Week 9 Predictions: Rams @ Vikings

[Purple bruise]

No need to thank me, in retrospect it was a pleasure pointing out that you were wrong.

You are really not that stupid (I hope not) to not be able to comprehend what I was stating are you? GOOD TEAMS DO NOT RELY ON TRICK PLAYS TO WIN GAMES An onside kick is not and I repeat not a trick play by my definition. The on-side kicks are quite common strategies used in numerous games and are most generally anticipated by the defenders.
The Saints onside kick was an unexpected play at a time of that game and I suppose you could call that a trick play if you want.
I can see Belichick with his game plans. "Okay men we need to rely on some trick plays to win some more games." Must be the secret to how the Cowboys, 49ers, Packers, Broncos won all of those games, relying on trick plays. Believe whatever makes you happy fellow

[dead_poet]

Other than the obvious (+1.3 is better than -2.4), do we know what that means? Does it mean he completed passes against the blitz? Ran for positive yardage? Threw for first downs? I'm curious. For example, hypothetically, if a QB is blitzed on 3rd and 9, avoids pressure and dumps the ball off for a 4 yard gain, is that a plus play, a neutral play or a minus play?

https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/ ... erPressure

There's a graph in there. I don't know what it all means but it looks to take into account: sacks taken, avoiding sacks, completion %, TDs, INTs, something called HAT, something called TA, takes into account drops.

Here's another article that provides a bit more information on how they're graded: https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... rterbacks/

Something to consider: if you want to judge a QB that is pressured on 3rd and 9 and dumps the ball off for a 4-yard gain, that may not be necessarily a negatively-graded play if there's not an open receiver.

This is more than just looking at the raw numbers, but looking at the context of the throws made. A positive completion percentage may show a QB dumping a ball off on third down for a short gain that sees the punting team coming on the field. Our grading can look at a quarterback evading pressure, throwing a perfect ball, only for it to be dropped–yet still rewarding the QB for his excellent play.

Then there's this little caveat that, if you're a subscriber, you might have more information to glean from:

Note: PFF Premium Stats also include player-by-player ‘Passing Under Pressure’ pages that break down the numbers and also highlight PFF grading in pressured/non-pressured and blitzed/not-blitzed situations. The same is available for each individual game as well.

[DK Sweets]

You are really not that stupid (I hope not) to not be able to comprehend what I was stating are you? GOOD TEAMS DO NOT RELY ON TRICK PLAYS TO WIN GAMES An onside kick is not and I repeat not a trick play by my definition. The on-side kicks are quite common strategies used in numerous games and are most generally anticipated by the defenders.
The Saints onside kick was an unexpected play at a time of that game and I suppose you could call that a trick play if you want. Whatever makes you happy.

I don't know how an onside kick in an unexpected situation out of a normal kickoff formation doesn't fit your criteria of trick play, but that's just your opinion. The Steelers play obviously was a trick play. The Patriots used trick formations in two different games in the playoffs last year. Trick plays are utilized by winning franchises and can often be the margin of victory.

Obviously, these teams don't completely rely on trick plays, but neither do the Rams, so I'm not sure what your post was really trying to point out.

[808vikingsfan]

And then there's this disgusting stat:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2585 ... ridgewater

It might have been this. I remember reading forty something percent. My mistake. The only thing I could find on Bridgewater being pressure on Sunday was:

While they weren't overloaded, the Vikings still allowed 10 quarterback hurries, by 1500ESPN.com's count, on 33 dropbacks.

I still remember him getting off the ground often, slowly at times. When watching his press conference, the one thing that kept going through my mind is that he looked and sounded battered.

[Purple bruise]

I don't know how an onside kick in an unexpected situation out of a normal kickoff formation doesn't fit your criteria of trick play, but that's just your opinion. The Steelers play obviously was a trick play. The Patriots used trick formations in two different games in the playoffs last year. Trick plays are utilized by winning franchises and can often be the margin of victory.

Obviously, these teams don't completely rely on trick plays, but neither do the Rams, so I'm not sure what your post was really trying to point out.

I can see Belichick with his game plans. "Okay men we need to rely on some trick plays to win some more games." Must be the secret to how the Cowboys, 49ers, Packers, Broncos won all of those games, relying on trick plays. Believe whatever makes you happy fellow
I am not sure why I waste a moment with you but I will say this one more time GOOD TEAMS DO NOT RELY ON TRICK PLAYS TO WIN GAMES.

[808vikingsfan]

Would be cool to see both teams wear throwback uni's this sunday. Vikings and Rams had a good rivalry back in the day. Well, not all good. I can still picture Tommy Kramer convulsing on the ground like it was yesterday.

[DK Sweets]

I can see Belichick with his game plans. "Okay men we need to rely on some trick plays to win some more games." Must be the secret to how the Cowboys, 49ers, Packers, Broncos won all of those games, relying on trick plays. Believe whatever makes you happy fellow
I am not sure why I waste a moment with you but I will say this one more time GOOD TEAMS DO NOT RELY ON TRICK PLAYS TO WIN GAMES.

Does using caps lock make you feel like your point is stronger?

Belichick obviously did feel like the art of deception was useful to him since he devised the trick plays, just like the other examples I used. I don't know how to make it any more clear than that.

Would be cool to see both teams wear throwback uni's this sunday. Vikings and Rams had a good rivalry back in the day. Well, not all good. I can still picture Tommy Kramer convulsing on the ground like it was yesterday.

That would be kinda cool, but the Rams used their throwbacks last week and will use them again against Arizona at home. I'm anxious to see what our throwbacks will look like once we start wearing them.

[autobon7]

Just to be clear I never said that any team "relies" on trick plays. That came from you. I just pointed out that I have seen more of this trickery from the Rams than the Viks (in the last few years). No need to make this into something that it's not.

[quote="Purple bruise"][quote="DK Sweets"][quote="Purple bruise"][quote="DK Sweets"]I don't think any team relies on trick plays, but the Super Bowl has been influenced heavily by trick plays in recent years with the Saints' onside kick and

[Mothman]

https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/ ... erPressure

There's a graph in there. I don't know what it all means but it looks to take into account: sacks taken, avoiding sacks, completion %, TDs, INTs, something called HAT, something called TA, takes into account drops.

Here's another article that provides a bit more information on how they're graded: https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... rterbacks/

Something to consider: if you want to judge a QB that is pressured on 3rd and 9 and dumps the ball off for a 4-yard gain, that may not be necessarily a negatively-graded play if there's not an open receiver.

Understood. Thanks for the links. I poked around a little more and also found this:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2 ... -pressure/

As always with PFF grades, it’s important to remember that we are isolating the quarterback’s role in the play from everyone else. We are evaluating the decision making and the throw, not necessarily the result. A great pass that gets dropped by a receiver receives the same credit it would have if the pass was caught, while an ill-advised pass into coverage that is dropped by a linebacker is downgraded as if it was intercepted. It’s important to remember this distinction when diving into the grades.

I tried to find out how they define "pressure" in the first place but so far, I've struck out.

The second section I highlighted in bold makes me wonder how they would grade a play like the completion to Johnson that set up the winning score on Sunday. I'd describe that as an ill-advised pass into coverage but in that case, it was completed for a big play. I imagine Johnson would get a high grade on that play but what about Bridgewater? Would PFF consider that a plus play, a minus play or a "zero" play? They say their grading system is concerned with how a player performed on a particular play, not with the outcome of that play.

Anyway, after reading what you linked to and what I found, it seems like all we can conclude from the grades given Sunday is that Bridgewater made what PFF considers good throws and decisions when blitzed and didn't do so well when not blitzed (ie: +1.3 is obviously better than -2.4!).

Then there's this little caveat that, if you're a subscriber, you might have more information to glean from:

Note: PFF Premium Stats also include player-by-player ‘Passing Under Pressure’ pages that break down the numbers and also highlight PFF grading in pressured/non-pressured and blitzed/not-blitzed situations. The same is available for each individual game as well.

That would certainly provide a little more context for the grades.

[dead_poet]

The second section I highlighted in bold makes me wonder how they would grade a play like the completion to Johnson that set up the winning score on Sunday. I'd describe that as an ill-advised pass into coverage but in that case, it was completed for a big play. I imagine Johnson would get a high grade on that play but what about Bridgewater? Would PFF consider that a plus play, a minus play or a "zero" play? They say their grading system is concerned with how a player performed on a particular play, not with the outcome of that play.

That's a good question and I don't have the answer. Perhaps it comes down to if/how well CJ was covered at the time of the throw. From what I remember he had some space in front of him (not so much behind with Rolle there) but perhaps it wasn't as ill-advised as it seemed?

I just looked and there was considerable space just prior to the throw, even if the throw was a bit late and a bit high.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-high ... r-37-yards

Teddy needed to throw this at the :29-:30 mark and on a rope (ideally) but I believe the decision was sound.

[Mothman]

That's a good question and I don't have the answer. Perhaps it comes down to if/how well CJ was covered at the time of the throw. From what I remember he had some space in front of him (not so much behind with Rolle there) but perhaps it wasn't as ill-advised as it seemed?

I just looked and there was considerable space just prior to the throw, even if the throw was a bit late and a bit high.

It's one of the "classic' ways to attack a cover 2. There's usually a window between when the CB releases the Wr and the safety gets over.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-high ... r-37-yards

Teddy needed to throw this at the :29-:30 mark and on a rope (ideally) but I believe the decision was sound.[/quote]

I think it's a play that illustrates how much interpretation must go into PFF grades.

Is it a positive because Bridgewater recognized the window of opportunity so in that sense the decision was sound? Is it a negative because he threw it too late (and thus directly at Rolle)? It could be a positive because it was completed but they supposedly evaluate the decision and the throw, not the outcome. If Rolle had played it more aggressively, it should have been an incompletion or an interception but that's not what happened and those are outcomes.

In the end, the outcome of this particular play suggests a good decision because the result was very positive for the Vikings. However, once you throw the outcome away, recognition of the window of opportunity to hit Johnson suggests a positive but the late throw directly at the defender suggests a negative. Presumably, PFF either throws plays like this one out (in which case, their grades becomes less representative of overall performances) or they make a judgment call, in which case bias and interpretation become factors.

It makes my head hurt.

[chicagopurple]

"what game was I watching"? I watched the Bears chase Teddy out of the pocket on most every play. I watched the Bears pressure and knock Teddy down immediately after releasing the ball countless times. I would hardly say that the OL gave Teddy good protection all day. Just because the outcomes arent sacks doesnt mean the QB isnt getting knocked around and pressured. Granted, he DID avoid the sacks. But for a crappy Defense the Bears still exerted a lot more pressure then they should have. My pint being, the Rams defense is a lot better and so it would be likely that this week Teddy will get worse pressure. He got very lucky against the Nears on many plays where he threw weak passes that should have been intercepted, IF the Bears were remotely competent. I am not sure how good the Rams secondary is. Hopefully they arent ball hawks, or I expect we will see more turnovers this week.

[dead_poet]

"what game was I watching"? I watched the Bears chase Teddy out of the pocket on most every play. I watched the Bears pressure and knock Teddy down immediately after releasing the ball countless times. I would hardly say that the OL gave Teddy good protection all day. Just because the outcomes arent sacks doesnt mean the QB isnt getting knocked around and pressured. Granted, he DID avoid the sacks. But for a crappy Defense the Bears still exerted a lot more pressure then they should have. My pint being, the Rams defense is a lot better and so it would be likely that this week Teddy will get worse pressure. He got very lucky against the Nears on many plays where he threw weak passes that should have been intercepted, IF the Bears were remotely competent. I am not sure how good the Rams secondary is. Hopefully they arent ball hawks, or I expect we will see more turnovers this week.

I feel you. I fear Teddy is going to be running for his life in this one. Aaron Donald vs. Fusco/Berger?

*shudders*

And that doesn't even take into consideration Chris Long, Michael Brockers, Robert Quinn, Akeem Ayers or James Laurinaitis.

[Norv Zimmer]

I am thinking a tough game!
24-17 vikings
Hoping to contain gurley and leave it in Foles hands.

Their D line scares me but I hope that our coaches are prepared for it.

[84BreaksAnkles]

I feel you. I fear Teddy is going to be running for his life in this one. Aaron Donald vs. Fusco/Berger?

*shudders*

And that doesn't even take into consideration Chris Long, Michael Brockers, Robert Quinn, Akeem Ayers or James Laurinaitis.

Denver is better. Hopefully we learned a lot from week 4