bigger and deeper problem right now. And I wouldnt even say it's the GM because the talent is there.

This points directly at the coaching and failed game planning. The Vikings are in the bottom half, even bottom five in 5 of 6 categories. Bottom half in all 6. This is NOT a bottom 5 roster. Not even close on either side of the ball. The current problem is MUCH bigger than Kirk Cousins, or lack of DL, or OL, or DBs, etc. Something is going on that is not adding up. This is a TEAM problem right now and the coach is who runs the team.

There is zero fire, zero excitement on the field, guys just looking like they are going through the motions, poor play, etc. I'm not sure what Zim, Kubiak and these DCs are doing right now but clearly it's not the right thing.

You dont have Kirk Cousins, Cook, Mattison, Thielen, Jefferson and our TEs and have the 30th ranked offense in the NFL. You just dont!!

Granted the defense is now banged up but you dont have Ngakoue, Kenricks, Barr, Smith and Harris and have the 29th total defense in the NFL. Some teams would kill to have 5 studs like that on their defense and they are still playing better defense than the Vikings are.

I've said it once and I'll say it again, this is a coaching problem right now. I dont know what is going behind the scenes whether they arent seeing eye to eye and they are battling or if they are really that clueless right now. I have no clue. But this problem needs to be fixed and fixed fast. If not, they will all be on the street at this rate.

Our defense is to banged up to even give a grade. Once we lost our two best DL players the gig was up. No team can recover from that. Our offense isn't built for high scoring games. We have one proven NFL WR. The rest are unproven young guys who are getting some time. We all saw this before the season started. We are in a rebuild right now and it won;t be pretty. But at least we can see some young guys. Like Jefferson he has a nice burst. IMO there is a positive. Not much I know. Maybe this young G will develop. That would be huge for us. Thats the best I can make of our current situation.

[Mothman]

StumpHunter, as I said, we're done here.

I'm not going to continue indulging your efforts to argue about a point I never made in the first place.

[StumpHunter]

StumpHunter, as I said, we're done here.

I'm not going to continue indulging your efforts to argue about a point I never made in the first place.

Oh good, then we are in agreement that Zimmer's defenses against the run haven't really been remotely close to the biggest problem until this year.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[Mothman]

Oh good, then we are in agreement that Zimmer's defenses against the run haven't really been remotely close to the biggest problem until this year.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

In case my comments in the Week 2 "Good, Bad, and the Ugly" thread weren't clear to you the other day, continually trying to bait people into arguments is a problem. You're still doing it. Stop.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Vikings TEAM stats through the first 2 weeks:

Total Offense: 30th
Pass Offense: 32nd
Run Offense: 20th

Total Defense: 29th
Pass Defense: 28th
Run Defense: 28th

Those stats alone point to a much bigger and deeper problem right now. And I wouldnt even say it's the GM because the talent is there.

This points directly at the coaching and failed game planning. The Vikings are in the bottom half, even bottom five in 5 of 6 categories. Bottom half in all 6. This is NOT a bottom 5 roster. Not even close on either side of the ball. The current problem is MUCH bigger than Kirk Cousins, or lack of DL, or OL, or DBs, etc. Something is going on that is not adding up. This is a TEAM problem right now and the coach is who runs the team.

There is zero fire, zero excitement on the field, guys just looking like they are going through the motions, poor play, etc. I'm not sure what Zim, Kubiak and these DCs are doing right now but clearly it's not the right thing.

You dont have Kirk Cousins, Cook, Mattison, Thielen, Jefferson and our TEs and have the 30th ranked offense in the NFL. You just dont!!

Granted the defense is now banged up but you dont have Ngakoue, Kenricks, Barr, Smith and Harris and have the 29th total defense in the NFL. Some teams would kill to have 5 studs like that on their defense and they are still playing better defense than the Vikings are.

I've said it once and I'll say it again, this is a coaching problem right now. I dont know what is going behind the scenes whether they arent seeing eye to eye and they are battling or if they are really that clueless right now. I have no clue. But this problem needs to be fixed and fixed fast. If not, they will all be on the street at this rate.

Our defense is to banged up to even give a grade. Once we lost our two best DL players the gig was up. No team can recover from that. Our offense isn't built for high scoring games. We have one proven NFL WR. The rest are unproven young guys who are getting some time. We all saw this before the season started. We are in a rebuild right now and it won;t be pretty. But at least we can see some young guys. Like Jefferson he has a nice burst. IMO there is a positive. Not much I know. Maybe this young G will develop. That would be huge for us. Thats the best I can make of our current situation.

Hunter hurts no doubt. But losing Griff and replacing with Ngakoue was a win IMO. Barr didnt get hurt until this week. It's currently banged up for sure but there is still enough talent there to at least be average

[Pondering Her Percy]

As for the run defense argument, I wouldnt say run defense has really been a problem until this year. We've always had Linval during Zim's time here and he's always been an elite run defender. Sure there have been a few times it wasnt "great" but it was still very good. Not having Pierce absolutely kills us.

I mean think about it:

We went from:

DE- Hunter
DE- Ngakoue
Rotational DE- Odenigbo
1 tech- Pierce
3 tech- a mixed bag

TO....

DE- Ngakoue
DE- Odenigbo
Rotational DE- Jalyn Holmes
1 tech- Stephen
3 tech- Jaleel Johnson

I dont think I can stress how DRASTIC that drop off is. So in terms of overall talent on the DL right now, I dont think it's on Spielman, Zim or the DL in general. We had a very well built DL coming into this year outside of 3 tech (which I get annoyed with too because I dont get why they havent addressed that). I feel like if anything, the result of this DL was bad luck. Losing Hunter who is hands down the best player on the defense IMO along with Kendricks and losing Pierce is a year there was a damn pandemic going on is just crappy luck.

I honestly liked this years DL coming in quite a bit more than I did last years.

I think Hunter, Ngakoue, Pierce > Hunter, Griff and Joseph. Mainly because we got much younger by doing that and I think Ngakoue is better than Griff at this point in Griffs career and same goes for Pierce compared to Joseph.

But yes, they 100% need to address 3 tech. I think I've picked one fairly early every year since Floyd was done in my mocks and it doesnt happen. Was really hoping James Lynch could make an impact. There's still some hope there but rumor has it he didnt have a good camp

[StumpHunter]

As for the run defense argument, I wouldnt say run defense has really been a problem until this year. We've always had Linval during Zim's time here and he's always been an elite run defender. Sure there have been a few times it wasnt "great" but it was still very good. Not having Pierce absolutely kills us.

I mean think about it:

We went from:

DE- Hunter
DE- Ngakoue
Rotational DE- Odenigbo
1 tech- Pierce
3 tech- a mixed bag

TO....

DE- Ngakoue
DE- Odenigbo
Rotational DE- Jalyn Holmes
1 tech- Stephen
3 tech- Jaleel Johnson

I dont think I can stress how DRASTIC that drop off is. So in terms of overall talent on the DL right now, I dont think it's on Spielman, Zim or the DL in general. We had a very well built DL coming into this year outside of 3 tech (which I get annoyed with too because I dont get why they havent addressed that). I feel like if anything, the result of this DL was bad luck. Losing Hunter who is hands down the best player on the defense IMO along with Kendricks and losing Pierce is a year there was a damn pandemic going on is just crappy luck.

I honestly liked this years DL coming in quite a bit more than I did last years.

I think Hunter, Ngakoue, Pierce > Hunter, Griff and Joseph. Mainly because we got much younger by doing that and I think Ngakoue is better than Griff at this point in Griffs career and same goes for Pierce compared to Joseph.

But yes, they 100% need to address 3 tech. I think I've picked one fairly early every year since Floyd was done in my mocks and it doesnt happen. Was really hoping James Lynch could make an impact. There's still some hope there but rumor has it he didnt have a good camp

Could not agree more. It is not the Vikings fault Pierce opted out, that was something they could not have foreseen, but the depth at that NT spot is very concerning. Then we get to 3 tech and I don't understand how they have neglected that position for the past 2 seasons.

I don't know if anyone watched the press conference when Rodgers found out Hunter was going to be out against the Packers week 1, but I have never seen the guy so excited. His eyes just lit up. Rodgers knew what that meant for our defense right away, and that his job Sunday just got that much easier. Not only from a pass rushing standpoint, but against the run as well. Hunter being out is such a huge factor, and there is hope that his return will right the ship just a bit.

[CharVike]

Our defense is to banged up to even give a grade. Once we lost our two best DL players the gig was up. No team can recover from that. Our offense isn't built for high scoring games. We have one proven NFL WR. The rest are unproven young guys who are getting some time. We all saw this before the season started. We are in a rebuild right now and it won;t be pretty. But at least we can see some young guys. Like Jefferson he has a nice burst. IMO there is a positive. Not much I know. Maybe this young G will develop. That would be huge for us. Thats the best I can make of our current situation.

Hunter hurts no doubt. But losing Griff and replacing with Ngakoue was a win IMO. Barr didnt get hurt until this week. It's currently banged up for sure but there is still enough talent there to at least be average

Ngakoue was a good trade providing it wasn't a one year rental. We don't need a total rebuild because we have talent so it can be done quickly if things break right. Getting Hunter and Ng in the lineup together should help big time. I don't see Hunter back anytime soon though. Really I'm talking next year already.

[makila]

It's the NFL, you need depth on both sides of the line just for these reasons (what you dont expect). Heck you need to plan for something unknown to occur. We clearly have little to no depth on dline. We would be in the same boat at NT if say it was an injury and not covid. We used to have more depth. That is on the front office.

Right now we had what could have been a promising starting line, and nothing past it. Now that nothing is having to start.

[StumpHunter]

Hunter hurts no doubt. But losing Griff and replacing with Ngakoue was a win IMO. Barr didnt get hurt until this week. It's currently banged up for sure but there is still enough talent there to at least be average

Ngakoue was a good trade providing it wasn't a one year rental. We don't need a total rebuild because we have talent so it can be done quickly if things break right. Getting Hunter and Ng in the lineup together should help big time. I don't see Hunter back anytime soon though. Really I'm talking next year already.

Yeah, I would prefer Griffen and next year's 2nd round pick over Ngakoue for one year, but if he is a long term solution and is more like week 2 than week 1 Ngakoue going forward, it was a good trade.

[Hunter Morrow]

I can definitely see this team being one of football's worst passing attacks.
Look at where they were last year...

24th in passing yards despite only giving up 28 sacks for a loss of 206 yards.
Middle of the road in yards per game
Lost Stefon Diggs for a first rounder WR and some draft picks. That may or may not be a wise decision in the long term, but in the short term, you can't expect to just immediately plug in Jefferson and replicate what Diggs provided and represented. He was a bonafide, proven threat that always had to be respected and produced almost 1200 yards from scrimmage! For him to even come close to that production, he'd have to have as big an impact on this team as Percy Harvin did and I'm just not buying it.
I believe the team has taken big steps backwards on defense and that doesn't do a conservative minded, defense-orientated head coach, Kirk "Hothouse Flower" Cousins and a brand new to this organization Offensive Coordinator any favors.

I can absolutely buy this team fielding a bottom 5 passing attack in a lot of categories.

[J. Kapp 11]

Ngakoue was a good trade providing it wasn't a one year rental. We don't need a total rebuild because we have talent so it can be done quickly if things break right. Getting Hunter and Ng in the lineup together should help big time. I don't see Hunter back anytime soon though. Really I'm talking next year already.

Yeah, I would prefer Griffen and next year's 2nd round pick over Ngakoue for one year, but if he is a long term solution and is more like week 2 than week 1 Ngakoue going forward, it was a good trade.

The biggest differences between Griffen and Ngakoue are:
1. Age
2. Griffen is WAY more effective against the run — since we have DTs who get pushed around in the run game, Griffen's departure hurts even worse.

The loss of Michael Pierce is hugely underrated. Baltimore's run defense suffered when he wasn't in the game ... I read somewhere that 2019 opponents averaged an additional 1.5 yards per carry when Pierce was on the sideline.

Not much we can do about Pierce this year. I fear the pathetic play against the run will continue.