Vikings Message Board.Com

Musgrave and the QB coach can both be shown the door. I think Saturdays game shed some light on why ponder was regressing, and I don't remember Webb being that bad.

AP's explosive runs have all been on the edges. He is a great gut runner but he is downright scary on the edge. GB's strategy to contain AP was to force him inside, thus they crowded the LOS. This also served to contain Webb's legs since they already had some many people in the zone to stop a runner. The Packers were basically playing a "bend don't break" style of defense on AP. They were willing to concede to him the 4-8 yard stuff up the middle. They were not going to give him the big 20-50 yard stuff on the edges. Combine the success of this with a backup QB who was terrible in the passing game and you beat the Vikings.

The key issue, IMO, is personnel. If PH had been on the field they could not have run this type of alignment since Harvin would have decimated them via quick passing plays given that so much of their front 7 was at the first level. You are not going to succed on Defense with PH only has to beat 1-2 guys to get to the endzone. We didn't see a lot of short timing type throws out of Webb which I think also contributed to the offensive woes.

IMO, the biggest reason to keep Musgrave is the fact that the offense improved after it faltered. They lost Harvin and Ponder regressed during the mid-season slide. They bounced back from this and altered their approach. That IMO is a good reason to keep Musgrave around.

PurpleMustReign wrote:Here is a great article by Souhan about Musgrave's inept play calling, and further emphasizes why I think he should be fired. I realize Ponder's deactivation was a last minute thing, but how hard can it be to call plays to use Webb's strengths? Don't get me wrong, Webb sucked, but the first drive went well, and then again, Musgrave outcoached and outthought himself.

Souhan: Instead of force-feeding Webb's flavor to Packers, Musgrave chose vanilla
Far too many times, the Vikings best player comes off the field on 3rd down situations. Far too many times, he also comes off the field in the redzone. To me, it seems like he is in over his head.

Exactly what I was saying the entire game. The odds were certainly stacked against but Musgrave basically waived the white flag. It worked great on the first drive and then was totally abandoned until late in the 4th where it was once again effective.

Webb can do damage to teams that are not prepared for him. Case in point, Philadelphia a few years ago. But in that game Bevell played to Webb's strengths whereas Musgrave forced Webb into something he's not and never will be. Would it have mattered in the end? Maybe not, but as Souhan says it was probably the only chance the Vikings had and I think they abandoned something that was working far too early.

S197 wrote:Exactly what I was saying the entire game. The odds were certainly stacked against but Musgrave basically waived the white flag. It worked great on the first drive and then was totally abandoned until late in the 4th where it was once again effective.

Webb can do damage to teams that are not prepared for him. Case in point, Philadelphia a few years ago. But in that game Bevell played to Webb's strengths whereas Musgrave forced Webb into something he's not and never will be. Would it have mattered in the end? Maybe not, but as Souhan says it was probably the only chance the Vikings had and I think they abandoned something that was working far too early.

Maybe but I think Musgrave deserves a little slack here. Souhan is kidding himself if he thinks the Vikings were going to win that game with the offense they ran on that first drive. It's too easy to shut that down without more of a passing game to accompany it. At some point, the QB has to be able to make some plays from the pocket. RGIII does it. Wilson does it. Newton does it. The read option offense isn't going to work without a good passer and Webb isn't a good passer. It's also unrealistic to expect Musgrave to install a new offense in a short week of preparation because Webb might have to start. He tried a few wrinkles and I think he could have tried a few more so it's not as if he doesn't deserve any criticism but Souhan is being extremely naive if he thinks the kind of run, run, run option offense he's talking about was going to beat the Packers on Saturday night.

Mothman wrote: Maybe but I think Musgrave deserves a little slack here. Souhan is kidding himself if he thinks the Vikings were going to win that game with the offense they ran on that first drive. It's too easy to shut that down without more of a passing game to accompany it. At some point, the QB has to be able to make some plays from the pocket. RGIII does it. Wilson does it. Newton does it. The read option offense isn't going to work without a good passer and Webb isn't a good passer. It's also unrealistic to expect Musgrave to install a new offense in a short week of preparation because Webb might have to start. He tried a few wrinkles and I think he could have tried a few more so it's not as if he doesn't deserve any criticism but Souhan is being extremely naive if he thinks the kind of run, run, run option offense he's talking about was going to beat the Packers on Saturday night.

I disagree, Jim. He could have tried it until it didn't work rather than giving up on it as early as he did. He seems to give up on things way too early.

Sent from my SGH-T769 using Tapatalk 2

Mothman wrote: Maybe but I think Musgrave deserves a little slack here. Souhan is kidding himself if he thinks the Vikings were going to win that game with the offense they ran on that first drive. It's too easy to shut that down without more of a passing game to accompany it. At some point, the QB has to be able to make some plays from the pocket. RGIII does it. Wilson does it. Newton does it. The read option offense isn't going to work without a good passer and Webb isn't a good passer. It's also unrealistic to expect Musgrave to install a new offense in a short week of preparation because Webb might have to start. He tried a few wrinkles and I think he could have tried a few more so it's not as if he doesn't deserve any criticism but Souhan is being extremely naive if he thinks the kind of run, run, run option offense he's talking about was going to beat the Packers on Saturday night.

They scored 3 points and took nearly 6 minutes off the clock. That's the recipe to having a shot (albeit slim) at winning. Keep Rodgers on the sideline. To say it wouldn't work, when it did, isn't fair. There's zero evidence to support it would not have worked because they abandoned it so quickly. This team lived and died most of the season by the run, even with Ponder, why all of a sudden would that stop working? The Vikings were able to rush for 400 yards on this team but all of a sudden that's not a formula that works?

And why is it unrealistic to expect Musgrave to change the offense? Isn't that what happened against Philly? Against Detroit? Different OC, but if Bevell could do it (with a rookie no less) I don't see why Musgrave can't.

Souhan says it as well as I could, I'm not saying the Vikings would have won if we ran the read option all game but I think it would have given them a better shot or at least kept it competitive.

Most likely, the Packers, playing at home with one of the game's best quarterbacks on their side, were going to win the game regardless of how the opposing quarterback played, but the Vikings hinted early that they could compete if they thought creatively.

On the first drive, Webb took off on designed runs or option plays, Peterson took advantage of a disoriented defense, and the Vikings drove 53 yards for a field goal.

After that, Musgrave asked one of the fastest quarterbacks in the game to stand still.

S197 wrote: They scored 3 points and took nearly 6 minutes off the clock. That's the recipe to having a shot (albeit slim) at winning. Keep Rodgers on the sideline. To say it wouldn't work, when it did, isn't fair. There's zero evidence to support it would not have worked because they abandoned it so quickly. This team lived and died most of the season by the run, even with Ponder, why all of a sudden would that stop working? The Vikings were able to rush for 400 yards on this team but all of a sudden that's not a formula that works?

And why is it unrealistic to expect Musgrave to change the offense? Isn't that what happened against Philly? Against Detroit?

Souhan says it as well as I could, I'm not saying the Vikings would have won if we ran the read option all game but I think it would have given them a better shot or at least kept it competitive.

It just seems like common sense to me, much less an offensive coordinator in the NFL. The Packers' strategy against Peterson seemed to be maintaining a disciplined edge contain while plugging in as many holes in the interior line as possible. With a passing attack, this oversell can be exploited via shallow slants/rolls on the outside and probably seams on the inside. Without a passing attack, as in our situation this past Sunday, it can be exploited via misdirection. Our first drive explicitly demonstrated this tactic and I was optimistic that our extremely athletic QB/RB tandem could continue to break ankles until the cheese could reasonably demonstrate an adjustment.

But, alas..nope. NOPE. Let's try the pocket passing thing.

S197 wrote:They scored 3 points and took nearly 6 minutes off the clock. That's the recipe to having a shot (albeit slim) at winning. Keep Rodgers on the sideline. To say it wouldn't work, when it did, isn't fair. There's zero evidence to support it would not have worked because they abandoned it so quickly.

Evidence or not, I just don't believe that's sustainable in the NFL for 4 quarters and we don't even know how much of that read option offense they were able to install in a short week. I agree that they could have gone back to it more often but they had to get something out the passing game to win that game.

This team lived and died most of the season by the run, even with Ponder, why all of a sudden would that stop working? The Vikings were able to rush for 400 yards on this team but all of a sudden that's not a formula that works?

They didn't abandon the run but it was less effective because Green Bay changed their strategy to defend it and basically invited the Vikings to pass the ball and beat them through the air.

And why is it unrealistic to expect Musgrave to change the offense? Isn't that what happened against Philly? Against Detroit? Different OC, but if Bevell could do it (with a rookie no less) I don't see why Musgrave can't.

No, that's not what happened in those games. The Vikings didn't install a new offense to beat teams when Webb was the QB (and Musgrave was the OC when Webb had his strong performance against Detroit). They threw in a few wrinkles and simplified the offense, which is quite different. As I've said before, Webb's best runs have usually come on plays where he was asked to drop back and pass and then he improvised when the play broke down.

After that, Musgrave asked one of the fastest quarterbacks in the game to stand still.

He asked him to do what an NFL QB has to do: complete passes. If Souhan thinks they could have defeated Green Bay by running on 8 of every 9 plays, as they did on the first drive, I can't say he's wrong because they didn't do it. However, there's a reason NFL teams haven't used that approach for decades.

I'm not saying Musgrave called a great game or that he couldn't have taken better advantage of Webb's athleticism but Souhan is just playing armchair quarterback. For all we know, Webb was dropping back and completing those passes from the pocket all week in practice and Musgrave had a reasonable expectation that Webb could complete them in the game. After all, strategically speaking, there were plays there to be made and Webb's athleticism is supposed to help him escape from pressure in the pocket. Instead, he was doing things like tripping over a defender and sacking himself.

Musgrave should be the OC next season. Like someone said already, having a steady coaching staff is crucial for a young QB and while Musgrave might not be an elite hotshot OC I think he's done enough to remain with the team (only on a year-to-year basis though, at this point). The team played well down the stretch without Harvin and he definitely gets some credit for that. Webb having a terrible game on Saturday night isn't a good reason to #### can him either.

As far as Pat Shurmur becoming our next OC, here's all you need to know: he hired Brad Childress to be his OC in Cleveland this past season. I'm surprised no one has mentioned that yet. So apparently Shurmur is a fan of the KAO!

HornedMessiah wrote:As far as Pat Shurmur becoming our next OC, here's all you need to know: he hired Brad Childress to be his OC in Cleveland this past season. I'm surprised no one has mentioned that yet. So apparently Shurmur is a fan of the KAO!

You're right, that's all I needed to be reminded of, thanks! Case closed on Shurmur! I'm not a big fan of Musgrave, but if we're bringing everyone else back and plan to run the same system, we might as well keep Musgrave too. This way if the ship sinks next year we can't 2nd guess the OC change and we can just clean house.

Add 2 more names to #Bears interview list for Phil Emery: #Vikings assistants Mike Singletary and special teams coach Mike Priefer.

Brad Biggs on Twitter

dead_poet wrote: Brad Biggs on Twitter

Are these guys candidates for Head Coach?! Jeez!

lol yes, Chicago please take Singletary.