A message board dedicated to the discussion of Minnesota Viking Football.
https://beta1.vikingsmessageboard.com/
DK Sweets wrote:I first read that title as "Adrian Peterson is Black: How Does This Help the Offense?" and I was really concerned with where this topic was going.
Matt Asiata is deeply offended.Mothman wrote:
Well, how does that help the offense!
You and I have had this convo before so I'm not gonna get into it again but I will say this, we know it didn't really work (for the passing game) in the past, you can make whatever argument you want for why that was, bad QB play, didn't have a WR good enough to beat single coverage, or what have you and maybe a Mike Wallace helps with that.Mothman wrote:
It all depends on how the defense lines up. If the formation has a WR on the outside who the coaches believe can beat single coverage and the bunch formation isolates him against a defender, theoretically, that should be an advantage. It's not just a numbers game, it's a matchup game.
Spreading the field has it's drawbacks too. There are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches, which is why I've always thought mixing it up is the best approach.
It's worked for teams many times over the years so I don't think we really need to see if it works for the Vikes under Turner to know it can be effective. Seattle and SF both went to Super Bowls in recent years using similar formations as a part of their offense and the Vikes used them most extensively in the only season in which they've made a playoff appearance in the last 5 years. It was never more than a part of their offense anyway.mondry wrote: You and I have had this convo before so I'm not gonna get into it again but I will say this, we know it didn't really work (for the passing game) in the past, you can make whatever argument you want for why that was, bad QB play, didn't have a WR good enough to beat single coverage, or what have you and maybe a Mike Wallace helps with that.
I doubt we'll be seeing it under Norv so "unfortunately" we'll likely never know if it would work better with this personnel.
Well, if we are being completely real..nvm.DK Sweets wrote:I first read that title as "Adrian Peterson is Black: How Does This Help the Offense?" and I was really concerned with where this topic was going.
Also, there's a link to the "Interceptable Passes Project"(From the ESPN article) Bridgewater also had a terrific season-long showing in the bad decision rate (BDR) metric that gauges how often a quarterback makes a mental error that leads to a turnover opportunity for the opposing team. His 0.5 percent BDR is a Tom Brady-in-his-prime-caliber number and indicates Bridgewater made that sort of mental error once in every 200 pass attempts.
The league-wide BDR average is usually about 2 percent (once every 50 passes) and the elite bar is 1 percent (once every 100 passes). Bridgewater had a 0.6 percent BDR against BCS-caliber conference opponents in his last year at Louisville, so this is par for the course for him, but it sure isn't par for the course for most rookie quarterbacks.
they wrote:After watching Bridgewater's tape, it's hard to imagine why he fell so far in the 2014 NFL Draft. He might not have the same type of arm strength as Derek Carr or Blake Bortles, but the Louisville product has a calm demeanor in the pocket and is consistently on target with his throws. Perhaps the most impressive part of Bridgewater's game is his accuracy on medium-range throws, especially over the middle of the field.
@ "After watching Bridgewater's tape, it's hard to imagine why he fell so far in the 2014 NFL Draft."I know what you mean. A person has to like what we saw from Teddy in his first season, but honestly, he was still a rookie. He didn't have a monster year and he even admitted to that. Plus Bridgewater noted that he still has a lot to learn. It's great to hear that kind of frankness from him.Mothman wrote:I wish I'd seen the consistent accuracy from Bridgewater that I keep reading about. I still think he needs work in that department. The accuracy was there at times but I certainly wouldn't say he was consistent on medium-range (or long-range) throws.
I like what he showed us as a rookie but I think his pro game needs more work than most people think. Fortunately, he seems more than willing to put in the effort and he seems to have the right mentality to succeed so I'm optimistic about what we'll see from him this season.
I"m just glad he didn't regress like Ponder and Jackson did. I agree he didn't have perfect accuracy, but he did get better as the season went on.losperros wrote: I know what you mean. A person has to like what we saw from Teddy is in first season, but honestly, he was still a rookie. He didn't have a monster year and he even admitted to that. Plus Bridgewater noted that he still has a lot to learn. It's great to hear that kind of frankness from him.
To me it wasn't that Bridgewater was all that consistent, but rather it was that he showed a genuine learning curve. I think that's big. That's what one wants from a rookie. Combine that with his work ethic and sincere attitude, and yeah, I'm definitely optimistic about Teddy's future.