Vikings @ Lions Game Day Discussion Thread -- Thanksgiving

[Mothman]

i think sam has a good future in purple...but when you find out that he could have been had for considerably less, it's like WTF?

Where was that said? I missed it.

[RFIP]

it was probably the strangest game i've ever watched in terms of playcalling.
Can't say with any certainty that Sam/Shurmur/Zimmer was more responsible than the other as to why they never threw downfield...but I'd guess they all bear some responsibility.
-
frustrating ...KAO3.0

This team is not good enough to make the playoffs period. And the mere fact that all the games save the Bears game have been won or close is nothing short of a miracle. The D is nowhere near as good as the first 5 games and has no ability to close out games as seen twice vs Detroit and in Washington. The offense is bad because of the OL and RB situation.

Truth be told, this team is held together by paper clips and band aids and will limp to the finish. With all the injuries they have on offense it's a miracle that the QB is still standing. To question more downfield throws is to have turned a blind eye to the OL issues and the FACT that they do not have a single receiver, Diggs included, who is the type to go up and win a 50/50 ball.

It's one thing to say "let's take some shots!" And other to watch the balls actually thrown and picked and say "why the heck would he throw that ball to a covered receiver!?!?"

Understanding pro football, talent, scheme and ability, goes a long ways to answering most of these questions. This team is simply surviving right now, they lack a TON of what it would take to be even good, let alone great. You will see a great football team next Thursday night folks. One with a GREAT, HEALTHY OL, Outstanding wr, te and rb, a kicker that never misses and an emerging young QB who is playing very well, along with an opportunistic bend-but-don't-break defense. December 1st may well be when the Vikings dam finally bursts...

[RFIP]

Where was that said? I missed it.

It's an internet "rumor" floating around. No facts whatsoever. I've actually LISTENED to the audio Peter King posted weeks ago in which Roseman was up all night at the mere thought of trading Sam days before the season, was physically ill at the thought of it and would only do it if the Vikings ponyed up big time.

Now? Well now we have revisionist history trying to claim otherwise....

[Mothman]

http://www.espn.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/ ... terception

"For me as the post safety, it really gets to the point where, 'OK, they are throwing so much quick stuff that eventually they are going to throw something deep,'" Lions safety Glover Quin said. "They never did, so it was actually kind of lonely back there.

"He can complete all those passes, and getting 3, 4 yards here, they might turn up and get 8 [yards] one time, but the ball is not going down the field. If you’re going to do that, I probably could [complete] 80 percent throwing it that fast."

[Nunin]

Where was that said? I missed it.

foxsports had an article late yesterday after the game. i can't post links with my phone....but the eagle gm admitted that a 1st rounder was his ceiling and that rick never tried to budge him lower....which he would have done.

[Nunin]

This team is not good enough to make the playoffs period. And the mere fact that all the games save the Bears game have been won or close is nothing short of a miracle. The D is nowhere near as good as the first 5 games and has no ability to close out games as seen twice vs Detroit and in Washington. The offense is bad because of the OL and RB situation.

Truth be told, this team is held together by paper clips and band aids and will limp to the finish. With all the injuries they have on offense it's a miracle that the QB is still standing. To question more downfield throws is to have turned a blind eye to the OL issues and the FACT that they do not have a single receiver, Diggs included, who is the type to go up and win a 50/50 ball.

It's one thing to say "let's take some shots!" And other to watch the balls actually thrown and picked and say "why the heck would he throw that ball to a covered receiver!?!?"

Understanding pro football, talent, scheme and ability, goes a long ways to answering most of these questions. This team is simply surviving right now, they lack a TON of what it would take to be even good, let alone great. You will see a great football team next Thursday night folks. One with a GREAT, HEALTHY OL, Outstanding wr, te and rb, a kicker that never misses and an emerging young QB who is playing very well, along with an opportunistic bend-but-don't-break defense. December 1st may well be when the Vikings dam finally bursts...

jeez man.....condesend much?
-

you gotta take some shots downfield regardless. anyone who understands the game understands that.lol

[RFIP]

jeez man.....condesend much?
-

you gotta take some shots downfield regardless. anyone who understands the game understands that.lol

So I'm guessing Shurmur and Zimmer don't understand the game? Got it.

[Nunin]

they've lost 5 outta 6...3 to division opponents.
-
the game they did win was on the back of two tds scored by st and D.
-
they got ousted from they playoffs last year in a game where they couldn't score a td...against a team they haven't scored an offensive td against in 2 full games.
-
the offense has gone from bad to the leagues worst.
whatever they are doing to mitigate their o-line woes is failing miserably.
-
but hey....at least they've only thrown 3 picks lol
you can never fail if you don't try.

[Mothman]

It's an internet "rumor" floating around. No facts whatsoever. I've actually LISTENED to the audio Peter King posted weeks ago in which Roseman was up all night at the mere thought of trading Sam days before the season, was physically ill at the thought of it and would only do it if the Vikings ponyed up big time.

Now? Well now we have revisionist history trying to claim otherwise....

foxsports had an article late yesterday after the game. i can't post links with my phone....but the eagle gm admitted that a 1st rounder was his ceiling and that rick never tried to budge him lower....which he would have done.

Thanks to both of you. I think I've found the article in question:

The Vikings only have themselves to blame for the Sam Bradford disaster

However, I'm not sure how Bradford is a "disaster" for the Vikes after 10 games. I certainly see how the price they paid for him was problematic but it seems to me the author of the article, Chris Chase, has the situation wrong. He calls Bradford a "one-year rental" and refers to a Peter King article from September in which King wrote about both Rick Spielman and Eagles GM Howie Roseman. He writes that in the King article, Roseman "was like a car salesman starting a negotiation with a number $10,000 higher than his sell price. Then, to his shock, the customer not only takes that high price but then throws in an a couple extra thousand for undercoating. He didn't think they'd take it! Roseman tacitly admits the Eagles would have taken less than a first rounder."

I read the King article when it came out and posted a link to it at the time. I read it again this morning but I saw no tacit admission from Roseman that he would have accepted less than a first round pick for Bradford. In fact, the article pretty clearly indicates otherwise. In that same King article, Rick Spielman clearly states:

What really was significant for us was the second year of the contract with Sam. No one knows how long it’s going to take Teddy to recover.

I think it's been pretty clear from the start that the Vikes don't just view Bradford as a "one-year rental".

Anyway, I feel Chase is premature in calling the trade a disaster and I disagree with his assertion that Bradford is "nothing more than a backup-level quarterback in an All-Pro package". That said, I don't know that he was worth a first round pick and if there's a disaster here, it's that Spielman may have spent 3 first round picks on starting QBs in 7 years and still not come away with a long-term solution at QB. IF he has found that solution, I'm guessing it's Bradford but that remains a very open question. Frankly, I don't think Bridgewater looked like he was going to be a good long-term solution even before his injury. I'll be surprised if things work out well between him and the Vikes.

It's possible the Vikings don't even have their 2018 starting QB on the roster yet.

[Pondering Her Percy]

they've lost 5 outta 6...3 to division opponents.
-
the game they did win was on the back of two tds scored by st and D.
-
they got ousted from they playoffs last year in a game where they couldn't score a td...against a team they haven't scored an offensive td against in 2 full games.
-
the offense has gone from bad to the leagues worst.
whatever they are doing to mitigate their o-line woes is failing miserably.
-
but hey....at least they've only thrown 3 picks lol
you can never fail if you don't try.

So when you lose Teddy, AP and both tackles did you expect the offense to get better?? I don't care if we had all the depth in the world

[Mothman]

So when you lose Teddy, AP and both tackles did you expect the offense to get better?? I don't care if we had all the depth in the world

Actually, it seems like that would probably help.

Injuries have taken a toll on the team this year and losing Peterson in particular hurt. Losing the starting tackles did too and Bridgewater's injury was demoralizing for the team, although there's been no drop-off in overall QB performance without him. In fact, it's actually been better. However, continually leaning on injuries to excuse or explain away the team's offensive woes rings hollow when the offense has been bad under Zimmer, period. Injuries have helped make the offense even worse but it's not as if those injuries dropped the offense from the upper half of the league to rock bottom. Sadly, they didn't have very far to fall.

The problems run far deeper than injuries.

[Nunin]

So when you lose Teddy, AP and both tackles did you expect the offense to get better?? I don't care if we had all the depth in the world

no i don't expect them to get better....but what I do expect is that they take a shot or two downfield....or throw it into the endzone at least once when they are in the redzone. especially in a game that comes down to one play.

a 15 yard pass on 3rd and 5 when you have a lead in the fourth...keeps a drive alive and could effectively alter the outcome of the game in your favor. 1 play! Or to really make an effort to score a TD by throwing into the endzone rather than settling for the FG earlier in a game. It's often the difference between winning and losing.
they go into turtle mode if they have the lead in the 3rd qtr....just like Fraizer and Childress to some degree. crazy

they aren't even trying. who was/is more stubborn, Norv or Zimmer?

that's the basics of football...that and you can't play to not lose. you play to win. so i don't understand how you can feel be all gung ho to go for it on 4th and 2 from midfield and say, 'We're trying to win" while the whole game long you don't throw one pass further than 8-9 yds.

[Nunin]

Thanks to both of you. I think I've found the article in question:

The Vikings only have themselves to blame for the Sam Bradford disaster

yeah that was it.

I completely disagree that the trade is a a bust and that Sam has failed here..OR..that he is just a rental. I think same is a good QB in spite of any limitations he may have. Most QBs have at least one.

But the point I was trying to make by alluding to the article was that Spielman overpaid. Period. Assuming it's accurate. And since it's front page on foxsports I would think that Rosenface may want to dispute it if it's false.

[Maelstrom88]

Teddy took more sacks than Sam throughout his career because Sam was always in a dink dunk offense where the defense doesn't have time to sack you. It's hard to get a sack when Sam immediately throws a swing route or a slant. Yea, great quick reads Sam! You diagnosed that defense so fast! Teddy was under Norv who asked him to look deep and stretch the field now and then. And yes apparently Zim and Shurmur do not understand you have to stretch the field now and then or else the defense crowds the los and jumps short routes. Why respect the deep part of the field when the offense doesn't even ATTEMPT to throw there. Yes the offensive line is banged up terribly. That's why you keep in extra blockers. I like what they do most of the time on offense given the injuries but Norv was much better than Pat.

[Mothman]

yeah that was it.

I completely disagree that the trade is a a bust and that Sam has failed here..OR..that he is just a rental. I think same is a good QB in spite of any limitations he may have. Most QBs have at least one.

But the point I was trying to make by alluding to the article was that Spielman overpaid. Period. Assuming it's accurate. And since it's front page on foxsports I would think that Rosenface may want to dispute it if it's false.

I doubt he'd bother, especially if he did get Spielman to pay more than he was willing accept!

I understand your position. I just don't see much substance behind the article's position. Chase provided no evidence that Spielman could have had Bradford for considerably less. I can't find the tacit admission he's talking about.