Vikings Message Board.Com

Mothman wrote: For what it's worth, I think the '98 team and this year's Vikes are worlds apart. I'd expect that '98 team to mop the floor with the 2015 Vikes if they faced off, though admittedly, Peterson could have posed a real problem for the '98 defense.

I would pick the '98 team in a one off too. He'll I'd pick them in a one off against almost anybody. But I think this team is more likely to win it all than that team ever was. Or to say it another way, I would pick a team with these characteristics over a team with those characteristics to win it all.

fiestavike wrote: I would pick the '98 team in a one off too. He'll I'd pick them in a one off against almost anybody. But I think this team is more likely to win it all than that team ever was. Or to say it another way, I would pick a team with these characteristics over a team with those characteristics to win it all.

I'm curious: what characteristics of a championship team do you see on the current Vikings?

Mothman wrote: I'm curious: what characteristics of a championship team do you see on the current Vikings?

That's a good question.

-The first thing that leaps out to me is physicality.
The SF game (which was really disappointing to me) notwithstanding, They are aspiring to be physically imposing at all levels. This began last year, and despite the losing record, I believe I could see this developing then. The pass rush transformed from Allen and Robison looping around the tackles, to a mentality that asked our DEs to take the guy in front of them and physically dominate him. The secondary has also shown a real physicality, especially in Xavier and Harrison. The LBers are more of a work in progress to me outside of Anthony Barr.

-Second is competitiveness.
Our CBs are going up in the air and making plays on the ball. The last time I saw that from a vikings secondary was....I've never seen it. We look like an actual NFL team in pass defense. Guys are also competing hard to make tackles, get to the ball, hold onto his leg, his jersey, whatever until reinforcements arrive. then, in those opportunities, they aren't content just to make tackles, they also are looking for the big shot.

-Third, opportunistic.
They are actually catching some of these interceptions. They are applying pressure and forcing errors, and because of their physicality and competitiveness, they are in position to do something with the opportunity.

-Fourth, leadership and composure.
I could list a bunch of names here, but I don't know which track records you'd give credence to. Instead I'll point to the way they have turned it around since the SF debacle, they way they composed themselves last year with a new coach, loss of Peterson, so much turmoil, and the way Teddy has consistently found his best self in the midst of intense pressure. I see the character to rise to the occasion, and as they become more talented, and their youth develops, I see them turning games like yesterdays into statement victories. Sorry to those who loved some past Vikings teams, but Moss, Carter, Jeff George, Dennis Green, Brad Childress, etc. were not those kind of leaders. Brett Favre was, and it got them close, but it obviously wasn't at the organizational or "cultural" level, as I believe it may now be.

-Fifth, development.
Its been a long time since so many of the Vikings contributors were in-house veterans and even young guys when given responsibility have shown improvement. Also, they tend to give a lot of young players the opportunity, which I think will pay dividends.

-Sixth, talent.
They have more impact players at important positions than they've had in a long time. Barr, Rhodes, Smith, Griffen...These guys are in the conversation as the best players at their respective positions.

I'll let you know what else I might come up with...

fiestavike wrote:That's a good question.

-The first thing that leaps out to me is physicality.
The SF game (which was really disappointing to me) notwithstanding, They are aspiring to be physically imposing at all levels. This began last year, and despite the losing record, I believe I could see this developing then. The pass rush transformed from Allen and Robison looping around the tackles, to a mentality that asked our DEs to take the guy in front of them and physically dominate him. The secondary has also shown a real physicality, especially in Xavier and Harrison. The LBers are more of a work in progress to me outside of Anthony Barr.

-Second is competitiveness.
Our CBs are going up in the air and making plays on the ball. The last time I saw that from a vikings secondary was....I've never seen it. We look like an actual NFL team in pass defense. Guys are also competing hard to make tackles, get to the ball, hold onto his leg, his jersey, whatever until reinforcements arrive. then, in those opportunities, they aren't content just to make tackles, they also are looking for the big shot.

-Third, opportunistic.
They are actually catching some of these interceptions. They are applying pressure and forcing errors, and because of their physicality and competitiveness, they are in position to do something with the opportunity.

-Fourth, leadership and composure.
I could list a bunch of names here, but I don't know which track records you'd give credence to. Instead I'll point to the way they have turned it around since the SF debacle, they way they composed themselves last year with a new coach, loss of Peterson, so much turmoil, and the way Teddy has consistently found his best self in the midst of intense pressure. I see the character to rise to the occasion, and as they become more talented, and their youth develops, I see them turning games like yesterdays into statement victories. Sorry to those who loved some past Vikings teams, but Moss, Carter, Jeff George, Dennis Green, Brad Childress, etc. were not those kind of leaders. Brett Favre was, and it got them close, but it obviously wasn't at the organizational or "cultural" level, as I believe it may now be.

-Fifth, development.
Its been a long time since so many of the Vikings contributors were in-house veterans and even young guys when given responsibility have shown improvement. Also, they tend to give a lot of young players the opportunity, which I think will pay dividends.

-Sixth, talent.
They have more impact players at important positions than they've had in a long time. Barr, Rhodes, Smith, Griffen...These guys are in the conversation as the best players at their respective positions.

I'll let you know what else I might come up with...

Thanks. That's a lot of food for thought. I'm not sure how much of that I agree with (for example, I definitely don't think Bridgewater has consistently found his best self in the midst of intense pressure) but I do think they're aspiring to be a physical team and to build from within.

It strikes me as a very optimistic assessment.

Mothman wrote: Thanks. That's a lot of food for thought. I'm not sure how much of that I agree with (for example, I definitely don't think Bridgewater has consistently found his best self in the midst of intense pressure) but I do think they're aspiring to be a physical team and to build from within.

It strikes me as a very optimistic assessment.

I am optimistic, and I'm usually a pessimist

As for Bridgewater, I think his best games have clearly come when they needed him to perform, and when he was blitzed and pressured. His numbers in these situations have been quite impressive. I will agree he's started this season slower than expected, aiming and trying not to make mistakes...yesterday we saw more of what made him standout last year.

Mothman wrote:Thanks. That's a lot of food for thought. I'm not sure how much of that I agree with (for example, I definitely don't think Bridgewater has consistently found his best self in the midst of intense pressure) but I do think they're aspiring to be a physical team and to build from within.

I'm curious, Jim. Have you seen the Bronco game yet? I ask because I find it impossible to watch Teddy Bridgewater performance against the Broncos and conclude that he's not found his best self in the midst of intense pressure. He was fantastic in the fourth quarter. As I've mentioned, this team has become his, not Adrian Peterson's, and yesterday highlighted that in a huge way. I know, I know ... you said, "consistently." It has to start somewhere. This was the biggest game of Teddy's career, and he stood out.

And while everybody ooh'd and aah'd over the Broncos defense, let's not forget that the Vikings' defense made Peyton Manning look very ordinary yesterday. Each team allowed a long run ... other than that, I'd say the Vikings defense played every bit as well as Denver's. The difference in the game yesterday was Blair Walsh missing a chip shot.

I don't know how close the Vikings are to being a legitimate playoff contender, let alone a Super Bowl contender. They've got to start winning games like this to be considered in that category. But the Broncos game showed me that this team is moving in the right direction. There is no question in my mind.

fiestavike wrote:I am optimistic, and I'm usually a pessimist

... and I'm usually more of an optimist than I probably appear today.

As for Bridgewater, I think his best games have clearly come when they needed him to perform, and when he was blitzed and pressured. His numbers in these situations have been quite impressive. I will agree he's started this season slower than expected, aiming and trying not to make mistakes...yesterday we saw more of what made him standout last year.[/quote]

Don't they always need him to perform?

One of the things that I have talked with fans of other teams is passer rating differential. This is of course just for the way the team is trending in defensive and offensive passing. And over the last three years the Vikings have made a change in this for the positive. For 2014 I only used Teddy's number because the other guys that influenced the data are no longer on the team. While for 2013 had a lot of the players that are on the team today.
As you can see the Vikings are trending in the right direction. The Pass defense is getting better while the pass offense is as well. For me, this is an indication of the way the passing game for the Vikings is progressing.

Unlike previous seasons, I see a ton of growth. I really think the Vikings are going somewhere. In my 30 years of being a fan, I can't remember ever feeling like this about the Vikings. One major thing I loved about this game was the emergence of Diggs. Not only was he making plays his route running was amazing. I really think we may have found a steal in him. The second thing is Teddy, I was very skittish going into the season as I don't fully trust Teddy yet. But this game he was under attack all game, and yet was still making plays, moving the chains.

When we went into this game I expected the Vikings to get blown out, came out pleasantly surprised. There are things to clean up, but the difference between the 2013 vikings to now is remarkable.

Mothman wrote:
Don't they always need him to perform?

I think the DET and SD games illustrate that the answer is no, at least not to the same degree week to week.

Mothman wrote: Then I disagree with him too.

So do I. And I like Zimmer a lot. But if the Vikings want to win a lot of road games, they have to score more than 20 points.

J. Kapp 11 wrote:I'm curious, Jim. Have you seen the Bronco game yet?

Yyes.

I ask because I find it impossible to watch Teddy Bridgewater performance against the Broncos and conclude that he's not found his best self in the midst of intense pressure. He was fantastic in the fourth quarter. As I've mentioned, this team has become his, not Adrian Peterson's, and yesterday highlighted that in a huge way. I know, I know ... you said, "consistently." It has to start somewhere. This was the biggest game of Teddy's career, and he stood out.

Actually, I quoted "consistently". FiestaVike wrote it and you're correct, that's the part I dispute.

I'm not so sure this team has become his and not Peterson's either 9assuming it "belongs" to either of them). The Broncos game plan yesterday was clearly to stop Peterson and dare the Vikes to beat them passing. SF's defensive game plan showed a similar emphasis and the Vikings two wins this year have come in the the two games where peterson had strong performances. It sure looks like their fortunes are still riding on him to a pretty significant extent.

I don't know how close the Vikings are to being a legitimate playoff contender, let alone a Super Bowl contender. They've got to start winning games like this to be considered in that category. But the Broncos game showed me that this team is moving in the right direction. There is no question in my mind.

It was one game, and a loss at that. As you can tell, I have a very hard time taking that much away from it.

Raptorman wrote:One of the things that I have talked with fans of other teams is passer rating differential. This is of course just for the way the team is trending in defensive and offensive passing. And over the last three years the Vikings have made a change in this for the positive. For 2014 I only used Teddy's number because the other guys that influenced the data are no longer on the team. While for 2013 had a lot of the players that are on the team today.

Code: Select all

          DPR     OPR      Diff.
2013     98.6     76.0    -22.6
2014     92.8     85.2     -7.6
2015     82.4     84.5     +2.1

As you can see the Vikings are trending in the right direction. The Pass defense is getting better while the pass offense is as well. For me, this is an indication of the way the passing game for the Vikings is progressing.

Thanks. That's encouraging and it's not a stat I see often.

losperros wrote:So do I. And I like Zimmer a lot. But if the Vikings want to win a lot of road games, they have to score more than 20 points.

... and allow fewer than they score!

See? I know things about sports.

Mothman wrote: ... and allow fewer than they score!

See? I know things about sports.

Yes, the final score does have something to do with which team wins the game.

Mothman wrote: It was one game, and a loss at that. As you can tell, I have a very hard time taking that much away from it.

True, it was one game. True, it was a loss. Based on that simplification, however, would you say the SF game and the Denver game are on "equal footing" so-to-speak? If the only "take-away" is that it's a road loss, then it seems to me that the SF game would be the same "indicator" as the Denver loss. I know (or at least I think) that's not what you mean. To me they are worlds apart (at least in terms of the Vikings' performance.) My concern was (and still is) not whether or not the Denver game was better (I believe it clearly was. So I'm in agreement with Zimmer on this one. I believe if they play that well they will win road games. Not all teams are as good as Denver, so a similar performance would probably beat 75% (if not more) of the teams in the NFL). My concern is which game was the "fluke"?

You can certainly question how good Denver actually is, but consider this:

In the past three years Denver has went 22-2 at home (Regular Season) and they were undefeated at home last year in 2014. It clearly is NOT an easy venue to get a win. So other than the (understandable) frustration with yet another road loss, I'm not seeing how this is anything other than a positive step forward. A journey of 1000 miles begins with but a single step...