Vikings Message Board.Com

It's been three games the way this reads about our depth chart and Oline play you'd think its week 12 and we are on the bubble

I just hope the guys criticizing CJ were also criticizing Wallace when he was here. Wallace never put out any extra effort to catch a ball, and CJ does put in the effort. That's probably why he's still out there. I don't know why we left Wallace out there sometimes except as a decoy that fooled nobody.

mansquatch wrote:CJ getting snaps is nauseating at this point. He draws the opposing defense's weakest CB and can't get open. The stuff on "earning it" is getting old if you ask me. Maybe the next guy up hasn't done enough, but the guy getting the snaps is doing nothing on the field where it counts. I get the need for team culture and all of that, but this is getting ridiculous.

This is more less my exact sentiment. I think what helps perpetuate the situation is the fact that they're winning games. This seemed the case last season too until it kinda bit them in the playoffs.
The only evidence I can recall of a performance based change on offense, since Turner has been here, is Thielen for Wright. And even then that might have been spurred by injury.
I'm not shouting for Treadwell to take CJ's snaps, because as another guy just said above, it typically takes longer to learn the WR position in the NFL. But I would like to see what CP can do! And Zimmers explanation of, 'I have no idea', in response to the question, 'why is CJ not producing?'....blew my mind.
-
I cited Sheppard as an example....the kid who broke his hand in Cleveland was playing great, and Diggs came in after 3 weeks (becuase of an injury) and was the best receiver on the team. Turner is not getting credit from me for that.
Maybe, due to the offenses being run in college now days, there is less to learn at the pro level? I dunno...but this staff has been uber cautious in this regard and I feel they are supported in that by the fact that they continue to win, even if it's in ugly fashion at times.

Purple Martin wrote: How is it misleading? The title says he won't play unil he practices better. Zimmer said "He has to continue to do better in practice,” Vikings coach Mike Zimmer said.

How does that misrepresent the title? He continues with specific details of what he needs to improve on

“ I still think he’s thinking about the number of steps to take on each route and things like that, being at the right depth.”

It seems perfectly in line with the title to me. Having said that, its a very sad excuse for "an article", as it barely exceeds the extremely low bar for newsworthy writing set by "tweets".

Still think the title is misleading. When Zimmer says "He has to continue to do better in practice,” I interpret it as he's already producing in practice, he just needs to continue improving. The title implies he's being punished for not practicing well and needs to do better if he wants to see the field. Well, that's how my brain sees it.

I would just put Treadwell in and give him a route that is his strong suit. And say get us a first down kid and see how he responses. But at least give him a chance.
I would like to see the rest of the recievers have the same chance.
Patterson has made some tough catches. I would like to see some more from him, and not the Norv gadget plays everybody knows is coming.

CP84 has made something positive happen almost every time he is on the field and gets to be around the football. I'm more and more with Jim on this one every day that goes by. CJ gets a ton of snaps and has produced almost nothing. Give those reps to somebody else please.

I am starting to think there is like, one major flaw in cp that we arent aware of, like a learning disablilty regarding audibles or something

IrishViking wrote:I am starting to think there is like, one major flaw in cp that we arent aware of, like a learning disablilty regarding audibles or something

Are you sure you're not just trying to find any explanation that doesn't involve stubborn (or perhaps short-sighted) coaching?

Mothman wrote: Are you sure you're not just trying to find any explanation that doesn't involve stubborn (or perhaps short-sighted) coaching?

You mean the stubborn short sighted coaching that is doing everything in their power to get him on the field anyway possible included Gunning?

IrishViking wrote:
You mean the stubborn short sighted coaching that is doing everything in their power to get him on the field anyway possible included Gunning?

It's great that they decided to use him as a gunner. After all, he was drafted because of his explosive special teams coverage skills. What better use could there possibly be for a first round pick?

I don't object to that use of his abilities, by the way. I'm just giving you a hard time.

In all seriousness, if they were truly "doing everything in their power to get him on the field" he'd actually be out there a lot more. After all, the coaches determine who gets on the field for every play!

This theory theory about audibles feels like a reach. If he's that problematic, why would they put him out there at all? Can they never audible on a play when Patterson is in the game?

I still see Patterson as being raw as a receiver. My guess is he still struggles with his route running.

That said, I love the way he is returning kicks this year. Full speed and very precise on his cuts up the field.

IrishViking wrote:I am starting to think there is like, one major flaw in cp that we arent aware of, like a learning disablilty regarding audibles or something

Yeah Norv
Maybe we should let Pat run the offense one week and then Norv the next and compare.
Kind of a competition....

halfgiz wrote: Yeah Norv
Maybe we should let Pat run the offense one week and then Norv the next and compare.
Kind of a competition....

And before that it was Bevell

And before that Chili

And before that Tice

Pretty much unless our offense is mirror Peak Denny Green Productions is just terrible playcalling from the OC


Maybe, just Maybe the grass is greener on the otherside.



Through three games we are 100% with TDs in the Redzone this year 3/3. One of the biggest if not the biggest complaint with this team has been settling for field goals. They aren't this year, zero credit?

Musgrave was the most recent and he did reasonbly well considering Ponder was his QB.
I don't think Bevell called plays here, which seems like a shame since the only time the KOA actually kicked some A is when Favre went 'off the reservation'.
3-3 in the redzone after 3 games is really the only thing demonstrably positive regarding this offensive thus far.
The Ravens fell today to a Raiders team that went 4-4 in the redzone in just that game alone.
I think Tice coaches the o-line there...Carr was not sacked today. And Musgrave runs the offense that just put up 28 on one of the leagues better D's, including a game winning drive late in the 4th.
I think Norv's rigid adhererence to his offensive philosophy is too reliant upon having superior atheltes to be anything more than mediocre without them.
-
There is a reason you don't see as many dominant offensive lines in todays game. In fact most teams struggle mightily just to field decent ones. Superior athelticism doesn't get it done on the o-line. Coaching does. Outside of Diggs, who I feel would've have caught on anywhere, I don't see one player on offense that has progressed half as well as several key players on defense. In fact, a few seem to have visibly declined in this system.
Bridgewater definitely progressed IMO, but I feel he is not the best fit for this system in the first place.
-
We'll see of course, but IMO, if assistant/position coaches were to be held to the same accountability as players, Norv woulda been benched awhile ago.
Jeff Davidson appears to be doing well in his new job too. Was it the personell here? The system? I dunno. It's week 4, lots of room and time to improve.
Ohhh...I also think Rudolph has been a big bright spot on offense thus far...just because they are going to him more often.
-
*edit because, Jim

IrishViking wrote:And before that it was Bevell

And before that Chili

And before that Tice

Pretty much unless our offense is mirror Peak Denny Green Productions is just terrible playcalling from the OC

Maybe, just Maybe the grass is greener on the otherside.

I get that fans complain about coordinators like people complain about the weather but the Vikings offense is currently ranked 31st out of 32 teams so I don't think it's fair to dismissively suggest complaints about it are just a case of fans thinking "the grass always greener" on the other side of the fence. It seems to me there's legitimate cause for complaint. The offense under Turner has been weak and it's been particularly weak this season.

Through three games we are 100% with TDs in the Redzone this year 3/3. One of the biggest if not the biggest complaint with this team has been settling for field goals. They aren't this year, zero credit?

They aren't 3/3 scoring TDs in the red zone this year. I'm not sure how you got that idea. They've had possessions inside the opponents 20 that didn't result in TDs (or even points, in at least one case). Technically, even one of their 3 TDs wasn't a red zone score because it was thrown from outside the 20.

They are clearly still settling for FGs. Walsh has attempted 9 FGs this season, several when the team had the ball inside the red zone. For every 1 TD the offense has scored they've attempted 3 FGs.

The bigger headline about those 3 TDs is that, after 3 games the Vikings only have 3 TDs on offense. As fans, we're supposed to be satisfied with that?

I don't know which sites are best for tracking red zone TD percentage but a quick Google search turned up two that have the Vikes ranked near the bottom of the league with a percentage of 28.6%:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/drivestatsoff

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/r ... coring-pct

If you look at that Football Outsiders link, you'll see the Vikings also have the highest punts/drive percentage (.567) and one of the highest 3-and-outs/drive percentages in the league.

None of the above is indicative of particularly effective offense.